• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Nvidia nerfing mining on their GPUs

correct, I wasn't trying to mislead, I just didn't think it necessary to go into detail since you appeared not to be aware of CCR's changes..
However, as you were attempting to correct Cyber-Mav, the point does still kinda stand. Strictly speaking, he was right, since giving the user the opportunity to "establish the nature, characteristics and functioning" would involve testing gaming performance (for which the product is designed) and not mining performance. If they user sent back goods in less than new condition claiming that the performance was not as expected, that then opens them up to the charge if the reseller chooses to check their claims.

CCR doesn't require the customer to give a reason for withdrawal (in fact, it explicitly states that they don't have to give one). Nor does it make any mention of goods being fit for purpose, as described, etc. as these have no impact on the right to withdrawal. All that matters is whether the extent to which the customer handled the goods is reasonable, or unreasonable. That is all that's considered. And the burden of proof for that falls on the retailer.

Receiving a GPU back, in undamaged retail packaging, with only the seal broken, it would be quite bold to accuse the customer of handling the goods unreasonably. Which is why, in practice, deductions are rare unless mishandling is obvious and easy to prove.
 
Last edited:
CCR doesn't require the customer to give a reason for withdrawal (in fact, it explicitly states that they don't have to give one). Nor does it make any mention of goods being fit for purpose, as described, etc. as these have no impact on the right to withdrawal. All that matters is whether the extent to which the customer handled the goods is reasonable, or unreasonable. That is all that's considered. And the burden of proof for that falls on the retailer.

Receiving a GPU back, in undamaged retail packaging, with only the seal broken, it would be quite bold to accuse the customer of handling the goods unreasonably. Which is why, in practice, deductions are rare unless mishandling is obvious and easy to prove.
I'm not arguing, I can't remember the last time we had to resort to a reduced refund, but that doesn't mean that all resellers are as understanding and it could leave the user having to pursue legal steps to reclaim all of their money if they felt the decision unfair. CCR flipped that side of things.
 
I'm not arguing, I can't remember the last time we had to resort to a reduced refund, but that doesn't mean that all resellers are as understanding and it could leave the user having to pursue legal steps to reclaim all of their money if they felt the decision unfair. CCR flipped that side of things.

Could go either way. There's a decent chance that any deduction would be illegal. So, bringing it back around to the original point, it's probably a good thing that Nvidia have decided LHR cards need to be labelled as such. Saves a lot of potential agro and cost for everyone.
 
it's probably a good thing that Nvidia have decided LHR cards need to be labelled as such. Saves a lot of potential agro and cost for everyone.
My thoughts exactly. Increases our workload dramatically and would no doubt accelerate the discontinuing of the original models, but it's the only way to prevent long term issues with regards returns/replacements.
 
So I'm right. Retailers will have to label these new cards as separate items with LHR (Lite Hash Rate).
To all the reps that didn't think this was an issue, screw you. x86 computer components are multi function. If a function is capped our not present compared to a previous iteration, the consumer NEEDS to know.
Honestly don't think some people deserve what they get paid.

Mining reduces the life of a GPU. FACT. How can a manufactuer afford to replace an endless quantity of failed GPU's that have been used for mining? What's wrong with nerfing a GPU so it lasts until the end of the warranty period?

I've read reports of mining cards failing within 6 months. That could potentially mean 10 RMA requests during a 5 year warranty. Surely that's unfair?
 
Last edited:
Mining reduces the life of a GPU. FACT. How can a manufactuer afford to replace an endless quantity of failed GPU's that have been used for mining? What's wrong with nerfing a GPU so it lasts until the end of the warranty period?

I think a heat sensitive strip would be a way around it. So the warrenty is void when the colour turns red.

I don't think this is the case, else they would have already done this. Mining is not new, they have only recently decided to do this. Maybe to do with keeping gamers happy as well as protect their new sales when mining goes down and market gets flooded with second hand cards.
 
I don't think this is the case, else they would have already done this. Mining is not new, they have only recently decided to do this. Maybe to do with keeping gamers happy as well as protect their new sales when mining goes down and market gets flooded with second hand cards.

Mining wasn't a problem before because GPU's had lots of headroom. They were very overclockable. So you could mine for years without an issue.

However, the current gen are running maxed out. Very hot, lots of power, and very little headroom.
 
Mining reduces the life of a GPU. FACT.

Less than gaming actually. Only the memory does real work when mining, otoh go turn raytracing on and you'll get every part of the gpu light up like a xmas tree from stress.

Mining is a much easier life than gaming for GPUs. Just look at how happy those doge are. :)

RviqJOx.gif
 
Mining reduces the life of a GPU. FACT. How can a manufactuer afford to replace an endless quantity of failed GPU's that have been used for mining? What's wrong with nerfing a GPU so it lasts until the end of the warranty period?

I've read reports of mining cards failing within 6 months. That could potentially mean 10 RMA requests during a 5 year warranty. Surely that's unfair?

I've got cards I've been mining on 24/7 for nearly 5 years, never had a failure. So no, it's not a fact at all.
 
I've got cards I've been mining on 24/7 for nearly 5 years, never had a failure. So no, it's not a fact at all.
Science "Smoking causes cancer - fact"

104 year old smoker - "I've been smoking 40 a day since I was 14! So NO it doesn't!"

Everyone else "That's not how science works!"

Your sample size and frame of reference is too small to make that judgement. Unless you've got a hundred+ cards mining and then a hundred+ cards being used as the manufacturer intended of course..
 
guess depends on the temps, more heat constant 24/7 is bound to have an effect i would have thought in degrading faster. maybe pro miners know the limits where as newer miners wouldnt as much, would that mean a pro mined card is a better buy than a newer miner?
 
Science "Smoking causes cancer - fact"

104 year old smoker - "I've been smoking 40 a day since I was 14! So NO it doesn't!"

Everyone else "That's not how science works!"

Your sample size and frame of reference is too small to make that judgement. Unless you've got a hundred+ cards mining and then a hundred+ cards being used as the manufacturer intended of course..

I have multiple cards yes, enough that "mining reduces the lifespan is a FACT" I should have had at least one failure, I've had zero.

In the same time I've had 1 out of three gaming only cards fail.

If you set them up correctly, and know anything at all about electrical engineering, it should be obvious that cards running at 120% of their rated power with constant spiking and changing of fan curve, are exponentially more likely to fail than cards being run at 60% with a fixed fan profile.

Hyperbolic references to cancer are meaningless.
 
Last edited:
I have multiple cards yes, enough that "mining reduces the lifespan is a FACT" I should have had at least one failure, I've had zero.

In the same time I've had 1 out of three gaming only cards fail.

If you set them up correctly, and know anything at all about electrical engineering, it should be obvious that cards running at 120% of their rated power with constant spiking and changing of fan curve, are exponentially more likely to fail than cards being run at 60% with a fixed fan profile.

Hyperbolic references to cancer are meaningless.
I'm not saying your experience is wrong but it is still anecdotal. Perhaps if you cited a survey or review with a big data set then it would be a more convincing argument.
 
I'm not saying your experience is wrong but it is still anecdotal. Perhaps if you cited a survey or review with a big data set then it would be a more convincing argument.

It's been argued ad infinitum all over the internet, I don't know of or can't find that any of the large operations have released that data, but to be honest this only reinforces my point - it is NOT a FACT. The sources claiming that are anecdotal.

I didn't set out to perform a scientific test of GPU longevity, but for my own benefit I'm quite happy with the data I have that suggests it has no effect on longevity given that all of my mining cards have outlived my current gaming cards.

I'm not going to sell nay of my mining cards so it's irrelevant to anyone else how long they continue to live, but they've already outlasted the 5 year benchmark that seems to be required.

I've seen gaming GPU's in tiny cases with no fans overclocked to 130% and thermal throttling, and then the person asking why they get poor FPS compare to xx review of their card. By the same token some "miners" unknowingly overclock their cards too because they don't pay for the electric and think they are making more money because they gained 1MH. Its not the mining that damaged the card, it's the idiot who didn't research proper cooling in both cases. In both cases the manufacturer would have, if they knew, a perfectly valid reason to deny warranty replacement, however in both cases they can't actually prove anything.
 
Last edited:
It's been argued ad infinitum all over the internet, I don't know of or can't find that any of the large operations have released that data, but to be honest this only reinforces my point - it is NOT a FACT. The sources claiming that are anecdotal.

I didn't set out to perform a scientific test of GPU longevity, but for my own benefit I'm quite happy with the data I have that suggests it has no effect on longevity given that all of my mining cards have outlived my current gaming cards.

I'm not going to sell nay of my mining cards so it's irrelevant to anyone else how long they continue to live, but they've already outlasted the 5 year benchmark that seems to be required.

I've seen gaming GPU's in tiny cases with no fans overclocked to 130% and thermal throttling, and then the person asking why they get poor FPS compare to xx review of their card. By the same token some "miners" unknowingly overclock their cards too because they don't pay for the electric and think they are making more money because they gained 1MH. Its not the mining that damaged the card, it's the idiot who didn't research proper cooling in both cases. In both cases the manufacturer would have, if they knew, a perfectly valid reason to deny warranty replacement, however in both cases they can't actually prove anything.
Since we're trading anecdotes here, plenty of us on this very forum have bought ex-mining cards which have died soon after. Myself included.

The memory on mine died after a few weeks of having it. Quelle surprise. Won't be making that mistake again.
 
Back
Top Bottom