Thursday, January 29th 2015
Perfectly Functional GTX 970 Cards Being Returned Over Memory Controversy
In what is a major fallout of the GeForce GTX 970 memory allocation controversy, leading retailers in the EU are reporting returns of perfectly functional GTX 970 cards citing "false advertising." Heise.de reports that NVIDIA is facing a fierce blowback from retailers and customers over incorrect specs. Heise comments that the specifications "cheating could mean the greatest damage to the reputation of the company's history."
Major German PC hardware retailer Caseking.de says that retailers don't have any explanation from NVIDIA to give to their customers. A similar sentiment is being expressed by the NVIDIA add-in card partners (AICs) we spoke to. Retailers and AIC partners are on their own, for now. One AIC partner rep told us that NVIDIA has no worldwide action plan, as of now, to deal with a potential flood of returns.
In absence of every other recourse, laws in most EU member states dictate that the retailers accept returns for a full refund, if they are not able to "repair" the defect, or exchange with another unit that works as advertised (which a retailer obviously can't, in this case). Retailers' options in the matter boil down to: 1. Taking back cards from whoever isn't happy with their GTX 970 and giving them a refund; 2. compensating with something of value (eg: game-coupons, in-game currency, etc.,) and 3. Springing up a surprise, such as exchanging GTX 970 cards purchased before a set date, with a GTX 980 (if that's your idea of a "repair."). This will come at the expense of a cascading lawsuit-chain (customers suing retailers, who in-turn sue AICs, and who in-turn sue NVIDIA).
NVIDIA, on the other hand, plans to issue a driver update that will "improve" the way the chip allocates resources, but there's no word on whether it re-enables disabled components that NVIDIA wasn't honest about, the first time around. They're counting on the issue to simply blow over, because at $329, there really isn't much you can complain about the GTX 970, given how it's positioned in comparison to the GTX 980.
Major German PC hardware retailer Caseking.de says that retailers don't have any explanation from NVIDIA to give to their customers. A similar sentiment is being expressed by the NVIDIA add-in card partners (AICs) we spoke to. Retailers and AIC partners are on their own, for now. One AIC partner rep told us that NVIDIA has no worldwide action plan, as of now, to deal with a potential flood of returns.
NVIDIA, on the other hand, plans to issue a driver update that will "improve" the way the chip allocates resources, but there's no word on whether it re-enables disabled components that NVIDIA wasn't honest about, the first time around. They're counting on the issue to simply blow over, because at $329, there really isn't much you can complain about the GTX 970, given how it's positioned in comparison to the GTX 980.
172 Comments on Perfectly Functional GTX 970 Cards Being Returned Over Memory Controversy
What surprises me most is AT/TR and others using water cannon on angry protesters. And It took over 4 months for this to come out and Tech Sites did not catch this error/lie, it was actually frustrated GTX 970 users. Tech sites were actually deleting threads in fear of Nvidia backlash. Why do you think, not ONE site have tested GTX 970 SLI yet (for this 3.5GB/Bandwidth flaw)? I bet most sites have done the testing but everyone is waiting for someone to go first (The power of Nvidia). Had this been AMD, Nvidia would be the first to a TEST (Remember FCAT?)
Do people think Nvidia will stop and think next time before deceiving? Ha think again wccftech.com/nvidia-gsync-mobility-confirmed-require-dedicated-module-raises-questions/
AMD's failures in every single market they have ever been in are due to their own ineptitude and lack of business sense (not technical). ATi is from 1985, NVIDIA from 1993, and they didn't have a mass market chip (not counting NV1) until NV5 in 1997/98. NVIDIA's CEO was once an AMD employee, and after having left the company now commands a firm that is significantly more lucrative, asset rich and with a larger market share in the market barring x86 CPUs.
What I'm getting at here, is that there's no conspiracy by any company that beats AMD. There need not be, as AMD does this themselves. Freesync is a better technology than G-Sync with none of the technical limitations that G-sync has, yet it took me using both monitors from a monitor vendor behind closed doors for me to appreciate that. AMD did nothing to promote Freesync and will probably fail at promoting it when the monitors are on the market.
The hatred towards NVIDIA is that which every company faces that leads in it's particular field. We cheered for NVIDIA, when 3Dfx, Matrox, S3, etc were the 500lbs Gorillas in the 3D accelerator market. Now, it seems NVIDIA can never do right and they are the devil incarnate. By merely making money where their direct competitor is instant on losing it.
For enthusiasts we seem to be very emotional about how we relate to information and selective in what we take data and information to mean. The GTX 970 is a snafu of note. However what that has to do with the company lying to customers repeatedly is something else. For instance the DX11 issue, isn't an issue. you can simply look it up with Microsoft themselves and they will tell you about the various levels of DX11 compliance that exist, from INTEL IGP to AMD GPUs. It seems blind emotion to whom we perceive to be the victim/ underdog clouds rudimentary reasoning.
NVIDIA doesn't pay tech sites, NVIDIA doesn't advertise on tech sites, their partners do.
They're pushing my 4K ACER screen playing Toxikk @ 3840 X 2160 and it's nice and smooth. I'm not running all of the eye candy at max, but more than halfway up.
It would only be better with a pair of 970s.
I remember being wowed by reviews when the 970's came out. I still am.
Although, Nvidia, MSI, EVGA, Asus, etc. mislead us with the whole 3.5GB+512MB issue, I don't think it was an egregious lie. It was more of a mis-truth than anything. After all, it is 4GB of total RAM, it just doesn't function as we would expect a full 4GB to function (as with GTX 980). On this matter, I can see the manufacturer's/board partner's/retailer's/your point.
HOWEVER...the following specifications prove a lie that can not be explained away with Marketing terms or benchmarks:
Advertised ROPs: 64
Actual ROPS: 56
Advertised L2 Cache: 2MB
Actual L2 Cache: 1.75MB
This is false advertising. This is the lie.
Then when you add on the mis-truth of:
Advertised VRAM: 4GB
Actual VRAM: 3.5GB+(much slower)512MB
This is why I am angry, and I do not understand why any user would defend Nvidia/board partner's/retailer's for this.Agreed!
But I have to say that the performance is fine by me,.......especially if the prices get better.
I was gonna buy a few of them anyways. Even if I can't get a few of them for less, I'll still consider them, but only after I see what AMD releases in the next few months.
videocardz.com/54826/pcperspective-mobile-g-sync-confirmed-g-sync-module-unneeded
G-Sync does not require any special module to work.... WTF!!!
I think AMD should make another FIXER video...... :D
I suspect we will see and hear an announcement before March when Adaptive-Sync monitors start to go on sale. So they can say look we work with both, which will be the smart move to do. Knowing Nvidia they might just delay support until they clear current G-sync module stock.
It will be much better for the customer to go out and buy a Adaptive-Sync monitor and not have to worry about being locked into a specific gpu.
On the other hand, the price point was good, even if the GTX 970 was a 3.5 GB card. I mean if the GTX 970 was a true 4GB (incl. specs of ROPs, bandwith etc.) the price tag would have been much closer to that of a GTX 980. Perhaps the GTX 970ti is in the make in the near future?
Anyway, I do have a GTX 970 myself. I have returned two GTX 970s (Gigabyte GTX 970 ITX and Asus GTX 970 Strix because of terrible coil whine) before the GTX 970 G1 Gaming I got now. Perhaps God wanted to warn me? I can say I don't like a video card with a limitation such as 3.5 GB fast videoram, but with additional 0.5 GB slow videomemory (which sounds more like a Level3 onboard cache), while it was advertised as a GTX 970 with blazing fast 4 GB DDR5. Perhaps I won't buy another Nvidia card in the near future, certainly not for SLI (was planning to). Also, I don't like this since it affects the resale value of my GTX 970 considerably.
indeed Greedy Company is a suitable title......:shadedshu:
However Nvidia cultivated this mindshare, it's standing the test of time. kudos
The company in every generation of video cards sell more than AMD cards and i'm sure they spend less money for making GPU, I mean seriously 128bit memory interface in GTX series is quite JOKE!!!
USATODAY - Hyundai, Kia pay $100M fine over gas mileage claims
You get the picture. And I am NOT saying the other ones are not doing the same thing, they are. I don't have an example on hand, but you know how it is...
I am not a fanboy, of any sort, I just don't express myself as clearly as I should.
So now the cats out of the bag and duh OMG they lied to us I want my money back. Reading how people just bought the 970 in Jan.. they had NO CLUE. But now.. Nvidia lied to them and they want there money back lol.
All the review sites.. yep in on it. Theres just no way to test for this kind of thing so you gotta take whats written lol
This false advertisement is not on my box or in any paper in the box. Oh not saying its not true it is. Ask anyone right now with out going to the INTERNET. Where did you read this? How did you find out? Strange how others should'nt lie yet its ok if we do. Some..some never new about it never bought the card because of it now tons of them jumping on that wagon. Yeah your the smart one. For me there are more important things going on in this world ..awful things that I care about. What should have been said that was not.. I dont care. I can not expect anything for something I never new was. I'd be just as guilty.
Come on :) you can sing it.. heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend how ... thanks Speedwagon.
Retailers have no clue and should not be a part of this conversation. I would bet the AIB's were handed down specs, and didn't figure it out until they started testing for their own non reference solutions...
Still, its 4GB total. But the last 512MB run slow. Still the performance is what it is. And unless you game higher than 1440p or run heavily modded games, you won't hit 3.5GB+ of ram use in the overwhelming majority of titles at 1080p.
So what am I saying? On purpose no one knows for sure and your just guessing and foolish if you do. If one does not join in with the lynch mob then YOUR ONE OF THEM! :) So if your guessing then NV was blind or just really stupid and the card makers are all in on this or they to are totally stupid. Then us that bought the card are the smart ones.
As for false advertisement.. really? Check all you buy to see if it is exactly like its written? Not all. They know were sheep and were stupid. Proof? Who here smokes. Pay taxes? Do you KNOW what is not written anywhere (law or the like) yet you and I still PAY lol. This rabbit whole is huge.. trust me you dont want to open your eyes.