# Perfectly Functional GTX 970 Cards Being Returned Over Memory Controversy



## btarunr (Jan 29, 2015)

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.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Severus (Jan 29, 2015)

I'm perfectly happy with my 970 Strix and am going to keep it. All the fuss isn't worth the trouble, since I haven't noticed any problems with performance.


----------



## Chaitanya (Jan 29, 2015)

I wouldn't mind purchasing one or two of those open box cards for cheap. Only idiots would return those cards.


----------



## Jborg (Jan 29, 2015)

Chaitanya said:


> I wouldn't mind purchasing one or two of those open box cards for cheap. Only idiots would return those cards.


 
I was thinking the same exact thing.

Sounds like a cheap way into a SLI set up 

I won't be returning my 970 G1 Gaming either. Card has been great for what I do, and I have no complaints.


----------



## 64K (Jan 29, 2015)

I'm keeping my MSI 970 Gaming too. 



Chaitanya said:


> I wouldn't mind purchasing one or two of those open box cards for cheap. Only idiots would return those cards.



I imagine there will be quite a few refurbished GPUs in the near future for a good price.


----------



## HTC (Jan 29, 2015)

Severus said:


> I'm perfectly happy with my 970 Strix and am going to keep it. All the fuss isn't worth the trouble, since I haven't noticed any problems with performance.





Chaitanya said:


> I wouldn't mind purchasing one or two of those open box cards for cheap. Only idiots would return those cards.



It all depends on what use you give it: tax it enough and the problem will "show" itself.

If you don't use resolutions or image enhancements that push the VRAM usage past 3.5 GB, then you're correct, IMO. If not, then that's a whole different story and, personally, i'd think hard before deciding what to do if i were in such a case.


----------



## Sasqui (Jan 29, 2015)

64K said:


> I'm keeping my MSI 970 Gaming too.
> 
> 
> 
> I imagine there will be quite a few refurbished GPUs in the near future for a good price.



Have to keep an eye in eBay for sold listings to see where the price trend is heading in the next few weeks.


----------



## JMO (Jan 29, 2015)

Ahahahaha. Nvidia is going to eat some s**t over this debacle. 

It's hilarious. 

I have an image in my mind of all these 970 owners flocking to the local retailer waving their under-specced GPU's angrily in the air.

Cash will be flowing from the Nvidia coffers this quarter. 

lolol Nvidia.


----------



## Severus (Jan 29, 2015)

Even if there's a slight drop in performance, at the price point you still don't have any better option. Why bother returning it and adding another couple hundred dollars for a 980? It won't be worth the trouble and it won't be a good time / price / performance deal.
I'll just wait for whatever Nvidia will offer us for the trpuble and be happy with it


----------



## e62144 (Jan 29, 2015)

I'll keep mine too but I wanna see some sort of compensation. 970's resale value is rapidly decreasing already.


----------



## john_ (Jan 29, 2015)

Perfectly functional or not, this is a good thing. Marketing department will think twice or even triple times before trying to misled the consumer.


----------



## W1zzard (Jan 29, 2015)

JMO said:


> Cash will be flowing from the Nvidia coffers this quarter.



Did you read the post? merchants and board partners are getting hit with costs, not NVIDIA


----------



## GhostRyder (Jan 29, 2015)

This is actually quite funny because a couple of things are going to happen (Depending on how this is handled):

A: People who want the GTX 970 (Or another 1-2) will be able to pick these up cheap (If they get re-sold as open box/refurbished) which also might show up cheaper because the value might take a hit on eBay or the likes so people can get a high end card for less.
B: Some of those people are going to buy GTX 980's instead so the reality is this is more of a slap on the wrist than anything because they are still purchasing said products and actually buying a much more expensive version so the only real hits to NVidia would be the people who end up buying from the alternative side (I am not factoring in of course any hits that travel down the line from the cards being returned and NVidia being charged for it in some way).
C: The cards are going to get some improvement down the line that could help this at least a bit and the advertisement on the box will probably change (Well the boxes might get an update or something of the likes) so in the end people can be made happy.

Its interesting to see how people are reacting to this, I understand why some people would return the card since they feel cheated on the specs.  Though I think the major players that are/will/might see a difference in the performance even if the memory was a full 4gb at the proper speed are running 1440p+ and some crazy games with crazy mods or settings turned up.  I think though in the end whether you kept the card or not your probably going to be made a bit happier one way or another.


----------



## MustSeeMelons (Jan 29, 2015)

Won't be returning mine, but I think the returns are understandable - mostly principle not reason. If ill start having problems it will be going on sale though.


----------



## GC_PaNzerFIN (Jan 29, 2015)

What I see going on around is that ANY problem with ANYTHING related to GTX 970 is getting blamed for memory allocation now. Even game engine related bugs, other driver issues, SLI microstuttering and not being capable of handing +30 FPS at ultra high settings at 4K resolution. 

No doubt there are some with valid driver issues related to memory allocation. But come on, this is a huge storm in a glass. Mass panic. Few people were ready to return GTX 970 and buy MUCH WORSE card from AMD. Does not make sense at all anymore. 

NVIDIA made a huge PR mistake handling this. No doubt they should make official company statement and give some kind of compensation for the pain like game bundle. 

Also I would love to see NVIDIA give users option to disable this last 512 MB partition from drivers if they experience problems.  !


----------



## Severus (Jan 29, 2015)

Worst outcome for users is to return them and buy the 980, whose's price went up since the release of the 960. I was just checking the prices, and I paid 450 $ for the 970, and the 980 is now almost 800 $. So it would be plain stupid to do this. Rather wait and buy another 970 refursbished. 

Think it through people and don't make stupid mistakes over a stupid scandal!


----------



## qubit (Jan 29, 2015)

Teacups and storms come to mind.


----------



## Sasqui (Jan 29, 2015)

GC_PaNzerFIN said:


> Also I would love to see NVIDIA give users option to disable this last 512 MB partition from drivers if they experience problems. !



In reality, that would make things worse.  Run out of 3.5 Gb and you're now swapping to even slower system memory.


----------



## JMO (Jan 29, 2015)

W1zzard said:


> Did you read the post? merchants and board partners are getting hit with costs, not NVIDIA



Did you?

"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). "


----------



## GC_PaNzerFIN (Jan 29, 2015)

Sasqui said:


> In reality, that would make things worse.  Run out of 3.5 Gb and you're now swapping to even slower system memory.



Af far as I understood few guys problems, it would be better option to not have it at all. For example some workstation utilities seem to use ALL available vram regardless how much is needed and then get in trouble with last 512 MB being slower than rest (which the app doesn't know of course). Mark that disabled and performance actually goes up.


----------



## xfia (Jan 29, 2015)

GC_PaNzerFIN said:


> Af far as I understood few guys problems, it would be better option to not have it at all. For example some workstation utilities seem to use ALL available vram regardless how much is needed and then get in trouble with last 512 MB being slower than rest (which the app doesn't know of course). Mark that disabled and performance actually goes up.



in reality it would fix the performance for everything. nvidia themselves said the segments dont have simultaneous access.


----------



## rooivalk (Jan 29, 2015)

Hopefully this means a lot of 970s will flooding the 2nd hand market with low price. It's like 280x/290x ex-mining rig again.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jan 29, 2015)

Nice, might go SLI then!


----------



## JMO (Jan 29, 2015)

What I also find amusing is all the discussion around:

"Oh it's not a big deal, still a a great card"

"Still performs like it did when released"

"What will you buy instead?"

"What are you complaining about?"

"Card was never internded for 4k"

"Oh the issues is probably your -insert other pc component-"

blah blah blah.

Who cares? It's all irrelevant.

People are jumping up and down. So funny.

Nvidia engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct. Case closed. Consumers will have the choice to return the cards for full refunds, it's just a matter of time.

Maybe Nvidia and Co. will come up with alternative options to offer disgruntled consumers, end of the day though, unless your country has really shitty consumer protection laws, you are going to get to choose at the retailer level, money or the card.

Nvidia is making intermittent press statements, but generally pretty quiet on what exactly they plan on doing.  Oh, new drivers! Never heard that before. Nvidia really really screwed up and they know it.  They can't say too much until they finish all their "OH SHIT" meetings with lawyers and upper management.

Then they still have all the consumer complaints agencies that will be knocking at their door. Not to mention letters from outraged customers, countless emails and PM's...farking funny.

The potential damage to their reputation has...potential.

lol lol lol Nvidia.

Time to man up Nvidia. Doesn't matter if the GTX 970 is still a great card, you _lied, _ and you're gonna pay for it. So-sayeth the angry shopper!

hahahahah. lol


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jan 29, 2015)

JMO said:


> What I also find amusing is all the discussion around:
> 
> "Oh it's not a big deal, still a a great card"
> 
> ...



Did they steal your first born child or something?


----------



## ShurikN (Jan 29, 2015)

GC_PaNzerFIN said:


> Mass panic. Few people were ready to return GTX 970 and buy MUCH WORSE card from AMD. Does not make sense at all anymore.


You can get a 290x for the same money, those two cards are basically on par. Therefore people have an alternative.
People are making a moral stand here, that's all it is. And they should. They should punish companies who lie to them. (wish they would do the same with Ubi games)


----------



## Patriot (Jan 29, 2015)

GC_PaNzerFIN said:


> What I see going on around is that ANY problem with ANYTHING related to GTX 970 is getting blamed for memory allocation now. Even game engine related bugs, other driver issues, SLI microstuttering and not being capable of handing +30 FPS at ultra high settings at 4K resolution.
> 
> No doubt there are some with valid driver issues related to memory allocation. But come on, this is a huge storm in a glass. Mass panic. Few people were ready to return GTX 970 and buy MUCH WORSE card from AMD. Does not make sense at all anymore.
> 
> ...



oO
Nvidia wins on Power... significantly... However the 290x is still faster than a 970 and costs less.
This problem has yet to be measured at SLI and Tri-SLI yet... it probably isn't a big problem performance wise but it might be.


----------



## chinmi (Jan 29, 2015)

i'm still happy with my gtx 970. unless if nvidia decide to release a newer gtx 970 with full 4gb memory and fully functional 64 ROP and full 2mb level 2 cache... if they do that, than i'll be pissed. cause i pay for as advertised a 4gb memory, 64 rop and 2mb level 2 cache gtx 970... not a 3,5gb + .5gb vram, 56 ROP and 1,75 level 2 cache !!


----------



## xfia (Jan 29, 2015)

are you joking? the problem gets worse with sli and higher resolutions.. for some people it could be when they decide to sli that the problem shows itself so I don't know what the people are smoking that are saying they want to get sli cheap on a open box deal but they should share.


----------



## El_Mayo (Jan 29, 2015)

I'm thinking about returning mine and getting a GTX 960. The 970 is good but overkill for me at 1080p but I couldn't wait for the 960 when I wanted to upgrade


----------



## JMO (Jan 29, 2015)

Fluffmeister said:


> Did they steal your first born child or something?



 haha. Nah, It's two in the morning and I've been reading up on and posting about this topic for hours.

You have to admit though, when you look at it, it is pretty damn funny. A company of this size, with the massive resources it possesses, the aggregate IQ of it's employees, the industry experience, and yet here we are watching this most ridiculous sideshow of events unfold before our eyes.

No way Nvidia is going to be able to palm this off as a misunderstanding and leave it at that. Not going to happen. 

So I keep reading the news and waiting for the next gem to come from the lips of an Nvidia employee. It's better than daytime television.


----------



## GC_PaNzerFIN (Jan 29, 2015)

ShurikN said:


> You can get a 290x for the same money, those two cards are basically on par. Therefore people have an alternative.
> People are making a moral stand here, that's all it is. And they should. They should punish companies who lie to them. (wish they would do the same with Ubi games)



If I punished companies that lied or misleaded me at some point I would not have a PC at all. It is easy to forget what happened few years ago. I had 4x HD 5870 and jsut before HD 6000 series was launched AMD themselves showed slides which proof the AF-filtering was completely broken on hardware level. More recently marking all specs with "Up to ..."  specs. Up to 1 GHz my ass never saw those clocks with R9 290X stock cooler.


----------



## Anth0789 (Jan 29, 2015)

Severus said:


> I'm perfectly happy with my 970 Strix and am going to keep it. All the fuss isn't worth the trouble, since I haven't noticed any problems with performance.



Same here just waiting on a new driver that might give it a boost.


----------



## Petey Plane (Jan 29, 2015)

This is all absurd.  As if suddenly, the cards perform worse than they did 2 weeks ago and all previous benchmarks are invalid.  Can't wait for the market to get flooded with sub $200, refurbished and barely-used 970s.  May finally upgrade from my 670.


----------



## REAYTH (Jan 29, 2015)

JMO said:


> haha. Nah, It's two in the morning and I've been reading up on and posting about this topic for hours.
> 
> You have to admit though, when you look at it, it is pretty damn funny. A company of this size, with the massive resources it possesses, the aggregate IQ of it's employees, the industry experience, and yet here we are watching this most ridiculous sideshow of events unfold before our eyes.
> 
> ...


Like your opinion I'm quite sure this report is overblown. Also welcome to TPU. We eat fanboys for breakfast.


----------



## JMO (Jan 29, 2015)

GC_PaNzerFIN said:


> If I punished companies that lied or misleaded me at some point I would not have a PC at all.



Sometimes you just have to make a stand.

I haven't _knowingly_ bought a Sony product since 2006: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_copy_protection_rootkit_scandal


----------



## 64K (Jan 29, 2015)

Fluffmeister said:


> Did they steal your first born child or something?



Jen-Hsun Huang ran over his dog 2 years ago and he's never apologized for it.


----------



## nemesis.ie (Jan 29, 2015)

W1zzard said:


> Did you read the post? merchants and board partners are getting hit with costs, not NVIDIA



... and do you not think they will in turn be bitching at nVidia; looking for compensation etc? I think they will.


----------



## romeg (Jan 29, 2015)

I have a 980, but I'll seriously look at "open box" 970s for SLI in a second rig.


----------



## REAYTH (Jan 29, 2015)

JMO said:


> Sometimes you just have to make a stand.



Your like the William Wallace of the electronics world.


----------



## JMO (Jan 29, 2015)

REAYTH said:


> Like your opinion I'm quite sure this report is overblown. Also welcome to TPU. We eat fanboys for breakfast.



You may be right, but this just has the feel of something that is not going to go away quickly. The story is getting picked by pretty much every single tech site you could name. There is multiple articles coming up on many of them.

Not to mention, everyone is still sitting around waiting to see what Nvidia is going to do. This includes the manufacturers who are telling customers "no returns until Nvidia puts out a statement".

Further, people are really interested in this shit. Much as Nvidia might wish it to, it is not going to blow over.

And tyvm for the welcome...you eat shit for breakfast?



REAYTH said:


> Your like the William Wallace of the electronics world.



Ahaha. I genuinely lol'd when i read that.


----------



## REAYTH (Jan 29, 2015)

We also don't double post.


----------



## natr0n (Jan 29, 2015)

I'm sure some vendors will drop nvidia over this like xfx did.


----------



## Parn (Jan 29, 2015)

This 0.5GB slower memory pool will most likely only affect users with 970 SLI setup in high-res gaming scenarios. 

Anyone with a single 970 pretty much doesn't need to worry about this.


----------



## REAYTH (Jan 29, 2015)

Parn said:


> This 0.5GB slower memory pool will most likely only affect users with 970 SLI setup in high-res gaming scenarios.
> 
> Anyone with a single 970 pretty much doesn't need to worry about this.


No one needs to worry about this except fanboys looking for salt to rub. Its a lot of BS for nerds.


----------



## xfia (Jan 29, 2015)

REAYTH said:


> No one needs to worry about this except fanboys looking for salt to rub. Its a lot of BS for nerds.



you realize there was endless pages on the nvidia forum since a few days after it hit the market with no moderator response?  I hang around toms hardware too and they have a very high volume forum.. like every minute there is 5 new posts. There was moderators and engineers trying to help people and ending with no cusses. 
there is a real issue and parn is exactly right about the behavior. Its not a big deal to get rid of the 500mb and will fix all the horrible sli gaming.


----------



## btarunr (Jan 29, 2015)

REAYTH said:


> No one needs to worry about this except fanboys looking for salt to rub. Its a lot of BS for nerds.



We're all nerds on this forum, for knowing what a graphics card is. Else we'd be gaming on an Xbox.


----------



## xvi (Jan 29, 2015)

It seems like nVidia needs to step up to the plate here. Legally, I'm sure they could find a way to say "Yeah, whoops. We didn't realize usable memory was 3.5GB. Sorry. Here's a sticker to cover up the part of the box that says 4GB.", but I think it'll hurt them in the long run. Sure, it's still a juicy little hamburger, but when people expect a full burger and it comes out with a 12% slice missing out of it, it's going to damage their reputation unless they do something about it.


----------



## Menta (Jan 29, 2015)

https://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?57022-asus-970-strix-false-specs


----------



## rpsgc (Jan 29, 2015)

REAYTH said:


> We eat [AMD] fanboys for breakfast.



FTFY.

I've never seen anyone 'eating' or 'chewing' NVIDIA fanboys around here.


----------



## Parn (Jan 29, 2015)

With this amount of 970 returns, I wonder how the 960 is going to stand when the market is full of discounted open box/refurbished 970s. 

If I were an owner of a SINGLE 970, I'd rather wait for some game bundle/$100 voucher off your next upgrade kind of compensations instead of returning the card without second thought. 

If people are returning 970s for the misleading specs published by NV, then anyone of them with a 4th gen Core CPUs should also return the product to Intel as Haswell was advertised as having TSX support, but the feature was removed after a bug was found by the community with no compensation from Intel.


----------



## bogami (Jan 29, 2015)

If they canot drop the price on real 230$ (even this is too much)!  it should now look into piles in front of their doors ! greedy bastards .Processors that should be in the trash because of imperfect operation of the entire processor is locked in part (the part that is defective cutting silicone) and instead of  partially cover the cost of production want to do with garbage greasy profit .the sad thing is that we will do this with TITAN X.
So it is when you stand constructional problems in software drivers and this then it bites you in the ass nVidia. However, please note that this lesson  will not sobered them up. I want to see fall to the bottom and then they will begin again to respected customers . We live in an age of information and misinformation, and it seems that nVidia is more on the misinformation .Many blindly buy and do not know how many tricks is here ..


----------



## Tomgang (Jan 29, 2015)

GTX 970 is a nice Card whit low power use and a nice performence. I am not returning my two Cards. But this better not ever happen again or i will be returning Cards next time.

this is how i feel about this

http://puu.sh/f69Ef/bed6f1d282.gif


----------



## 64K (Jan 29, 2015)

bogami said:


> If they canot drop the price on real 230$ (even this is too much)!  it should now look into piles in front of their doors ! greedy bastards .Processors that should be in the trash because of imperfect operation of the entire processor is locked in part (the part that is defective cutting silicone) and instead of  partially cover the cost of production want to do with garbage greasy profit .the sad thing is that we will do this with TITAN X.
> So it is when you stand constructional problems in software drivers and this then it bites you in the ass nVidia. However, please note that this lesson  will not sobered them up. I want to see fall to the bottom and then they will begin again to respected customers . We live in an age of information and misinformation, and it seems that nVidia is more on the misinformation .Many blindly buy and do not know how many tricks is here ..



That's easy for you to say. 

$230 for a GTX 970 isn't going to happen but I do expect if this dings Nvidia's sales of chips too much that there will be a price decrease soon.


----------



## NightOfChrist (Jan 29, 2015)

bogami said:


> If they canot drop the price on real 230$ (even this is too much)!  it should now look into piles in front of their doors ! greedy bastards .Processors that should be in the trash because of imperfect operation of the entire processor is locked in part (the part that is defective cutting silicone) and instead of  partially cover the cost of production want to do with garbage greasy profit .the sad thing is that we will do this with TITAN X.
> So it is when you stand constructional problems in software drivers and this then it bites you in the ass nVidia. However, please note that this lesson  will not sobered them up. I want to see fall to the bottom and then they will begin again to respected customers . We live in an age of information and misinformation, and it seems that nVidia is more on the misinformation .Many blindly buy and do not know how many tricks is here ..


This is one of many reasons why I never wanted to use machine translation. It barely makes sense.

Also, I do not understand why you are so angry, if you actually are angry. You did not buy or own the card and does not have to return any card for false advertising. What is with the frustration?


----------



## xfia (Jan 29, 2015)

from what I can find about tsx is that it was good on paper but still only a marginal programming improvement. 
things like that are a choice to be used by programmers so it was nothing missed. 
in short.. it happens and will continue too for the sake of progression. 
if we reach for nothing then nothing will be gained.


----------



## ShurikN (Jan 29, 2015)

REAYTH said:


> No one needs to worry about this except fanboys looking for salt to rub. Its a lot of BS for nerds.


So, what happens when a game comes out that actually requires 4GB for (let say) ultra, since we all know that this card will run slower if it uses all memory. And no driver can fix that.
Let me tell you whats gonna happen. NV will release a better spec 970 to cash in more, and of course fuck all over the early adopters.


----------



## Patriot (Jan 29, 2015)

ShurikN said:


> So, what happens when a game comes out that actually requires 4GB for (let say) ultra, since we all know that this card will run slower if it uses all memory. And no driver can fix that.
> Let me tell you whats gonna happen. NV will release a better spec 970 to cash in more, and of course fuck all over the early adopters.



That is the Nvidia way...  Thread title is also a bit of a clickbait... 56/64 rops is obviously not perfectly functional... I am tempted to return mine and just wait till March...


----------



## Luka KLLP (Jan 29, 2015)

ShurikN said:


> So, what happens when a game comes out that actually requires 4GB for (let say) ultra, since we all know that this card will run slower if it uses all memory. And no driver can fix that.
> Let me tell you whats gonna happen. NV will release a better spec 970 to cash in more, and of course fuck all over the early adopters.


Early adopters are always fucked over


----------



## ChristTheGreat (Jan 29, 2015)

Tomgang said:


> GTX 970 is a nice Card whit low power use and a nice performence. I am not returning my two Cards. But this better not ever happen again or i will be returning Cards next time.
> 
> this is how i feel about this
> 
> http://puu.sh/f69Ef/bed6f1d282.gif




lol, I like the gif 

For those who says that people that returns teh card are BS or whatever, well they are not.. nVidia sells a product with false marketing. Event if the card is good or not, it is a false marketing... It is not difficult to understand..

If you are buying a car, that the company says: it does 4L/100, and all the car does 7L/100, sorry but if you keep it like this by doing nothing, you are just stupid. That's what happened to hyundai and Kia, they gave People cash onto a prepaid credit card because of the fuel consumption.. It's better than nothing..

If nVidia would be smart, they would apologize and say that are trying to do a fix (like I don't know, the .5gb could be desktop usage only and full 3.5gb for games) and give the user a game, or something...


----------



## I. B. (Jan 29, 2015)

MY TEST EVGA 970 SC 
As many of you have heard the GTX 970 has gotten a lot of heat because of the memory allocation. It uses 3.5GB and the other 500MB only when it's necessary. This has gotten a lot of buzz and is justified.


----------



## xfia (Jan 29, 2015)

Im no engineer but the segments cant be accessed at the same time so using it for desktop or cache is not possible without performance hit. 

look at the benchmarks of the 780ti and the 970... they just are not that far apart in performance... if they just make the 500mb segment unusable it will fix the performance especially for sli.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Jan 29, 2015)

W1zzard said:


> Did you read the post? merchants and board partners are getting hit with costs, not NVIDIA


That's akin to saying "only the hands got hurt, the head is still fine" well it will be until the hands either can't or simply refuse to feed to head anymore.

Nvidia knows this. There will have to be some kind of compensation for it. Even despite the fact that the cards perform exactly the same now as they did at launch. Consumer panic + EU false advertising laws will come back to bite nvidia.


----------



## Patriot (Jan 29, 2015)

yogurt_21 said:


> That's akin to saying "only the hands got hurt, the head is still fine" well it will be until the hands either can't or simply refuse to feed to head anymore.
> 
> Nvidia knows this. There will have to be some kind of compensation for it. Even despite the fact that the cards perform exactly the same now as they did at launch. Consumer panic + EU false advertising laws will come back to bite nvidia.



I bought my cards on Amazon ... False advertising is valid return reason.


----------



## xfia (Jan 29, 2015)

I. B. said:


> MY TEST EVGA 970 SC
> As many of you have heard the GTX 970 has gotten a lot of heat because of the memory allocation. It uses 3.5GB and the other 500MB only when it's necessary. This has gotten a lot of buzz and is justified.



looks likes it was saying please don't do this to me


----------



## xorbe (Jan 29, 2015)

I suspect the mass returns report is over-blown, a small rush of enthusiasts that will dry up quickly.  Hold nVidia's feet to the fire for the deceptive specs, but in reality probably less than 5% are really pushing their card into 3.5+ used.  I know I don't make good use of my Titan ...


----------



## xfia (Jan 29, 2015)

I love asian style art


----------



## beardofnails (Jan 29, 2015)

Here is one way that all the angry 970 owners could have avoided their frustrations: don't buy 4gb vram cards and expect qhd/uhd resolution performance to be fluid. Learn what the specs mean in relation to usage of the product. I didn't go out and buy a 750ti because I knew I would be playing heavy games at max detail, so I bought the 780. The fact that all these people purchased a mid range card and are griping about it having issues at super resolutions is borderline insanity. And (most of all) the only reason these people are angry is because it was brought to their attention by the press, they would have otherwise not noticed the partitioned ram and would have had to *knock their settings down to the appropriate levels for the card* (shocking, I know).


----------



## xorbe (Jan 29, 2015)

beardofnails said:


> I didn't go out and buy a 750ti because I knew I would be playing heavy games at max detail, so I bought the 780.



Mid-range card.  Should have bought the 780 Ti.


----------



## xfia (Jan 29, 2015)

ahh a 970 has no big advantage over your 780.. give it a little overclock and it will be right there most of the time. 

the 970 is certainly not mid-range though..  the 780(ti)-970-980-290(x) are all in the same high end performance class that do perfect 1080p gaming. people with 4k rigs hardly understand where graphics technology is at and pay a shit load for something they will soon need to upgrade. 

in reality just going by performance and nothing else it would be crazy to buy a 980 and a 290 gives you the best bang for your buck so it was kinda garbage people saying the 970 has the best price to performance ratio.


----------



## beardofnails (Jan 29, 2015)

xfia said:


> people with 4k rigs hardly understand where graphics technology is at and pay a shit load for something they will soon need to upgrade.



This is the point I was trying to illustrate. People who bought the 970 and expected it to be a flagship killer were doing it wrong. A single gpu with 4gb vram *IS NOT ENOUGH* to play current games smoothly at  resolutions over 1080p. You might be able to get away with 1440p in some instances, but I think people were unrealistic in their expectations, and they are blaming their lack of knowledge on nvidia because finger pointing is easier than learning what these things are and how they work.


----------



## Dave65 (Jan 29, 2015)

Severus said:


> I'm perfectly happy with my 970 Strix and am going to keep it. All the fuss isn't worth the trouble, since I haven't noticed any problems with performance.



Same here, some people just love to drama things up..


----------



## REAYTH (Jan 29, 2015)

btarunr said:


> We're all nerds on this forum, for knowing what a graphics card is. Else we'd be gaming on an Xbox.


Tru dat.


ShurikN said:


> So, what happens when a game comes out that actually requires 4GB for (let say) ultra, since we all know that this card will run slower if it uses all memory. And no driver can fix that.
> Let me tell you whats gonna happen. NV will release a better spec 970 to cash in more, and of course fuck all over the early adopters.


 By that time the card will be outdated anyway. 4gb or not its not running jack at 4k on ultra.


----------



## wickedcricket (Jan 29, 2015)

El_Mayo said:


> I'm thinking about returning mine and getting a GTX 960. The 970 is good but overkill for me at 1080p but I couldn't wait for the 960 when I wanted to upgrade




Not sure if you are retarded or a troll or actually both.


----------



## xfia (Jan 29, 2015)

ahh dont be mean..   @El_Mayo your 970 will always be better than 960.  if you experience the problem then turn down your settings starting with aa... solved.


----------



## El_Mayo (Jan 29, 2015)

wickedcricket said:


> Not sure if you are retarded or a troll or actually both.



WOW I don't see how that post sounded troll-like, what do you mean?



xfia said:


> ahh dont be mean..   @El_Mayo your 970 will always be better than 960.  if you experience the problem then turn down your settings starting with aa... solved.



Oh yeah it's a good card, but I wonder if I'll see any noticeable difference in performance if I switch to a 960 at *1920x1080*. But I do wanna get a 4K monitor eventually so I'll probably keep it


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 29, 2015)

btarunr said:


> Heise comments that the specifications "cheating could mean the greatest damage to the reputation of the company's history.".



Seriously?  No one remembers the FX series benchmark cheating they got caught doing?

This is like nothing by comparison.  At least in my books.


----------



## xfia (Jan 29, 2015)

El_Mayo said:


> WOW I don't see how that post sounded troll-like, what do you mean?
> 
> 
> 
> Oh yeah it's a good card, but I wonder if I'll see any noticeable difference in performance if I switch to a 960 at *1920x1080*. But I do wanna get a 4K monitor eventually so I'll probably keep it



even if you had the full 4gb it would still not be ideal for 4k gaming with 2.


----------



## REAYTH (Jan 29, 2015)

R-T-B said:


> Seriously?  No one remembers the FX series benchmark cheating they got caught doing?
> 
> This is like nothing by comparison.  At least in my books.


That and outside like 5 tech forums the vast public will have no idea. This is just another "Nerdageddon" that a few people will necro in a AMD driver release thread.


----------



## xfia (Jan 29, 2015)

dont hate on the AMD drivers  they have gotten better every few months since WQLH and I find the Omega drivers to be pretty nice.


----------



## Xzibit (Jan 29, 2015)

I see this scenario also making the issue stick around

A.) 970 Happy user

B.) 970 Unhappy user

C.) 970 User experiencing problems

B user get a refund for his card. Retail sells open/refurbished 970 at lower price. User A buys at discount, now SLI since he was playing at 1440p with no issue decides to turn up detail now or play at 4k.  Starts experiencing problems C user is having.


----------



## Fluffmeister (Jan 29, 2015)

Xzibit said:


> I see this scenario also making the issue stick around
> 
> A.) 970 Happy user
> 
> ...



D.) Buys 8GB GTX 980 Ti


----------



## Uplink10 (Jan 29, 2015)

Serves them right. Quotes from The Wolf of Wall Street:

That is what I hoped it would happen because they have such high prices:

00:49:57,828 --> 00:50:01,649
One of these days, the chickens are gonna come home to roost.

And now:

02:49:08,430 --> 02:49:11,158
<i>"The chickens had come home to roost."</i>


----------



## BorisDG (Jan 29, 2015)

Fluffmeister said:


> D.) Buys 8GB GTX 980 Ti


980 Ti will be 100% 6GB of memory to deal with 384bit bus.


----------



## AsRock (Jan 30, 2015)

qubit said:


> Teacups and storms come to mind.



Agree and disagree, if your one of those who replace your GFX card yearly or a little over for the most part i agree but for those like my self who keep a card 3-5 years the 3.5GB is going to get a load more often there fore would see the issue more often by time they replaced it.

If some ones returning a 970 due to just so they can get a 980 i am truly lmfao @ you.  You really think nVidia are going to learn if they end up getting more money of you in the end.

If i had one i would return it due to the fact i said above but i do wounder how bad it really is.  But still i would as telling people they did not know about this is just total BS.

All so i would feel like i been conned too but not having one to try the current games i play that take more than 3.5GB would lead me to sending it back.

Next time nVidia will thin twice and make sure what they are selling what they say they are.

What will not help is it's near tax return too and new toys are always fun.


----------



## Lionheart (Jan 30, 2015)

btarunr said:


> We're all nerds on this forum, for knowing what a graphics card is. Else we'd be gaming on an Xbox.



Oi that's cruel, I love my updated VCR


----------



## L337One91 (Jan 30, 2015)

"Perfectly functional GTX 970..."

This sounds like shilling.


----------



## bwat47 (Jan 30, 2015)

GC_PaNzerFIN said:


> What I see going on around is that ANY problem with ANYTHING related to GTX 970 is getting blamed for memory allocation now. Even game engine related bugs, other driver issues, SLI microstuttering and not being capable of handing +30 FPS at ultra high settings at 4K resolution.
> 
> No doubt there are some with valid driver issues related to memory allocation. But come on, this is a huge storm in a glass. Mass panic. Few people were ready to return GTX 970 and buy MUCH WORSE card from AMD. Does not make sense at all anymore.
> 
> ...


This. During this entire controversy people have been running around claiming that any and all stuttering issues must be the fault of the last 0.5gb vram, with little to no compelling proof. Most videos/benchmarks attempting to 'prove' this issue involve loading up games with ridiculous settings like ridiculous amounts of downsampling which will almost certainly result in hitting other bottlenecks on the card making it impossible to determine if its the fault of the vram or not.

I wouldn't really call an r9 290/290x a 'much worse' card though, they are pretty close in performance.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 30, 2015)

REAYTH said:


> That and outside like 5 tech forums the vast public will have no idea. This is just another "Nerdageddon" that a few people will necro in a AMD driver release thread.



As much as I'd like to believe people are reasonable and would be like that, the returns suggest the general public does know and cares...  Heck I'll take a second hand one at this rate!

PS:  I'm not a fanboy.  I'm running an R9 290X right now and love it for it's own qualities.  But the 970's energy consumption would be excellent for another PC without tripping my UPS!



> I wouldn't really call an r9 290/290x a 'much worse' card though, they are pretty close in performance.



I agree there.  If it weren't for energy consumption I'd call them equal.  As it is, 970 is a little better IMO but I gotta hell of a deal on my R9 290X


----------



## xorbe (Jan 30, 2015)

What IS the desired outcome anyways?  I say, fix the specs (3.5GB, 224-bit, 56 rop), and add a driver option to disable the unwanted 512MB side-port vram.  That's it.


----------



## GhostRyder (Jan 30, 2015)

GC_PaNzerFIN said:


> No doubt there are some with valid driver issues related to memory allocation. But come on, this is a huge storm in a glass. Mass panic. Few people were ready to return GTX 970 and buy MUCH WORSE card from AMD. Does not make sense at all anymore.


Uhh I think you need to look again because the 970 is normally below or on par with the R9 290X and the 290 is not much below it...

Either way this was expected, people are going to be outraged one way or another and you cannot expect anything less.  People do not like being lied to on products especially when it comes to alternatives to other products on the market because things like that can influence decisions on purchasing products.  When people drop a lot of money on a products they have certain levels of expectation no matter what it is, and when its something that actually does cause a difference they are likely to make a stand.  All in all its healthy for the consumer because it means that things like this will not happen (Or will slow down) in the future.


----------



## Lorenzo (Jan 30, 2015)

Ok, first, those are not perfectly functional 970s, every single 970 has the same uncorrectable memory problem, on the other hand, nVidia broke the law when they didn't disclose the real specs of the product. 

The shouldn't get a free pass just because. 

The card still performs in a stellar fashion, yes, that does not change the fact that nVidia knowingly deceived its customers, unless you buy the miscommunication error explanation, and even if that was true, their customers shouldn't have to pay for the company's mistakes.


----------



## RichF (Jan 30, 2015)

Severus said:


> Even if there's a slight drop in performance, at the price point you still don't have any better option. Why bother returning it and adding another couple hundred dollars for a 980? It won't be worth the trouble and it won't be a good time / price / performance deal.
> I'll just wait for whatever Nvidia will offer us for the trpuble and be happy with it


It's not a slight drop. It's a massive drop in terms of bandwidth for that second VRAM partition.

People who bought two or more of these cards for 4K gaming should be pissed. VRAM totals are very important for making SLI decisions in particular.


----------



## RichF (Jan 30, 2015)

"Perfectly function" is _misleading_ wording because it depends upon whose point of view you're talking about.

From Nvidia's point of view they're perfectly functional because that's how they were designed.

From a buyer's point of view they're faulty because they do not contain the design they were sold. 

When OCZ switched the NAND in its Vertex 2 ssds from 32-bit to 64-bit without telling anyone and without changing the specs printed on the box, people were upset. Not only did they lose capacity, they lost performance as well.

According to the point of view of this topic, though, those 64-bit NAND Vertex 2 drives were "perfectly functional".


----------



## mxp02 (Jan 30, 2015)

xfia said:


> ahh a 970 has no big advantage over your 780.. give it a little overclock and it will be right there most of the time.
> 
> the 970 is certainly not mid-range though..  the 780(ti)-970-980-290(x) are all in the same high end performance class that do perfect 1080p gaming. people with 4k rigs hardly understand where graphics technology is at and pay a shit load for something they will soon need to upgrade.
> 
> in reality just going by performance and nothing else it would be crazy to buy a 980 and a 290 gives you the best bang for your buck so it was kinda garbage people saying the 970 has the best price to performance ratio.



This is interesting.According to this theory, 6600 8600 250 460 are certainly not mid-range.Or should that be,just because they're close to previous gen high end,so they are certainly  mid-range.


----------



## xfia (Jan 30, 2015)

mxp02 said:


> This is interesting.According to this theory, 6600 8600 250 460 are certainly not mid-range.Or should that be,just because they're close to previous gen high end,so they are certainly  mid-range.



what exactly do you mean?  I'm a gamer so I base my experience off of performance..  new architectures are great but how much is it really worth when the most they can boast is efficiency. spending millions on research and not increasing ipc is almost sad to me and borders pathetic if a new architecture sits on a smaller lithography.
this can give you a bit of a idea how much performance has really increased in recent generations 
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html
a lot of gamers have zero reason to make upgrades with years old hardware


----------



## inferKNOX (Jan 30, 2015)

༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ Gif Games, nVOLVO!!


----------



## zAAm (Jan 30, 2015)

Just semantics, but wouldn't a "_perfectly_ functional GTX970" actually have 4 GB of full speed memory according to the definition given to consumers? Which means the returns are actually not _perfectly_ functional?


----------



## unspoken (Jan 30, 2015)

Games are already hitting the 3.35 GB limit these cards provide. I would not have purchased two of these considering the low ram available specifically in SLI. In a single card setup, sure. But knowing this information would have saved me money and the trouble of building a high resolution setup. 

Perfectly functional? Pfft. No. These cards are mislabeled. Why did tech sites not test the new Maxwell architecture? It seems they can be as unreliable as nVidia.


----------



## inferKNOX (Jan 30, 2015)

btarunr said:


> We're all nerds on this forum, for knowing what a graphics card is. Else we'd be gaming on an Xbox.


These are my sentiments too. I take quite a bit of offense to his nerd-bashing!

Like Tomgang, I feel like this:






What I came to understand is that because it can only access one memory partition at a time, it starts alternating between the two partitions, slowing the whole card down. Basically both partitions become slow when the slower 2nd one starts being used, due to the alternating nature of the config!
That means the whole card suffers a performance drop when performance is needed most!


----------



## xfia (Jan 30, 2015)

I think the HSA foundation needs to give NV a lesson on the parallel nature of gpu's.. The whole design is flawed by basic principle. gaming? yeah it can hurt there but what about editing, rendering and NV own Cuda apps... ouch...


----------



## mxp02 (Jan 30, 2015)

xfia said:


> what exactly do you mean?  I'm a gamer so I base my experience off of performance..  new architectures are great but how much is it really worth when the most they can boast is efficiency. spending millions on research and not increasing ipc is almost sad to me and borders pathetic if a new architecture sits on a smaller lithography.
> this can give you a bit of a idea how much performance has really increased in recent generations
> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html
> http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-5.html
> a lot of gamers have zero reason to make upgrades with years old hardware



Totally agree with your last line.There are a lot of gamers still using cards like  5-year-old 5770 even intel HD 1000 series,running games at 720p low 10-20fps;a lot of gamers can't notice the difference between 20 fps and 60fps;a lot of gamers does't bother low medium or  high;a lot of gamers are happy with games looks like Quake 3.It's their choice,does it have anything to do with the definition of a mid-range card?200 years ago the avg height of japanese male is 5‘1",if you were 5'7",that was really tall.Time changed,nowadays 5'7" is merely avg.


----------



## buggalugs (Jan 30, 2015)

wow, its incredible that even after this debacle, and even Nvidia themselves admitting it is a huge problem that is going to cost them financially, there are still a handful of the same guys here saying theres no problem, its all a beat up etc.

 You guys are completely wrong, and I seriously gotta question your motivations and your morals really...It doesn't matter which team you like, when someone does something wrong , they should be criticised so it wont happen again.

 Its is a commercial disaster to be caught out being dishonest about specs, in an industry where specs are an important selling point of these cards.

 The big question is why it took Nvidia 3 months and post Christmas sales to admit to this problem?? Then they only admitted it after it was reported by tech sites. Its bad form. Nvidia need a kick in the shins to stop them pulling this crap again.


----------



## Max Mojo (Jan 30, 2015)

Obviously that's the way it's meant to treat customers nowadays. This guy Jen-Hsun appeared always a bit too boastful at his launch parties. This issue is called a fraud, done voluntarily and not by miscommunication.
But however sound the facts are, the army of nvidia evangelists will whitewash them. Seems to be some sort of overprotection.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 30, 2015)

Used, perfectly functional 970's, here I come!  These are going to be a steal!


----------



## inferKNOX (Jan 30, 2015)

You guys gotta read this conversation, it's rather hilarious:
http://rog.asus.com/forum/showthrea...ons-of-GTX-970&p=471750&viewfull=1#post471750


----------



## JMO (Jan 30, 2015)

inferKNOX said:


> You guys gotta read this conversation, it's rather hilarious:
> http://rog.asus.com/forum/showthrea...ons-of-GTX-970&p=471750&viewfull=1#post471750




No,










is hilarious.


----------



## 64K (Jan 30, 2015)

inferKNOX said:


> You guys gotta read this conversation, it's rather hilarious:
> http://rog.asus.com/forum/showthrea...ons-of-GTX-970&p=471750&viewfull=1#post471750



That was some funny stuff. Thanks.


----------



## rtwjunkie (Jan 30, 2015)

inferKNOX said:


> You guys gotta read this conversation, it's rather hilarious:
> http://rog.asus.com/forum/showthrea...ons-of-GTX-970&p=471750&viewfull=1#post471750


 
Good find!  That is indeed funny stuff!  And really, do you know how many years it has been since I have run accross a motherboard that didn't support a video card?  But that rep was sticking to that story! "If it's not in the script, I cannot think." LOL!!?.....


----------



## lukart (Jan 30, 2015)

Uau who did they hire? A pretty Chinese girl that is reading from the RMA guidelines book?


----------



## TRWOV (Jan 30, 2015)

Where's the "Hitler finds out that the GTX970 is 3.5GB" video?  Come on internet, try to keep up.


----------



## Ralfies (Jan 30, 2015)

JMO said:


> No,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's the greatest thing I've ever seen.


----------



## AsRock (Jan 30, 2015)

TRWOV said:


> Where's the "Hitler finds out that the GTX970 is 3.5GB" video?  Come on internet, try to keep up.



@TRWOV

There had to be one
It's the way it's meant to be gimped


----------



## GAR (Jan 30, 2015)

This proves how dumb some people can be, the 970 is still the best bang for buck, why didn't anyone return the R9 290X reference design that was running at 10,000 degrees and took 5000 gigawatts to run it. IMO the 290X is one of the biggest GPU Failures ever, sure it performs, but I put it in the same class as the FX5900. This isnt a red vs Green, its a look at things from both sides.


----------



## xkche (Jan 30, 2015)

inferKNOX said:


> You guys gotta read this conversation, it's rather hilarious:
> http://rog.asus.com/forum/showthrea...ons-of-GTX-970&p=471750&viewfull=1#post471750



WTF!, no way.

That video XD


----------



## newtekie1 (Jan 30, 2015)

GAR said:


> This proves how dumb some people can be, the 970 is still the best bang for buck, why didn't anyone return the R9 290X reference design that was running at 10,000 degrees and took 5000 gigawatts to run it.



And don't forget how it wouldn't run at advertised clocks...



GAR said:


> IMO the 290X is one of the biggest GPU Failures ever, sure it performs, but I put it in the same class as the FX5900. This isnt a red vs Green, its a look at things from both sides.



I think I've said this before, but the Hawaii is a worse release than Fermi.  A full Hawaii consumes more power than a full Fermi did, relative to the competition Hawaii consumes way more power than Fermi did, and at least Fermi outperformed the competition while Hawaii doesn't.


----------



## CrAsHnBuRnXp (Jan 30, 2015)

JMO said:


> Ahahahaha. Nvidia is going to eat some s**t over this debacle.
> 
> It's hilarious.
> 
> ...


AMD fanboy much? I really dont get this stupid fanboy crap. Fucking childish and just makes you look like a loser with a low IQ.


----------



## xfia (Jan 30, 2015)

hahaha  what company does ngreedia think it is?  fucking apple?


----------



## Frederik S (Jan 30, 2015)

I think this video sums it up perfectly!









On a more to the point note, I think it is insane that NV would resort to fake marketing they clearly did not need it for the GTX 970 to be a success or the 980 for that matter.


----------



## remixedcat (Jan 31, 2015)

people are dumbshits for returning these awesome cards... if anyone cant then I would gladly take one!


----------



## xorbe (Jan 31, 2015)

Yeah, seems silly to return the cards for most people, even though it was a crap move by nVidia.  But I'm not going to complain if it gets the message across.


----------



## JMO (Jan 31, 2015)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> AMD fanboy much? I really dont get this stupid fanboy crap. Fucking childish and just makes you look like a loser with a low IQ.




What fanboy crap? Observing events and coming to conclusions doesn't put you on one "team" or another.

Get of your high-horse mate. It just funny, and I'm having a laugh.

I would be laughing just as hard at an AMD cock-up of these proportions.

Simply truth is that there is already a fantastic number of 970 owners _virtually_ waving their GPUs in Nvidia's face. You just have to look at the Nvidia forums. 

It's pretty funny.


----------



## remixedcat (Jan 31, 2015)

CrAsHnBuRnXp said:


> AMD fanboy much? I really dont get this stupid fanboy crap. Fucking childish and just makes you look like a loser with a low IQ.



Very true statement here!


----------



## Prima.Vera (Jan 31, 2015)

You wont get over 3GB of VRAM if you play at 1080p anyways. And the 4K users are still buying the 980 card.
IMO this whole thingy overreacted to much...


----------



## Xzibit (Jan 31, 2015)

Prima.Vera said:


> You wont get over 3GB of VRAM if you play at 1080p anyways. And the 4K users are still buying the 980 card.
> IMO this whole thingy overreacted to much...



Eh,, Really ?










			
				NVIDIA GeForce 980 970 Reviewer's Guide said:
			
		

> _*Like the GeForce GTX 980, the GeForce GTX 970 is designed for 2560x1600 gaming with maximum graphics settings and high levels of AA enabled. NVIDIA recommends two GeForce GTX 970 cards running in SLI for the best gaming experience at 4K.*_



They're marketing the card for people to push it to a situation where the segmented memory becomes an issue.

Its like there asking for it.

Then buyers keep getting told different things.

*PCWorld - Nvidia clarifies: No specific GTX 970 driver to improve memory allocation performance planned*

If the card is truly working as intended. There should be no problem running maxed out at 2560x1600 or SLI 4k.  Why would there be any need to tell a user to limit there setting in 1440p or 1080p.


----------



## Tsukiyomi91 (Jan 31, 2015)

Uh... if anyone here is selling off their GTX970s, you got one potential buyer, which is me haha~! IMO, I dun care what you guys say coz I'm a gamer who's comfortable with a few things like:
1.) I'm not some crazy "gamer" who thinks that a single GTX970 can handle games on 1600p & above with shitload of mods.
2.) I don't look at those synthetic numbers or whatnots & say "this card is bugged, not gonna use it" crap.
3.) It's meant to combat games on 1080p & 1440p at Max settings MINUS the mods on games like Skyrim.
4.) You pay is what you get. Never expect much from a $350 card when you're pushing it excessively.
5.) Lastly; 4K gaming is useless. Why pay so much for 4 times the resolution of 1080p when graphic quality isn't even 4 times better? Best you spend a little more for a card that's design for handling 4K at High setitngs. 
Lesson here is that no matter what you spout, those who are happy with it knows their VGA cards better than anyone. I dun care if there's 3.5GB of "usable" VRAM, 56 actively running ROPs or eats ~250W peaked power consumption, it's still the best 1080p killer card money can buy. Best part is, I dun even need to change to a more expensive one when I game comfortably on a massive 60-inch FHD LED TV at my living room.


----------



## Eagleye (Jan 31, 2015)

You wont see much 970`s on Ebay because most cards will be returned. But cards have dropped in price at the retailer in the EU (GTX 980 - £40 and GTX 970 - £20) , some cards BNIB GTX 970 are going £60 cheaper already.



buggalugs said:


> wow, its incredible that even after this debacle, and even Nvidia themselves admitting it is a huge problem that is going to cost them financially, there are still a handful of the same guys here saying theres no problem, its all a beat up etc.
> 
> You guys are completely wrong, and I seriously gotta question your motivations and your morals really...It doesn't matter which team you like, when someone does something wrong , they should be criticised so it wont happen again.
> 
> ...



I agree, but this isn't the first time nVidia have been caught lying to their customers and review sites http://www.ngohq.com/news/22789-amd-unlike-nvidia-we-have-full-support-for-directx-11-1-a.html OR http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/nvidia-kepler-not-fully-compliant-with-directx-11-1.html (Remember BumpGate?) So why wouldn't nvidia try again as they have got away with it many times before. BTW its not easy to get away with false specifications, especially when its DX11.1, RAM, BUS Width and ROPS etc. But they did because of the unconditional blind biased/fanboy backing they get.

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 http://wccftech.com/nvidia-gsync-mobility-confirmed-require-dedicated-module-raises-questions/


----------



## ShockG (Jan 31, 2015)

Eagleye said:


> You wont see much 970`s on Ebay because most cards will be returned. But cards have dropped in price at the retailer in the EU (GTX 980 - £40 and GTX 970 - £20) , some cards BNIB GTX 970 are going £60 cheaper already.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
There isn't a great conspiracy by NVIDIA. There never has been. 
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.


----------



## Para_Franck (Jan 31, 2015)

Oh my god, this is the best one yet:


----------



## RejZoR (Jan 31, 2015)

Actually returning GTX 970 and paying more for GTX 980 is the worst outcome one can imagine for customers (why people even do it?). Basically what you say with such action is that you got screwed without vaseline, you liked it and you want to pay more to the one who screwed you over in the first place.


----------



## RealNeil (Jan 31, 2015)

I'll be happy to buy up some of those 970s too!


----------



## Para_Franck (Jan 31, 2015)

Yeah, I'd pick one up for myself! I mean, they still are, and always where, great cards, that perform just as as good as the ones reviewed. This is just PR and Marketing crap. It would be much better than my actual 7850 2GB


----------



## RealNeil (Feb 1, 2015)

My two R9-280X OC GPUs in Crossfire are both 3GB Cards. 
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.


----------



## Airjarhead (Feb 1, 2015)

Petey Plane said:


> This is all absurd.  As if suddenly, the cards perform worse than they did 2 weeks ago and all previous benchmarks are invalid.  Can't wait for the market to get flooded with sub $200, refurbished and barely-used 970s.  May finally upgrade from my 670.



Sure the GTX 970 is still the same card (benchmark wise), that we bought after seeing the very first reviews.
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.



buggalugs said:


> wow, its incredible that even after this debacle, and even Nvidia themselves admitting it is a huge problem that is going to cost them financially, there are still a handful of the same guys here saying theres no problem, its all a beat up etc.
> 
> You guys are completely wrong, and I seriously gotta question your motivations and your morals really...It doesn't matter which team you like, when someone does something wrong , they should be criticised so it wont happen again.
> 
> ...



Agreed!


----------



## RealNeil (Feb 1, 2015)

I'm not defending them on this. It sucks for those that it matters to, the ones that bought them not knowing about this.

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.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 1, 2015)

deceptive tactics are a no no.


----------



## johnspack (Feb 1, 2015)

If someone doesn't want their 970,  I'll trade you my 480 for it in a heartbeat!  You lucky bastards......


----------



## RONIN021 (Feb 1, 2015)

Check this out
http://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*......


----------



## Xzibit (Feb 1, 2015)

RONIN021 said:


> Check this out
> http://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*......



The sooner they dump the G-Sync module the better. Which they don't even make, its an Altera ARM design.  They always made it sound like they design it from the ground up.

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.


----------



## TC-man (Feb 1, 2015)

Nvidia should have been more cautious with the advertising about the GTX 970. I just couldn't believe that a huge company such as Nvidia could have slipped through this just like that. But it seems none of the reviews of these cards have properly tested the entire 4 GB memory on these GTX 970... 
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.


----------



## RONIN021 (Feb 1, 2015)

Xzibit said:


> The sooner they dump the G-Sync module the better. Which they don't even make, its an Altera ARM design.  They always made it sound like they design it from the ground up.
> 
> 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.



Things i don't understand is why NVIDIA with big financial resources do something like that
indeed Greedy Company is a suitable title......


----------



## Para_Franck (Feb 1, 2015)

RONIN021 said:


> Things i don't understand is why NVIDIA with big financial resources do something like that
> indeed Greedy Company is a suitable title......


Why do you think they have big financial resources, certainly not by being honest and generous. I am honest and generous and I don't have big financial resources, nor will I ever have it.


----------



## Regenweald (Feb 1, 2015)

Yah know, if some car manufacturer had advertised a new model as getting X mpg and it turned out to be 1/8 short of advertising, or and engine that is 1/8 smaller than advertised there'd probably be a class action lawsuit. It's funny to see how stupid the gamer/fanboy mentality is, and how adults treat straight up false advertising as 'no big deal' because 'you don't need that much memory anyways'

However Nvidia cultivated this mindshare, it's standing the test of time. kudos


----------



## TRWOV (Feb 1, 2015)

Heck, if nVidia had been more, humm, creative, they could have spin the 0.5GB partition as some sort of cache. They might have sold it as "GTX 970 224bit 3.5GB GDDR5 with 512MB of hyper cache technology" or something like that.


----------



## Para_Franck (Feb 1, 2015)

TRWOV said:


> Heck, if nVidia had been more, humm, creative, they could have spin the 0.5GB partition as some sort of cache. They might have sold it as "GTX 970 224bit 3.5GB GDDR5 with 512MB of hyper cache technology" or something like that.


I sure one of them read that and said to himself: Why didn't I think of that, this is genius!


----------



## RONIN021 (Feb 1, 2015)

Para_Franck said:


> Why do you think they have big financial resources, certainly not by being honest and generous. I am honest and generous and I don't have big financial resources, nor will I ever have it.


Why you think they don't have...?
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!!!


----------



## Xzibit (Feb 1, 2015)

Regenweald said:


> Yah know, if some car manufacturer had advertised a new model as getting X mpg and it turned out to be 1/8 short of advertising, or and engine that is 1/8 smaller than advertised there'd probably be a class action lawsuit. It's funny to see how stupid the gamer/fanboy mentality is, and how adults treat straight up false advertising as 'no big deal' because 'you don't need that much memory anyways'
> 
> However Nvidia cultivated this mindshare, it's standing the test of time. kudos



You mean like this.

*USATODAY - Hyundai, Kia pay $100M fine over gas mileage claims*


----------



## Para_Franck (Feb 2, 2015)

RONIN021 said:


> Why you think they don't have...?
> 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!!!



My bad, my english is not as good as I thought. There is probably a missing coma in there. It was supposed to be more like: How do you think they make big money, certainly not by being honest and generous.....

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.


----------



## Zeblade (Feb 2, 2015)

I dont know one friend or read about those that new the  970 had or didnt have "64 ROP and 2mb 2 cache"

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.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 2, 2015)

Airjarhead said:


> Sure the GTX 970 is still the same card (benchmark wise), that we bought after seeing the very first reviews.
> 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:
> ...


I wonder when in the process the AIB's found out and why they didn't say anything... oh wait, I know why, because they fear what NIVIDIA will do to them. Just like they quiver when we suggest to them to let AIB's have free reign on their power limits... they won't budge and are afraid to budge. NVIDIA can be a bully in that respect. 

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.


----------



## Zeblade (Feb 2, 2015)

You guys cant be this silly right? Well you talk as if you know Nvidia did this false advertisement on purpose. No please share all the proof YOU have. You know how that makes you look? So ALL the card makers have no way of testing they just make the WHOLE card yet cant test this or ALL are in on this also since they never said a word. Then the review sites ALL left with "Nvidia said" so thats all we have for you guys we can only run the benchmarks not ONE new how to test for this?

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.


----------



## AsRock (Feb 2, 2015)

No you wont in a lot of games but as time goes on the list is going get bigger. I normally keep mine for at least 3 years and by that time there be a lot more.


----------



## xorbe (Feb 2, 2015)

I am wary of all the less-than-5-post defenders of NV across various forums on this issue.


----------



## Regenweald (Feb 3, 2015)

Zeblade said:


> You guys cant be this silly right? Well you talk as if you know Nvidia did this false advertisement on purpose. No please share all the proof YOU have. You know how that makes you look? So ALL the card makers have no way of testing they just make the WHOLE card yet cant test this or ALL are in on this also since they never said a word. Then the review sites ALL left with "Nvidia said" so thats all we have for you guys we can only run the benchmarks not ONE new how to test for this?
> 
> 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.



I hope this is sarcasm or satire or some shit...... because I still have faith in mankind. Don't take that away from me.........Not for a GPU. not for a GPU.......


----------



## Xzibit (Feb 3, 2015)

This reminds me of the Leave Britney Nvidia Alone guy.







For those of you who forgot.


Spoiler: Leave Britney Alone


----------



## The N (Feb 3, 2015)

Reaction on GTX970 being 3.5g

http://www.ytpak.com/?component=video&task=view&id=tNGi06cq_pQ


----------



## Athlonite (Feb 3, 2015)

The N said:


> Reaction on GTX970 being 3.5g
> 
> http://www.ytpak.com/?component=video&task=view&id=tNGi06cq_pQ




ROFL nVidia: The way it's meant to be Gimped


----------



## AsRock (Feb 3, 2015)

Tech Report vid


----------



## The N (Feb 3, 2015)

AsRock said:


> Tech Report vid




Server refused the connection


----------



## xfia (Feb 3, 2015)

AsRock said:


> Tech Report vid



I didnt really think much of it..  they left out some pretty important points


----------



## RONIN021 (Feb 3, 2015)

_You Really Should See This_! 
http://www.mediafire.com/watch/lfvh...with_Nvidia_engineer_about_the_970_fiasco.mp4


----------



## AsRock (Feb 4, 2015)

RONIN021 said:


> _You Really Should See This_!
> http://www.mediafire.com/watch/lfvh...with_Nvidia_engineer_about_the_970_fiasco.mp4



No, Everyone already seen it fck knows how many times int his thread alown. in fact i believe people should start getting banned for posted shit on a thread they clearly not read.


----------



## Athlonite (Feb 4, 2015)

It begs the reason why did nVidia come forward with a statement now instead of when the card first launched answer they were caught out, if nobody noticed and complained they wouldn't have said anything and they would have gotten away with it


----------



## lukart (Feb 4, 2015)

ShockG said:


> NVIDIA doesn't pay tech sites, NVIDIA doesn't advertise on tech sites, their partners do.



They dont? I guess you just check TPU for reviews then... 
How many SiteSkins they buy on a product launch? Im guessing thats not cheap ...


----------



## JMO (Feb 5, 2015)

And litigation draws nearer...

http://bursor.com/investigations/nvidia/


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 5, 2015)

JMO said:


> And litigation draws nearer...
> 
> http://bursor.com/investigations/nvidia/


OFN from days ago...


----------



## 64K (Feb 5, 2015)

JMO said:


> And litigation draws nearer...
> 
> http://bursor.com/investigations/nvidia/



I don't want a refund for my 970 because I'm happy with the performance but for anyone that does and wants to get involved then contact that law firm and let them know about this petition

https://www.change.org/p/nvidia-refund-for-gtx-970

They may not be aware of it.


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 6, 2015)

Can someone explain why GPUz didn't pick up the actual number of ROPS etc?


----------



## rtwjunkie (Feb 6, 2015)

EarthDog said:


> Can someone explain why GPUz didn't pick up the actual number of ROPS etc?


I think W1zz explained last week. GPUz reads what the driver tells it.

Of course, that would mean someone intentionally put the wrong info in the driver...


----------



## 64K (Feb 6, 2015)

EarthDog said:


> Can someone explain why GPUz didn't pick up the actual number of ROPS etc?



iirc W1zzard said it reads the ROPS from the driver. In any case I think the GTX 970 has 64 ROPS it's just that it only uses 56 of them.

Edit: ninjad by rtwjunkie


----------



## EarthDog (Feb 6, 2015)

rtwjunkie said:


> I think W1zz explained last week. GPUz reads what the driver tells it.
> 
> Of course, that would mean someone intentionally put the wrong info in the driver...


Missed that as I haven't been here often lately...

And holy cow... its in the driver? That means that............ oh wow. Worse than I thought NVIDIA...


----------



## MxPhenom 216 (Feb 8, 2015)

xfia said:


> hahaha  what company does ngreedia think it is?  fucking apple?



My question is, who do you think you are? Gods gift to the computing world?


----------



## xorbe (Feb 9, 2015)

MxPhenom 216 said:


> My question is, who do you think you are? Gods gift to the computing world?



Yup, we're the consumer gods holding the cash nv very much desires.


----------

