These are DX12 cards which is the cool part.
DX12 is more of a "CPU optimizer" upgrade. This doesn't really restrict you from having to purchase a future generation of graphic cards from either camp to use it.
As far as I know, all current generations, NVidia 700 and AMD R#-200s for the most part, can run DX12.
On that note it seems nvidia will be skipping 16nm in favor of 14nm Samsung, either way waiting for a die shrink then I'll purchase my next GPU, I have personally had enough of the 28nm GPUs.
Saw the news about that on Tweaktown.com. I don't feel optimistic that Samsung will continue to do business, produce 14 FF chips for NVidia after the current sue job. I'm not saying it isn't going to happen, I am saying that I feel it won't happen unless the case was settled, or the agreement to produce said 14 ff chips for NVidia was agreed before the patent infringement case. Of course money always talks. So it's possible if NVidia was paying Samsung more $$$, it could happen.
3.5GB is fine since it's not a 4K capable card anyway.
You're mistaken. VRam isn't summed up together as one when you add an additional graphic card to your system. If you have 3 GTX 970s in SLI with 4 GBs VRam, it doesn't mean you have a total of 12 GBs VRam. It means that each GPU has a 4 GB VRam framebuffer, and that's dedicated to each GPU. 3.5 GBs VRam each if you want to be technical plus how much ROPs less per card than previously stated by the manufacture's specs. If you go 4k and you have a 3way SLI 970 setup, and 3.8 GBs VRam is needed in this hypothetical scenario, each card will try and access 3.8 GBs VRam to store information for the image that's being rendered and sent to the display device.
I've read on Tweaktown.com that AMD is making a claim, or hinting one that after DX12 aka Win10 is released, AMD may eventually make it where AMD Mantle will allow VRam, from each GPU, to be summed up as one. This hint was made next to the one about the GPU could also use CPU memory, eventually...
@ the post,
Worst case scenario, Nvidia could be faced with false advertisement for misleading their customers with a faulty product. Consumers could take that route. It be ironic if that were to happen after trying to sue Samsung and Qualcomm. Think about it. It's not surprising. First they came out with the GTX Titan-Z for $3,000 as a high end gaming card with 64bit floating point capabilities. Hoping for AMD to fail with the R9-295x Now they've pretty much mis-lead their consumer base, or claim ignorants to the truth about their product. For consumers, worst case scenario is you couldn't play any future PC Games with high textures, surround, or go 4k HD. A heavily modded Skyrim is a big no for GTX 970. So if this was an investment that's going to last you for the next 5 years, you're totally screwed on any future PC game that requires more VRam usage. You are crap out of luck. I know Star Citizens is possibly going to be one of those games.
I don't feel it's right that AMD owners should degrade themselves or toss dirt on NVidia, but in another point of view, NVidia had it coming from the AMD camp because they've pretty much pulled the same "QQ-cry-cry-cry" card about the Frame Time Variance issues with the GPU king of 2013 aka AMD 7990. AMD took it's punches and improved from their mistakes in their own way. Now if you ask me, did NVidia deserved it, and the answer is yes. Thank your consumers for that. It's basically a natural "eye for an eye" reaction from the AMD camp at NVidia. Is NVidia going to learn from this. I highly doubt it because a majority of the base has basically rolled over, or gave into the compromise that "oh it only an issue for the card is a piece of crap if I go above 3.5 GBs VRam Usage" comments. The reals message being sent to NVidia by consumers is I will pay more for less, but don't be truthful about it.
Sadly, I think NVidia consumers deserve better than this even if NVidia consumer's don't want to stand up for themselves. Say "hey, you sold me a faulty card, this isn't what I paid for when I purchased this product." Now a lot of members on this forum are going to make the argument that "oh when AMD R9-200 cards were throttling, AMD customers didn't cry to AMD about it, or the Frame Time Variance on 7000 series cards in Crossfire was crap" case, and you know what, I think those issues are less significant than NVidia covering up a drop in ROPs or lack of full direct memory access on the GTX 970. The reasoning for that is because AMD didn't really, intentionally mislead their consumers. R9-290x cards would go up to 1.0Ghz core clock until it started throttling because of the increased temperatures. AMD fixed its Frame Time Variance issues over time. In addition, AMD Catalyst Drivers (Both beta and WHQL) are not causing issues for AMD users as much as haters would believe. The question really isn't what NVidia consumers should say to counter-argument AMD consumers about the GTX 970 issues. NVidia consumers are either going to refund their cards, or stick with their purchase because it meets there needs or expectation. I think the best question NVidia consumers should ask is are you willing to let NVidia continue to provide you with a product that doesn't meet specs when they are suppose to have a track record, over AMD, of producing reliable, premium products. Are NVidia consumers paying $500, $600 for premium NVidia products in the future that don't live up to expectations anymore.... A lot of NVidia users saying this is acceptable behavior. It's acceptable for NVidia to live up to AMD's failed standards. It won't upset you so long as you don't know right...... Once you bought these faulty products, your locked until you buy more NVidia products down the line.
It really doesn't matter what this poll represents. The polls could be a misrepresentation of the truth, it could be the truth, but it doesn't represent the 100%, bigger picture.
