I will explain you why nvidia lied to you.

[zappian]

That's ridiculous though; none of us deserves a $550 card when we payed for a $350 one. I'd just like my money back and they can have their card.

 

They need to do a nvidia GTX 970 NON BS Edition.

 

I have said this before , do a bloody proper 4 GB card and call it 970ti or something.

 

They need to do SOMETHING.

[I/O]

That's ridiculous though; none of us deserves a $550 card when we payed for a $350 one. I'd just like my money back and they can have their card.

They screwed you guys over and it's on them morally and ethically to do whats right. 

[zappian]

I wouldn't try 4k on my 780 because I'm not a moron. 

 

Half the time that graph is sitting around 45 fps, which is awful for an FPS game. For a racing game that would be fine -- but then again, it also would't be nearly as hard to drive. 

 

>Complaining about 4k crysis 3 performance.

>Has 780.

>Tells people to buy a console if they don't have enough money.

>Says 45 fps is unplayable

 

-snip- , kudos.

 

Couldn't  have done a better job myself.

[Suika]

think

That's the keyword, here. You have your suspicions, but you don't have enough evidence to support that NVIDIA had blatantly been lying to consumers, or at least enough evidence to convince me.

 

Have you considered, why did NVIDIA lie about a spec that holds little to no relevance to the consumer level? The SMMs are a bottleneck anyway and, prior to this, I hadn't fully known what an ROP was.

 

They made a mistake, and probably waited awhile before fixing it because of the backlash they'd receive from everybody who imagines they're smart enough to understand what an ROP is and if it even benefits them.

[79wjd]

>Complaining about 4k crysis 3 performance.

>Has 780.

>Tells people to buy a console if they don't have enough money.

>Says 45 fps is unplayable

 

-snip- , kudos.

 

Couldn't  have done a better job myself.

Yes, I have a 780. How that has anything to do with anything is beyond me. I didn't buy my 780 expecting to play 4k -- buying a card, which can't handle 4k properly and expecting it to handle 4k and then bitching when it doesn't is downright idiotic. And yes, 45fps on a twitch shooter sucks especially when there are frequent drops to 35-40 fps. 45~ fps has a time and place, $2000+ pcs are not it. 

[zappian]

That's the keyword, here. You have your suspicions, but you don't have enough evidence to support that NVIDIA had blatantly been lying to consumers, or at least enough evidence to convince me.

 

Have you considered, why did NVIDIA lie about a spec that holds little to no relevance to the consumer level? The SMMs are a bottleneck anyway and, prior to this, I hadn't fully known what an ROP was.

 

They made a mistake, and probably waited awhile before fixing it because of the backlash they'd receive from everybody who imagines they're smart enough to understand what an ROP is and if it even benefits them.

 

Full disclosure would have been nice and avoided this whole mess.

 

When they waited 3 months or more to announce their card was fucked up and they wound not have if nobody had notice it

makes you wonder about their intentions.

 

Cut down ROPS , l2 cache and cut down memory performance.

They could have disclosed that at launch.

 

People bought 970s considering the specs that nvidia launched , that a lie no matter how you look at it.

 

Nvidia doesn't need your white knighting , they are a multi billion dollar company and they fucked up.

 

I wont let it go until they do right by their costumers.

After that i will back off.

[Whorax]

Non BS edition LOL. IMHO the only way nvidia could redeem themselves is if they give all 970 owners a free 980 and nvidia pays the shipping.

Then I'd like two 980s and a new PSU to support them in SLI, since I bought my PSU solely for the SLI 970s.

[Guest Generallee]

woa woa woa 

 

ALL THIS GASOLINE, AND NO LIGHTER TO PUT IT ON FIRE

 

let me help

 

 

now please proceed

[I/O]

Then I'd like two 980s and a new PSU to support them in SLI, since I bought my PSU solely for the SLI 970s.

nvidia does not deal in PSUs. nvidias moral responsibility is to support their customers and make right what they did wrong.

[zappian]

Guys im not saying the 970 inst still a excellent card or something.

 

Im just saying nvidia engaged in shady businesses practices or gross incompetence and they need to do right by their costumers.

 

They lied plain and simply, has been proved beyond the shadow of the doubt in this thread if you bother to read it.

[Suika]

Full disclosure would have been nice and avoided this whole mess.

 

When they waited 3 months or more to announce their card was fucked up and they wound not have if nobody had notice it

makes you wonder about their intentions.

 

Cut down ROPS , l2 cache and cut down memory performance.

They could have disclosed that at launch.

 

People bought 970s considering the specs that nvidia launched , that a lie no matter how you look at it.

 

Nvidia doesn't need your white knighting , they are a multi billion dollar company and they fucked up.

 

I wont let it go until they do right by their costumers.

After that i will back off.

NVIDIA doesn't need my "white knighting?" The world doesn't need your sensitivity to a subject that doesn't affect a single person who purchased the card. Yes, they bought a card that was not advertised as it should have (which I'll agree that NVIDIA needs some black lash for), but prior to this, if I asked everybody who owns a GTX 970 how many ROPs the GTX 970 has, I'd say less than 1% would answer me correctly. People often buy these cards completely disregarding a spec like ROPs. What did NVIDIA gain from not correcting a spec? I'd argue that they gained nothing, and it wasn't fixed because it was too much of a bother to contact everybody.

[zappian]

NVIDIA doesn't need my "white knighting?" The world doesn't need your sensitivity to a subject that doesn't affect a single person who purchased the card. Yes, they bought a card that was not advertised as it should have (which I'll agree that NVIDIA needs some black lash for), but prior to this, if I asked everybody who owns a GTX 970 how many ROPs the GTX 970 has, I'd say less than 1% would answer me correctly. People often buy these cards completely disregarding a spec like ROPs. What did NVIDIA gain from not correcting a spec? I'd argue that they gained nothing, and it wasn't fixed because it was too much of a bother to contact everybody.

 

Doesn't affect a single person is BS i know people in this forum with 4k sli 970 rigs that suffer from stutter issues because of this mess.

What did NVIDIA gain from not correcting a spec?

 

Their costumers wouldn't be mad at them now.

 

Brand credibility.

 

I just want nvidia to do right by their customers like i said.

Did you agree when ubisoft lied about watch dogs?

 

Thats what you are saying on a nut shell , "hi my name is Suika and i support false advertising"

[Whorax]

nvidia does not deal in PSUs. nvidias moral responsibility is to support their customers and make right what they did wrong.

Yeah, but had I not gotten two 970s I would've gotten a 980 and a bigger PSU for SLI room.

 

Oh, and I'll just leave this here..

[zappian]

Alright guys time to go to sleep , got finals tomorrow.

 

Cya.

[chopdok]

Guys im not saying the 970 inst still a excellent card or something.

 

Im just saying nvidia engaged in shady businesses practices or gross incompetence and they need to do right by their costumers.

 

They lied plain and simply, has been proved beyond the shadow of the doubt in this thread if you bother to read it.

I agree. They screwed up. I am not upset about the GTX 970 - in fact, when I first saw the specs, I thought that full cache and full ROP count are too good to be true - that is the first time actually when a cut-down GPU has the same ROP and cache as the flagship full version. But unfortunately, after checking 10 review sites, nVidia forums and the wikipedia, I was convinced. The reason why I am upset mostly is the fact that there is no way they didn't notice their mistake. Their wrong specs have been parroted by every review site, every youtube video. No way they didn't notice. And they decided to keep quiet, to maintain sales. Even now, they don't want to start apologising officially, working through the tech review sites instead. No word on official site. Heck, the tech specs for GTX 970 on geforce.com are still wrong. It looks like they are trying to delay the inevitable as long as possible, to not hurt GTX 960 sales. That is what drives me crazy. Not even a public apology.

 

NVIDIA doesn't need my "white knighting?" The world doesn't need your sensitivity to a subject that doesn't affect a single person who purchased the card. Yes, they bought a card that was not advertised as it should have (which I'll agree that NVIDIA needs some black lash for), but prior to this, if I asked everybody who owns a GTX 970 how many ROPs the GTX 970 has, I'd say less than 1% would answer me correctly. People often buy these cards completely disregarding a spec like ROPs. What did NVIDIA gain from not correcting a spec? I'd argue that they gained nothing, and it wasn't fixed because it was too much of a bother to contact everybody.

I knew about the official specs through and through. In fact. My GPU-Z still reports 64 ROP. I am very particular about the GPU I buy - some people would call me a picky jerk in that regard. I check every stat, every benchmark and every piece of information. Thinking back, the joke is on me too - now that I scroll through the bechmark results, I can see that some of them have small anomalies with scaling to higher AA settings and resolutions. Something that can only be expected on unconventional asymetrical GPU design. But again, we are all geniouses in retrospective.

[Razzaa]

Yerp.

I'm hoping for a recall. While this 970 hasn't missed a step for what I have used it for (1080p 60hz gaming, can't afford one of them fancy ass 144hz monitors), I still feel like I got ripped off for $340, or at least my parents did, was an xmas gift. and to think, I would have gone with the sapphire 280x if it hadn't sold out when I was ordering.

I will trade you a sapphire 280X for your 970......

[Suika]

Doesn't affect a single person is BS i know people in this forum with 4k sli 970 rigs that suffer from stutter issues because of this mess.

Who buys a card without figuring out performance and benchmarks? For the billionth time, the SMMs are a bottleneck, additional ROPs are useless. It's like a GTX 970 getting an 8GB card. We all know it's not going to utilize 8GB and we'd be stupid to believe it could, the only difference is that we don't understand ROPs and SSMs as well as we do VRAM.

 

Their costumers wouldn't be mad at them now.

 

Brand credibility.

 

I just want nvidia to do right by their customers like i said.

Did you agree when ubisoft lied about watch dogs?

 

Thats what you are saying on a nut shell , "hi my name is Suika and i support false advertising"

1) There are a lot more things to be mad about in this world, plus people are disgustingly sensitive creatures.

 

2) There are still people who argue that AMD's "modules" are just sugar coated cores, and that the 8350 is only truly a quad core. The R9 290X throttled on a stock cooler, too, and I'd say that's even worse (I'm pretty sure at least lol). No company is perfect.

 

3) What are they going to do? They can accept refunds, but no person deserves anymore, as performance was exactly as promised.

 

4) Ubisoft is a different beast.

 

5)

 

(which I'll agree that NVIDIA needs some black lash for)

Yes NVIDIA should have some backlash to solidify the point in having solid communications between the engineers and sales, but everybody is blowing this completely out of proportion. 

 

I can tell that you're not an avid reader.

[Trik'Stari]

I will trade you a sapphire 280X for tour 970......

no

[chopdok]

Who buys a card without figuring out performance and benchmarks? For the billionth time, the SMMs are a bottleneck, additional ROPs are useless. It's like a GTX 970 getting an 8GB card. We all know it's not going to utilize 8GB and we'd be stupid to believe it could, the only difference is that we don't understand ROPs and SSMs as well as we do VRAM.

 

Not true. ROP are used for AA for instance, which has nothing to do with SMM. Less ROP : SMM ratio = higher performance hit for AA. GTX 8 GB is not a proper comparison. If I was promised same ROP count as GTX 980, by this I was automatically promised equal relative performance hit to my FPS when using AA. Since the ROP count is lower, its a false promise. I was promised the same memory as the GTX 980 - and while it is obviously not the thing that affects the performance now - by that I was promised that any game that is not bottlenecked by GTX 980's VRAM bandwith will not be bottlenecked by the VRAM of the GTX 970. I am not asking for the same pixel fillrate of 980, but I expect my card to take the same relative performance hit, and I will not tolerate a situation where a game has enough memory bandwith on GTX 980, but not enough on my GTX 970. Because the peak bandwith of GTX 970 is 196 GB/s even when using only the fast 3.5. If a game requires more peak bandwith than that, I will get a stutter, GTX 980 will not. That is not what I was promised.

[Geekazoid]

This may/may not have been mentioned, but I think it would've been better for NVIDIA to limit the GTX 970's vRAM to 3.5GB and just have the 0.5GB as L2 cache, as mentioned in the PC Perspective video.

[dredded_one]

 

The 970 is prone to VRAM stutter at high resolution because it has 500 mb of donkey speed memory.

Nvidia proved jack shit when they launched their benchmarks without minimum fps that spot the stutter.

Just some damage control that people that dont understand nothing about gpus will eat up.

 

 

Well, I'm glad I'm free of any stutter and Far Cry 4 has been using over 3.5GB since I started playing it.

[JustCallMeVlad]

Two 970 play 4k and many people i have met here that have 4k 970 sli rigs have had problems.

Have some consideration for them will you.

They don't have a clue how to setup their rigs because I gamed at 4K with 970's and had ZERO issues. Proof below. See any stuttering? That's what I thought

http://youtu.be/0S5TbGL1WnQ

[Najuno]

Though it is not okay what nVidia did, and surely there´s no excuse for that. But the behaviour of many people in all forums is totally ridiculous, nVidia is for sure not the first and 100% not the last company to bring something terrible like this to the table, and I do not mean the lack of 500mb VRAM I mean the dishonest part of their marketing. But let´s face it, most people don´t even play in 1440p and are no where near to 4K... so why raving so hard about it? The GTX970 is still a very potent card and it is not as if thousands of cards all of a sudden would have stopped working... the GTX970 in SLI is more than capable to run 1440p and Surround in 1080p so where´s the point in all the rage?

Everybody feels betrayed? In a why sure but it doesn´t make the card totally crappy. Most people that rage now would have fought with their lifes 2 weeks ago to defend the card for its outstanding perfomance of being able to keep up with a R9 290X or a GTX780Ti and just being 15% slower than a GTX980 and now all this is just blablabla?!?

 

I personally never buy other than the top dog of a GPU line because they´re at least less cut down than their little brother cards. But I guess people bought that GTX970 of it´s still standing good price to performance ratio and other thought they´d get the performance of a GTX980 for much less.

[zappian]

Though it is not okay what nVidia did, and surely there´s no excuse for that. But the behaviour of many people in all forums is totally ridiculous, nVidia is for sure not the first and 100% not the last company to bring something terrible like this to the table, and I do not mean the lack of 500mb VRAM I mean the dishonest part of their marketing. But let´s face it, most people don´t even play in 1440p and are no where near to 4K... so why raving so hard about it? The GTX970 is still a very potent card and it is not as if thousands of cards all of a sudden would have stopped working... the GTX970 in SLI is more than capable to run 1440p and Surround in 1080p so where´s the point in all the rage?

Everybody feels betrayed? In a why sure but it doesn´t make the card totally crappy. Most people that rage now would have fought with their lifes 2 weeks ago to defend the card for its outstanding perfomance of being able to keep up with a R9 290X or a GTX780Ti and just being 15% slower than a GTX980 and now all this is just blablabla?!?

 

I personally never buy other than the top dog of a GPU line because they´re at least less cut down than their little brother cards. But I guess people bought that GTX970 of it´s still standing good price to performance ratio and other thought they´d get the performance of a GTX980 for much less.

 

Like i mentioned on this  thread i still believe the 970 is an excellent card .

 

I would appreciate however transparency from nvidia.

 

Now that they have been caught lying to their customers some kind of rectification is in order.

 

If you have the PSU for it the 290x is much better since it actually has 4 GB of VRAM , i would prefer that or the 290 to the 970

at this point.

[zappian]

This may/may not have been mentioned, but I think it would've been better for NVIDIA to limit the GTX 970's vRAM to 3.5GB and just have the 0.5GB as L2 cache, as mentioned in the PC Perspective video.

 

I will share the video in the post as well.