Perfectly Functional GTX 970 Cards Being Returned Over Memory Controversy

[zappian]

Ubisoft did nothing different than what other companies do: showcase their E3 demos on much higher end systems; both Sony and Microsoft did it with consoles too. The reality is that they probably had to reduce the graphic fidelity to meet the resolution and framerate targets on average or above average PCs. Enthusiasts with GTX 770s or above should have a smooth gaming experience with it, for people who don't care about "zomg must have 4K at 60FPS or game is shit". 

 

If you really want to send a message, a large group of gamers will have to boycott gaming companies entirely. That won't happen. Gaming companies will keep going even if a small fraction of players boycott the company. 

 

They removed effects of the game.

And then named the files for example E3 rain and tucked them away in the games code.

 

Google the worse MOD.

[rashdanml]

Most hardware owners dont care about morality.

 

If i told them their card is made thought child labor and that baby seals were sacrificed to satan in order to make it.

 

They would NOT care.

 

Its sad we are like this ;(

And i have made my new SIG.

Do you honestly think hardware companies are unique in that regard? Fun fact, all of your clothes and shoes, everything you possess, is most likely the result of child labour or some form of exploitation. 

 

North Americans will be up in arms if everything you owned was produced in North America. 

[cubercaleb]

Not really , as i mentioned before.

If my 270x had 1.5 GB of VRAM i would not be able to run a SINGLE game from this year.

Lol my 550ti had 1GB and it runs shit fine

[Brainless906]

Lol my 550ti had 1GB and it runs shit fine

 

 

Ok, so we have entire threads on this forum arguing that for 1080p gaming 3gb of VRAM is enough but...ah..1gb..is a little outdated even for 1080p

[Dabombinable]

Ok, so we have entire threads on this forum arguing that for 1080p gaming 3gb of VRAM is enough but...ah..1gb..is a little outdated even for 1080p

Maybe for Skyrim with texture mods, but even then 2GB was enough, my GTX 650ti plays it just as well as my GTX 970 (both hit the enforced FPS limit with ease.

[dragosudeki]

Meh, I have to side with the people returning their cards. While most will agree that 4GB will not be fully used, I'd much rather have something that fully works at the advertised speed. Imagine if SSDs, HDD, RAM, and/or your Internet showed the same scenario? I would definitely look at an alternative if that was the case.

[StingBull]

They can't be perfectly functional if they are broken by design.

[Khvarrioiren]

Idiot, it already only has 1.6 ish. Where do you think driver info and required system stuff is stored? There's about 430MB now on any big card that's used exclusively for non-game info.

 

My R9 280x sits at 60-150 Mb when not gaming or viewing videos.

[zappian]

Ok, so we have entire threads on this forum arguing that for 1080p gaming 3gb of VRAM is enough but...ah..1gb..is a little outdated even for 1080p

 

I play games at 1440x900 and if had 1 GB i wouldnt be able to play dying light since that POS uses 1.9 VRAM.

[Dabombinable]

They can't be perfectly functional if they are broken by design.

I'll put it this way, since a GTX 970 can be overclocked to match a GTX 970 in raw performance, Nvidia had to limit them in some way to make their more expensive product viable.

[Dabombinable]

My R9 280x sits at 60-150 Mb when not gaming or viewing videos.

I've found that when Windows 7 is set to performance mode and the classic theme, it uses less than 60MB of vRAM.

[Khvarrioiren]

I've found that when Windows 7 is set to performance mode and the classic theme, it uses less than 60MB of vRAM.

 

Windows 8.1 with 0 shenanigans.

[zappian]

I've found that when Windows 7 is set to performance mode and the classic theme, it uses less than 60MB of vRAM.

 

Why would anybody use aero?

 

It eats up resouces.

 

If i had double xeon i would still use windows classic lol.

[Dabombinable]

Why would anybody use aero?

 

It eats up resouces.

 

If i had double xeon i would still use windows classic lol.

Aero is more for the 'looks', and when your forced to use the iGPU, the less vRAM the better (though I've hear reports that Windows 8 uses more with metro, but I never saw how that was possible).

[Suika]

Hello! Victorious Secret here once again to remind you that I think i'm better than you all! I have no further input, I just wanted to let you know how low you all really are when compared to me!

Honestly I think you're just mad that you were compared to the people you refer to as "peasants."

[zappian]

Aero is more for the 'looks', and when your forced to use the iGPU, the less vRAM the better (though I've hear reports that Windows 8 uses more with metro, but I never saw how that was possible).

Pardon my french but screw the looks.

I want performance \m/

[zappian]

Honestly I think you're just mad that you were compared to the people you refer to as "peasants."

Sick burns over here in the LTT forums.

[aj101202]

I wouldn't return my asus GTX 970 its a beast(got mine overclocked to 1.4ghz lol)  runs my games at 2560x1080 resolution fine with loads of vram left over 

[Dabombinable]

Pardon my french but screw the looks.

I want performance \m/

Put it this way, if I had a IDE SSD (or 1.5GB of DDR), I'd have Windows 7 installed on my 1999 P3 desktop, because its got the graphics horsepower to run any Win7 theme.

[Dabombinable]

I wouldn't return my asus GTX 970 its a beast(got mine overclocked to 1.4ghz lol)  runs my games at 2560x1080 resolution fine with loads of vram left over 

Your ASUS GTX 970 runs at 1.4GHz stable whilst my Gigabyte G1 Gaming struggles to run stable at its factory overclock? Dafaq?

[Snadzies]

Honestly, I find this all very good.

Nvidia has the majority market share in the dedicated card sector and it feels like with the 700 and 900 series that they were playing it rather safe.

If AMD really knocks it out with the R9 300 series and takes some money away from Nvidia this should, hopefully, light a fire under Nvidia to start pushing the things forward again.

[Rodneyg87]

I honestly don't see the problem. Because everyone was onboard with the card because of what the hard proof of performance was meaning they saw the benchmarks they saw the in game performance and the 970 was praised as one of the best if not the best card out there. Then all of a sudden .5gb of memory cant be used that sucks but everyone knows they will fix it soon with driver updates. Then all of a sudden some stats on paper were found to be wrong and all of a sudden the card is the worst one in existence when it still obviously out performs just about anything its put head to head against just the same as it did at launch. So where is the real problem????

 

I could understand if they said one thing before launch and advertised X performance but it actually got Y in game but the X performance that was shown during their marketing campaigns is still there why all the fuss honestly? And no this is not just because its Nvidia that im saying this I am saying this for any product. Hell it was all of the consumers that were praising this card to be the best of the best.

[toddleronebar]

I'll put it this way, since a GTX 970 can be overclocked to match a GTX 970 in raw performance, Nvidia had to limit them in some way to make their more expensive product viable.

yeah i have waterblock on mine, it overclocks like a freaking monster. absolutely love it right now.

[zappian]

I honestly don't see the problem. Because everyone was onboard with the card because of what the hard proof of performance was meaning they saw the benchmarks they saw the in game performance and the 970 was praised as one of the best if not the best card out there. Then all of a sudden .5gb of memory cant be used that sucks but everyone knows they will fix it soon with driver updates. Then all of a sudden some stats on paper were found to be wrong and all of a sudden the card is the worst one in existence when it still obviously out performs just about anything its put head to head against just the same as it did at launch. So where is the real problem????

 

I could understand if they said one thing before launch and advertised X performance but it actually got Y in game but the X performance that was shown during their marketing campaigns is still there why all the fuss honestly? And no this is not just because its Nvidia that im saying this I am saying this for any product. Hell it was all of the consumers that were praising this card to be the best of the best.

 

Most people have a moral issue with this.

The performance is the same.

[Brainless906]

Honestly I think you're just mad that you were compared to the people you refer to as "peasants."

 

 

Yah man, i'm really really upset. 

Or, maybe he's just being a dick and doing nothing but trying to belittle anyone who doesnt agree with him?

Idk, you're right, that seems unlikely.