Return rate of GeForce GTX 970 after memory scandal is below 5%

[MoonSpot]

The returned GeForce GTX 970 will not vanish into thin air and will reappear on the market. Suppliers of graphics cards who voluntarily decided to accept returns will get them back, test them, ensure that they work properly and then will either market them again as new.

 

That will need confirmation.  Reselling used cards, regardless of testing, as anything more than refurbished or re-certified is a lie.  But I would be paying a lot more attention to marketing spin and loose use of language if I were looking to get a 970 now or in the near future.

 

They could also somehow rebrand the returned GeForce GTX 970 graphics boards. Those graphics cards that will not be accepted by manufacturers will be re-conditioned by retailers and will be sold with a discount. In short, all returned GeForce GTX 970 will shortly be available with 5% – 10% – 20% price reduction.

 

Speculative opinion is speculation.  I take issue with that entire copy/pasted paragraph and its pulled out of arse nature.

[bogus]

The ridiculous part is that it's 5% through the efforts of resellers and some manufacturers and the resistence of NVIDIA, other resellers and other manufacturers... so yeah... it's not only 5%, not even close to that it would be WAY MORE.

But let's hope the lawsuits will make it right

[mr moose]

The ridiculous part is that it's 5% through the efforts of resellers and some manufacturers and the resistence of NVIDIA, other resellers and other manufacturers... so yeah... it's not only 5%, not even close to that it would be WAY MORE.

But let's hope the lawsuits will make it right

 

How do you know there is any resistance,  Most companies (especially ones in competitive markets) know the importance of happy customers and so make returns as easy as possible, especially in cases like this where the law sits on the customers side.

 

If people aren't interested in returning them and the class action falls in a heap why do you care?

[.spider.]

So 95% of customers like to being lied to.

Good sign for manufacturers bad for customers.

[Castdeath97]

Does it include normal refunds and returns or just the ones caused because of the Vram issue?

[zappian]

[Sharp_3yE]

Op put "incorrect specifications" which is correct but then said "and inability to use more than 3.5GB/s of memory" which is incorrect. The os just uses the 3.5 gigs of fast memory first and if needing more then it uses the .5 gigs of slower memory.

But w/e we all know this.

[Rohith_Kumar_Sp]

Speculative opinion is speculation.  I take issue with that entire copy/pasted paragraph and its pulled out of arse nature.

there's nothing more that i could say that people already don't know about 970 at this point , so yeah, i didn't bother to give my thoughts on it , pointless at this point .

[Ex14]

I've aired these opinions on most 970 threads, but seeing as tho the press seems to be not making a big deal of them straight up lying to their faces and Nvidia seemingly still not giving a damn...kinda crestfallen at how the community has responded.

If it was AMD the community would have most probably burned them at the stake. In fact even after their drivers woe are over people still bring it up. Don't bring up those that claim the 290x will burn down your house. This really sucks esp people like us. Who look at specs and performance and i expect to be mostly rationale.

What makes it worse is that while reading up, it seemed that nvidia had in the past pulled something like that. Get most people seem to have forgotten and in this 970 facade many choose to ignore everything nvidia has done and instead try to make it a non issue.

Yes the card performs admirably, but are you guys really going to take it from nvidia about "lying" ? Intentional or non intentional. This has happened before guys...

Returns are low also possibly through some resistance from retailers. Just look at the NVIDIA forums....

Anyway that about sums up what i feel about this whole thing. Did people overacted sure. But this lack of response males me slightly more agitated than those that overeacted... Part of me hope nvidia doesn't do it again. Least the community non response to nvidia come round to bite us in the future...a "told you so" would be too little too late.

[ShadowCaptain]

Dont forget 70% of people dont know about it who arent that into PCs  (pre builts etc)

 

and the rest probably just dont care

[mr moose]

I think most of the people who purchased these cards would be aware of it's short comings,  it's not exactly a card you find in most prebuilt systems.  and people do read forums and check reviews even after purchase.

 

I think this is also a good indication that people buy these cards based on performance reviews and not on specs. If it does indeed turn out to be only 5% returns (less than when you account for DOA and failure), then I think this also indicates that people don't really care what companies say so long as the product does what they expect it to, I.E produce X number of frames at X resolution.

[aeterna789]

I never had the intention of returning my 970 because I bought for the new technology of maxwell rather than the higher memory capacity. Though i still wish it was 4gb, its still one of the best cards I got for the price that I paid.

I think the 5% who returned their cards are people who needed the full 4GB for a 4k set up.

[bogus]

How do you know there is any resistance,  Most companies (especially ones in competitive markets) know the importance of happy customers and so make returns as easy as possible, especially in cases like this where the law sits on the customers side.

 

If people aren't interested in returning them and the class action falls in a heap why do you care?

Well you can do a simple market research, check out NVIDIA forums, in fact many other tech forums, they have several cases of people who's refund got denied and NVIDIA so far didn't even make a statement to reach out for the frauded customers.

JP measured the returns made so far, they didn't measure the people who is willing to return the card but have SEVERAL obstacles in the way and some of them get the refund denied - and this is all with a product falsely advertised, witch is ilegal.

So the tittle should be "SUCESSFULL RETURN RATE OF GEFORCE GTX 970 AFTER MEMOERY SCANDAL IS BELOW 5%, ATTEMPED REFUNDS IS NOT YET KNOWN"

[Bhav]

Id return mine if I could get 980s without paying more. But then who wouldn't? The extra cost of the 980 isn't worth it to me, and I need Nvidia for my Gsync monitor.

[mr moose]

Well you can do a simple market research, check out NVIDIA forums, in fact many other tech forums, they have several cases of people who's refund got denied and NVIDIA so far didn't even make a statement to reach out for the frauded customers.

JP measured the returns made so far, they didn't measure the people who is willing to return the card but have SEVERAL obstacles in the way and some of them get the refund denied - and this is all with a product falsely advertised, witch is ilegal.

So the tittle should be "SUCESSFULL RETURN RATE OF GEFORCE GTX 970 AFTER MEMOERY SCANDAL IS BELOW 5%, ATTEMPED REFUNDS IS NOT YET KNOWN"

 

I'm sure there are a number of people claiming they can't get refunds,  there are always people claiming they can't get refunds on legitimately dead/broken hardware.  We don't know whats a load of shit and what isn't.  JP is a fairly thorough source when it comes to market research.  I'll take their word over any other unless some real evidence comes to play.

[Frankz]

I bet most of them are users who participate on forums.

Yea, 5% on the total amount of sold cards. Now how many are actually aware of this?

[TheMidnightNarwhal]

~5% is a LOT

No, lol.

[Unlikelyjoker]

Yea, 5% on the total amount of sold cards. Now how many are actually aware of this?

less than 50%

[TorqueS]

Jay has done some testing for 1080p..and  busted the limitation myth and what I liked is that he's shown exactly what matters..actual games..not graphs, numbers and all that crap...I think he might do a 1440p test but i'm not entirely sure.

 

 

As expected..apart from Shadow of Mordor....everything ran fine...and well under the 3.5GB VRAM threshold...That VRAM becomes an issue at higher resolutions say 1440p or 4k, or if you load a game with lots of heavy modded textures(i.e. Skyrim)...but for the average consumer, 1080p is still the standard...and in this category the 970 is still good, and worth the pennies.

 

Nevertheless...GTX 970 is still a great card...and I bet most of those who claimed returning the card were completely clueless about the issue..and moreover...they weren't affected because they were using either 1080p or lower res.....so yeah...nVidia did a very stupid thing which might result in some customers losing their trust...but all that aside..GTX 970 is still a bad-ass card.

[ShockwavesXL]

So 95% of customers like to being lied to.

Good sign for manufacturers bad for customers.

 

That doesnt even make sense, I've got the card and for 1080p gaming its works perfect. I'm just not bothered about returning the card while it still works. 

 

And 4k would not be an option anyway. 

 

So for the price of the 970 (which still has 4gb) its a great card.

[AxelRantila]

Jay has done some testing for 1080p..and  busted the limitation myth and what I liked is that he's shown exactly what matters..actual games..not graphs, numbers and all that crap...I think he might do a 1440p test but i'm not entirely sure.

 

 

As expected..apart from Shadow of Mordor....everything ran fine...and well under the 3.5GB VRAM threshold...That VRAM becomes an issue at higher resolutions say 1440p or 4k, or if you load a game with lots of heavy modded textures(i.e. Skyrim)...but for the average consumer, 1080p is still the standard...and in this category the 970 is still good, and worth the pennies.

 

Nevertheless...GTX 970 is still a great card...and I bet most of those who claimed returning the card were completely clueless about the issue..and moreover...they weren't affected because they were using either 1080p or lower res.....so yeah...nVidia did a very stupid thing which might result in some customers losing their trust...but all that aside..GTX 970 is still a bad-ass card.

Didn't he play Battlefield 4 supersampled down from 4k (or whatever the exact setting was)? And from what I remember the stutters he got didn't seem to be VRAM related

[ACatWithThumbs]

Jay has done some testing for 1080p..and  busted the limitation myth and what I liked is that he's shown exactly what matters..actual games..not graphs, numbers and all that crap...I think he might do a 1440p test but i'm not entirely sure.

 

As expected..apart from Shadow of Mordor....everything ran fine...and well under the 3.5GB VRAM threshold...That VRAM becomes an issue at higher resolutions say 1440p or 4k, or if you load a game with lots of heavy modded textures(i.e. Skyrim)...but for the average consumer, 1080p is still the standard...and in this category the 970 is still good, and worth the pennies.

 

Nevertheless...GTX 970 is still a great card...and I bet most of those who claimed returning the card were completely clueless about the issue..and moreover...they weren't affected because they were using either 1080p or lower res.....so yeah...nVidia did a very stupid thing which might result in some customers losing their trust...but all that aside..GTX 970 is still a bad-ass card.

This might be the case right now but I bet already by the end of the year the first games will be over 3,5Gb on 1080p.

Ryse Son Of Rome uses already 3GB on 1080p and on 1440p you probably already edge the 3,5GB.

And Ryse is very linear big  sized games like Star Wars Battlefront or Batman Arkham Knight will probably use even more and if you put AA on top you'll be over 3,5GB.

 

[bogus]

I'm sure there are a number of people claiming they can't get refunds,  there are always people claiming they can't get refunds on legitimately dead/broken hardware.  We don't know whats a load of shit and what isn't.  JP is a fairly thorough source when it comes to market research.  I'll take their word over any other unless some real evidence comes to play.

But I'm not questioning the source - what I'm questioning is the reality of the numbers. 5% are what seems to be the numbers they gathered, yet they LACK to measure the actual figures of people with the intent to get refund and are being denied and facing barriers - the intentions of the people are irrelevant, since what they measure was people who actually managed to get refunds - something that was only allowed by a few retailers and few manufacturers.

So this "5%" are the real measured numbers, yet they are "bullshit" because neither NVIDIA, neither alot of manufacturers and retailers allowed for refunds. This has nothing to do with people claims, it's their official position about refund a product falsely advertised. 

[.spider.]

That doesnt even make sense, I've got the card and for 1080p gaming its works perfect.

To date, bigger textures in the future and...

So for the price of the 970 (which still has 4gb) its a great card.

Yeah, but 0.5GB are almost unusable.

[Trik'Stari]

No real point in returning it to begin with if all we get is a full refund. Unless they'd offer us a significant discount on 980's, we wouldn't really have anything to buy that would replace the 970.