Newegg won't be offering returns for GTX 970, as expected..

[Prastupok]

Wrong wrong wrong.

 

False advertising or deceptive advertising is the use of false or misleading statements in advertising, and misrepresentation of the product at hand, which may negatively affect many stakeholders, especially consumers. As advertising has the potential to persuade people into commercial transactions that they might otherwise avoid, many governments around the world use regulations to control false, deceptive or misleading advertising. "Truth" refers to essentially the same concept, that customers have the right to know what they are buying, and that all necessary information should be on the label.

 

They advertised the bandwidth of the card. The bandwidth of the last .5GB is significantly lower and this was never mentioned. It's falsely advertised. It doesn't matter whether it's intentional or not.

 

/facepalm

 

Many people bought it WITHOUT knowing all of the information.. that sound's like consumer's fault, NOT the company's.

 

There are many products, literally thousands that don't have the layout and detailed information on product release.

 

They didn't misrepresent the product to the consumer. At most, they misrepresented it to reviewers. But there was no public information regarding what everyone is up in arms about.

 

The product performs as advertised. That is the biggest thing to keep in mind. You got what you paid for. Copying definitions, word for word off of Wikipedia (against CoC if I'm correct) doesn't make you correct.

[Lewellyn]

Many people bought it WITHOUT knowing all of the information.. that sound's like consumer's fault, NOT the company's.

 

There are many products, literally thousands that don't have the layout and detailed information on product release.

 

They didn't misrepresent the product to the consumer. At most, they misrepresented it to reviewers. But there was no public information regarding what everyone is up in arms about.

 

The product performs as advertised. That is the biggest thing to keep in mind. You got what you paid for. Copying definitions, word for word off of Wikipedia (against CoC if I'm correct) doesn't make you correct.

 

Blame the consumer because the company doesn't correctly advertised their product. Right.

 

Because other companies falsely advertise it's OK for this company to. Right.

 

They did publicly list the spec sheet for buyers as a certain memory bandwidth and 4GB without listing the design of segmented memory. This leads the consumer into assuming (rightfully so) that the memory will all run at the same speed.

 

Consumers purchased the card expecting it to run with all 4GB at full speed, without segmented memory because it wasn't advertised as such. Copying definitions from anywhere is not against CoC, ask a mod. The point is that you said "they didn't list the problem therefore it's not false advertising" which is completely incorrect.

[bogus]

@mr moose now you understand why the "5% refunds" is such a worthless information?

[Prastupok]

Blame the consumer because the company doesn't correctly advertised their product. Right.

 

Because other companies falsely advertise it's OK for this company to. Right.

 

They did publicly list the spec sheet for buyers as a certain memory bandwidth and 4GB without listing the design of segmented memory. This leads the consumer into assuming (rightfully so) that the memory will all run at the same speed.

 

Consumers purchased the card expecting it to run with all 4GB at full speed, without segmented memory because it wasn't advertised as such. Copying definitions from anywhere is not against CoC, ask a mod. The point is that you said "they didn't list the problem therefore it's not false advertising" which is completely incorrect.

 

It's not false advertising to keep the inner workings under wraps... It's being smart as a business. Otherwise AMD could decide to rip off their products. You are just spewing hate for the sake of it.

 

To address the bandwidth issue: They could have averaged it... it still isn't false advertising.

 

4GB is 4GB. Segmented or not. I could sell you a laptop with 32GB of ram, and not tell you it's segmented... but it is 8GB x 4. Is that false advertising too?

 

While I agree that what they did is shady, they didn't technically do anything wrong, at least in the legal sense. If a consumer assumes something, and is mistaken, it is their fault. They could have waited to get the full story from some reputable source.

 

Assumptions on the part of the consumer shouldn't put the blame on the company. The card works as advertised, end of story.

[Lewellyn]

While I agree that what they did is shady, they didn't technically do anything wrong, at least in the legal sense. If a consumer assumes something, and is mistaken, it is their fault. They could have waited to get the full story from some reputable source.

 

Blame the victim. Not impressed.

 

4GB is 4GB. Segmented or not. I could sell you a laptop with 32GB of ram, and not tell you it's segmented... but it is 8GB x 4. Is that false advertising too?

 

If you advertise that the RAM runs at a certain speed without mentioning that a certain portion of the RAM runs at a DIFFERENT speed, then YES, that is false advertising.

[Prastupok]

Blame the victim. Not impressed.

 

 

If you advertise that the RAM runs at a certain speed without mentioning that a certain portion of the RAM runs at a DIFFERENT speed, then YES, that is false advertising.

 

Well, it is the consumer's fault if they assume something and are mistaken. Hard facts are paramount, not hopes. You don't have to be impressed. But you do have to be realistic.

 

We aren't talking about the speed of the RAM. And this is falling apart here: They averaged it. It's shady, but it isn't false advertising.

[Lewellyn]

Well, it is the consumer's fault if they assume something and are mistaken. Hard facts are paramount, not hopes. You don't have to be impressed. But you do have to be realistic.

 

We aren't talking about the speed of the RAM. And this is falling apart here: They averaged it. It's shady, but it isn't false advertising.

 

They did not average... they combined the maximum speed of the first segment with the maximum speed of the second and listed it as the total for both.

[Prastupok]

They did not average... they combined the maximum speed of the first segment with the maximum speed of the second and listed it as the total for both.

 

Sigh... as it seems with everyone who feels the way, there is no reasoning with them.

 

I have yet to see any proof about the combined speed thing... I've seen a lot on the averages though.

[mr moose]

@mr moose now you understand why the "5% refunds" is such a worthless information?

 

No, that's still only anecdotal and/or a very low numbers.  We on the forums are at the ground level and will hear most of the complaints if not all of them including the made up ones by antagonists and those dying for attention.

[Lewellyn]

No, that's still only anecdotal and/or a very low numbers.  We on the forums are at the ground level and will hear most of the complaints if not all of them including the made up ones by antagonists and those dying for attention.

 

... that wasn't his point. The point was that he was making was that the returns rate is low because returns aren't being accepted.

 

edit: And I don't remember if it was the returns rate or the 'requested' returns rate, but I still think that's what he was trying to say.

[mr moose]

... that wasn't his point. The point was that he was making was that the returns rate is low because returns aren't being accepted.

 

the reality is it doesn't matter what I post, his point always changes.   According to JP it is 5%, that is higher than the average return rate, therefore returns are being accepted.  Many people have said they have successfully returned their cards.  At this point to try and make an argument for or against something based solely on hearsay is pointless and unhelpful in the conversation.

 

Much like all those who want to cry nvidiot or fanboy and then base their argument on a component of the review process that didn't happen.  It's all made up to further a point.  I would simply like to stick to the facts about this and not let the emotionally scared run free with antagonizing claims that neither progress the conversation nor help those who genuinely feel hard done by.

[Soul801]

I got both of my GTX 970 returned to newegg.  They just gave me store credit.

[givingtnt]

The people who paid money for it.

 

 

 

Then why are you in this thread? Did someone force you to click, read, and respond against you will?

you don'T get the point,

im getting tired of the 970 thing with people willing to return the card. gosh do you guys expect anything from that ?

not giving a shit was about the 970 issue, not the fact that there is a thread about it. 

[bogus]

... that wasn't his point. The point was that he was making was that the returns rate is low because returns aren't being accepted.

 

edit: And I don't remember if it was the returns rate or the 'requested' returns rate, but I still think that's what he was trying to say.

Thank you for understanding something really simple. But I don't go that far, to say the return rates are "low"... I just say that without the denied /pending/ requested returns, the 5% is just returns, wich is the reflection of part of the reality and in no way it reflects the dimension of the problem.

It was the returns rate, not requested.

[Entropy]

People freaked out about this way too much. Hop off the bandwagon and look at the real-world effects of the 3.5GB issues.

[jaggysnake57]

The product was advertised by Newegg for having a total memory speed of 224GB/s, but that's not the truth. http://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-specifications,28464.html

 

Not at the advertised speed. Let's say you bought 16gb of ddr4, but you're only getting the speed of ddr3 with some of the memory., wouldn't you want it to be the full speed as advertised. 

 

How else can i do it, as it was an email sent to me? Why would it matter, i'm just trying to share the email, so saying that is kinda being a busybody. 

I said "as expected" in the title, this is for people who keep saying Newegg is giving out refunds, because they are not, so don't waste your time.

 

that 224 is a theoretical max, so no they didnt lie as long as the card can hit that....its shady becasue its gonna hit that in lab conditions, on a wednesday, with a head wind.

 

Wrong wrong wrong.

 

all necessary information should be on the label. 

this is where your whole point falls apart. if the diferance in fps between the 970s setup and the 980s ram setup is 1-3% then the fps hit fails to make a diferance. at 100fps the most you loose is 3fps....its just not enough to be necessary information.

 

why are you so buthurt by this....its not like nvidia kicked your dog

[Prastupok]

 

that 224 is a theoretical max, so no they didnt lie as long as the card can hit that....its shady becasue its gonna hit that in lab conditions, on a wednesday, with a head wind.

 

That's the thing. All specs that are listed by ANY manufacturer is in the optimal configuration.

[jaggysnake57]

That's the thing. All specs that are listed by ANY manufacturer is in the optimal configuration.

 

it is so why nvidia is taking the hit ill never know.  its shitty but its the way it is.  benchmarks on the other hand are a much better at showing performance.

 

buyer beware, do your research to avoid getting ripped off

[Prastupok]

Thank you!

[NumLock21]

In other news a chicken farm has advertised their chicken at 5 pounds. Consumers then find out it only weighs 4.5 pounds, with last .5 pounds being the inedible feathers. Scores of angry butt hurt people are lining up at their local supermarket, demanding a refund for the false advertisement, with some even returning the chicken sans meat.

[Opcode]

Returns should be held responsible of the manufacture not bulk retailers.

[patrickjp93]

Yeah its great to see a company can openly lie and cheat its customers only to have absolutely no responsibility for, even excluding compensation, simply giving them a refund! Woo! So good! I can't wait to buy the GTX 1280 that says it has 64 ROPs but actually has 8. But no one will care right? Because thats fine right?

Right?

That's free market economics for you. Consumer responsibility and all that...

[NumLock21]

GTX 970 cost $200 less than a GTX 980. Those that returned the card, now what are you going to get? Spend the extra $200 on a GTX 980 all because of that 512MB of vram? GTX 970 also has 4GB of vram, just not as a whole 4GB, it's 3.5GB+512MB=4GB. The card performs great and you're saving $200 in your wallet, where you can spend on something that you might need later on. Want to return the card for false advertising, then go ahead, it's your choice. But the amount of users who make a big deal out of this, with some on the internet saying "I'm not buying from Nvidia again" are making themselves look like idiots. There is only 2 graphic card makers that makes gaming cards. AMD and Nvidia. I bet when Nvidia release their next GPU, they're will be the first in line to get it. :rolleyes:

[thebennyboy]

But the amount of users who make a big deal out of this, with some on the internet saying "I'm not buying from Nvidia again" are making themselves look like idiots.

 

And? That is their choice, not yours. People that make sweeping statements like this are the idiots.

[JAKEBAB]

People keeping there card are basically giving a thumbs up to NVIDIA and saying great job so they can do this all over again lol

 

As for newegg not taking returns, WOW America is pretty screwed up in the department that is clearly false advertising yet they don't have to give refunds WTF!  

 

P.S not saying the card its self is bad but what NVIDIA did was wrong.