970 Propaganda B/S

[iDeJayDzn]

So basically i'm sick of see'ing everybody shit on the 970's.

 

I'm getting one whether or not people like it or not. 

 

The card is more power efficient that the 700 cards and as far as i'm aware, performs better and OC's better.

 

I'm getting EVGA's FTW+ edition so i havce the higher end version of this card so i can push it as far as it can go. Mainly because i want to SLI my cards at some point. I can't afford two 980's so FTW+ 970's is the better option.

 

For everybody who continusly shits on these cards can you please not. The card is better than most cards and saves people on their power bills. You'er giving a good card a bad reputation over something that is not really a big deal. Fgs the 700 cards only have 3GB VRAM anyways so the person is still getting more for their money with this card. It's an all round powerful and great value card. 

 

I don't understand how one community can be so bad on a single manufactor/card just because of a slight marketing mistake. Stop it because you just look like morons fighting a battle that no real enthusiast cares about.

 

I rest my case.

[Guest Kloaked]

Mate, there hasn't been a new thread on this in a couple days (that I've noticed). It was almost dead...

[Ahaber]

So basically i'm sick of see'ing everybody shit on the 970's.

 

I'm getting one whether or not people like it or not. 

 

The card is more power efficient that the 700 cards and as far as i'm aware, performs better and OC's better.

 

I'm getting EVGA's FTW+ edition so i havce the higher end version of this card so i can push it as far as it can go. Mainly because i want to SLI my cards at some point. I can't afford two 980's so FTW+ 970's is the better option.

 

For everybody who continusly shits on these cards can you please not. The card is better than most cards and saves people on their power bills. You'er giving a good card a bad reputation over something that is not really a big deal. Fgs the 700 cards only have 3GB VRAM anyways so the person is still getting more for their money with this card. It's an all round powerful and great value card. 

 

I don't understand how one community can be so bad on a single manufactor/card just because of a slight marketing mistake. Stop it because you just look like morons fighting a battle that no real enthusiast cares about.

 

I rest my case.

Thanks for starting a new fight

[Nup]

Abort thread, quickly! I'll hold the shitstorm back! 

 

 

No but really, this has been discussed to death here. Go talk about it there. 

[iDeJayDzn]

Mate, there hasn't been a new thread on this in a couple days (that I've noticed). It was almost dead...

 

There's people in thread's that still fight the fact that bad marketing means that people who are unaware about this stuff, should not buy the card. It's ridiculous.

[Sharif]

I Purchased mine a week ago as well (Being shipped) and for person like me,it will do the fine,as i won't be able to utilizing more than that anyway

Though value wise the R9290x is better now 

[Guest Kloaked]

There's people in thread's that still fight the fact that bad marketing means that people who are unaware about this stuff, should not buy the card. It's ridiculous.

 

Because people keep bringing it up, like this thread.

 

I totally get what you're saying and why, but it's only adding fuel to the fire since some people don't know how to have a rational discussion.

[Archangel1994]

1. Propaganda bs? This is not propaganda nor is it bullshit, there are scenarios where VRAM exceeds 3.5GB and then performance usually tanks to the point where the game is not really playable.

2. It's not so much bashing the card for being bad, it's about Nvidia having lied about the initial specs then not releasing the driver fix that could've solved the issues (Allocating the slower 500MB of VRAM to slower tasks like desktop/youtube) AND then just saying "It's working as intended". Performance tanking to 0-10 fps when exceeding 3.5GB of VRAM is intended? It's not about bashing the card itself

[SpriteNo5]

Chill dude! If that's what you want then go for it. No one else's opinion should matter.

Once I set my mind on a GPU I just buy it, regardless of what others think. Unless of course it only has 3.5 gigs. Couldn't be having that.

I'll get me coat.

[Guest Kloaked]

1. Propaganda bs? This is not propaganda nor is it bullshit, there are scenarios where VRAM exceeds 3.5GB and then performance usually tanks to the point where the game is not really playable.

2. It's not so much bashing the card for being bad, it's about Nvidia having lied about the initial specs then not releasing the driver fix that could've solved the issues (Allocating the slower 500MB of VRAM to slower tasks like desktop/youtube) AND then just saying "It's working as intended". Performance tanking to 0-10 fps when exceeding 3.5GB of VRAM is intended?

 

Stahp. go discuss this on the other 970 thread - I'm also 100% certain you have already said your peace.

[Archangel1994]

Stahp. go discuss this on the other 970 thread - I'm also 100% certain you have already said your peace.

I think you read my post too quickly, this is directed at the OP, not at the 970 discussion

[qwertywarrior]

I Purchased mine a week ago as well (Being shipped) and for person like me,it will do the fine,as i won't be able to utilizing more than that anyway

Though value wise the R9290x is better now 

congratulations on your new purchase 

your 4870 needs a rest

[iDeJayDzn]

1. Propaganda bs? This is not propaganda nor is it bullshit, there are scenarios where VRAM exceeds 3.5GB and then performance usually tanks to the point where the game is not really playable.

2. It's not so much bashing the card for being bad, it's about Nvidia having lied about the initial specs then not releasing the driver fix that could've solved the issues (Allocating the slower 500MB of VRAM to slower tasks like desktop/youtube) AND then just saying "It's working as intended". Performance tanking to 0-10 fps when exceeding 3.5GB of VRAM is intended?

 

There's limited card's that barely reach 3GB VRAM. Plus most games barely reach 3. It's mods that do it. For standardized gaming, most people DO NOT require 4GB of VRAM. If they do then they get a 980. Stop saying things about the VRAM when it's more than enough. There's been countless videos on this fact.

[Guest Kloaked]

I think you read my post too quickly, this is directed at the OP, not at the 970 discussion

 

You're still talking about the card's issues, all fine, but will spark a debate here and those naturally attract those who refuse to have a rational and objective discussion.

 

EDIT: Not trying to tell you what do to, just sayin'.

[Fate]

There's limited card's that barely reach 3GB VRAM. Plus most games barely reach 3. It's mods that do it. For standardized gaming, most people DO NOT require 4GB of VRAM. If they do then they get a 980. Stop saying things about the VRAM when it's more than enough. There's been countless videos on this fact.

I feel like you're just making this thread to reinforce your purchase decision...

[iDeJayDzn]

I feel like you're just making this thread to reinforce your purchase decision...

 

Nope. I'm just sick of see'ing people shit on the card for no reason. I understand hate towards something, but this much? This is way too far. The card is fine. People telling others not to buy it because it only 3.5GB of VRAM is just ridiculous. All because they can't accept that Nvidia had bad communication this one time for a single card... I wouldn't care. There is actually 4GB of VRAM on the card, just the other .5 is barely touched for gaming etc. Some many misinformed people.

[ZuluSamus]

Meh, I've seen so many of my friends argue over the 3.5 GB problem. 3.5 GB is enough in my very own opinion... But how the GTX 980 does not have this problem boggles my mind.

No seriously, wot de fuq!!!!!

[Sharif]

congratulations on your new purchase 

your 4870 needs a rest

Thanks! 

It is currently shelf decor 

[Fate]

Nope. I'm just sick of see'ing people shit on the card for no reason. I understand hate towards something, but this much? This is way too far. The card is fine. People telling others not to buy it because it only 3.5GB of VRAM is just ridiculous. All because they can't accept that Nvidia had bad communication this one time for a single card... I wouldn't care. There is actually 4GB of VRAM on the card, just the other .5 is barely touched for gaming etc. Some many misinformed people.

I haven't seen someone not recommend the 970 on this forum because of the vram limitation for anything outside of SLI setups/high resolutions where the 3.5GB vram could infact be a bottleneck in some games and the 290x is plain better at those resolutions.

[iDeJayDzn]

I haven't seen someone not recommend the 970 on this forum because of the vram limitation for anything outside of SLI setups/high resolutions where the 3.5GB vram could infact be a bottleneck in some games and the 290x is plain better at those resolutions.

 

There has been some. I've seen it around. There's other forums and videos too where people hit on the card for it. Yes it could bottleneck some games, even in SLI. Although i don't understand why people would considering a 970 over a 980 if they're using heavy VRAM related games. 

 

I mean if you can afford it and can justify spending that much on a 980 just to run a lot of mods on Skyrim for example, then fair enough. Most people cannot afford that though so people recommending a 980 over a 970 in some instances just boggles my mind. Like you said, a 290x would be better for that person and wouldn't kill their wallet.

[zappian]

Say you bought a 10 gallon bucket, but only regularly fill it up with 5 gallons of water.

 

You don't need all 10 gallons right away, but you still bought the 10 gallon bucket so there is more overhead in case you need to fill it up to more water later on.

 

One day you fill it up to 8 gallons and notice the top of the bucket has small holes and you realize it will leak if filled with more than 8 gallons. 

 

You decide to test it. You fill it up with 10 gallons of water, but 2 gallons leaks out from the holes. You didn't notice this before and the manufacturer never mentioned this limitation.

 

Effectively, the bucket only holds 8 gallons despite its size being that of a 10 gallon bucket, and the manufacturer selling it as a 10 gallon bucket.

 

You can deal with it because you only fill it up to 5 gallons and sometimes 8 gallons. So its OK.

 

Now you found out next month you are going to need to start filling this bucket with 10 gallons but that's impossible. The manufacturer tells you that the holes were a design feature to keep costs down, but because the bucket has a 10 gallon volume, they did not misrepresent the bucket because. Its still a 10 gallon bucket after all, even if you can't fill it up all the way.

 

Now imagine you paid $350+ for this bucket.

 

I missed my sig so much guys

[Nup]

-snip buckets snip-

 

 

Ahh the buckets are back!

 

That was a good analogy.

[iDeJayDzn]

 

Say you bought a 10 gallon bucket, but only regularly fill it up with 5 gallons of water.

 

You don't need all 10 gallons right away, but you still bought the 10 gallon bucket so there is more overhead in case you need to fill it up to more water later on.

 

One day you fill it up to 8 gallons and notice the top of the bucket has small holes and you realize it will leak if filled with more than 8 gallons. 

 

You decide to test it. You fill it up with 10 gallons of water, but 2 gallons leaks out from the holes. You didn't notice this before and the manufacturer never mentioned this limitation.

 

Effectively, the bucket only holds 8 gallons despite its size being that of a 10 gallon bucket, and the manufacturer selling it as a 10 gallon bucket.

 

You can deal with it because you only fill it up to 5 gallons and sometimes 8 gallons. So its OK.

 

Now you found out next month you are going to need to start filling this bucket with 10 gallons but that's impossible. The manufacturer tells you that the holes were a design feature to keep costs down, but because the bucket has a 10 gallon volume, they did not misrepresent the bucket because. Its still a 10 gallon bucket after all, even if you can't fill it up all the way.

 

Now imagine you paid $350+ for this bucket.

 

 

Someone else just said near enough the exact same thing to my over private message and this is my reply.

 

 

 

I understand where you're coming from. Expect for the fact that if a person wanted to use 4GB of VRAM, i'm pretty sure they'd know before buying their card. All i'm saying is that unless the game their playing is going to be heavily modified or just a game that has a higher texture resolution throughout. Then they're fine with getting a 970. It's got more than the 700 series and performs better. Although if the person knows they are going to be modding etc then a 290x/980 would be a more viable option. I'm just stating that it's just stupid for people to talk shit about the 970's unnecessary just because they're butthurt about it not having a full speed, fully capacitated 4GB of VRAM. Yes they have reason too but the card is still better than getting a 780 or something then having a 3GB VRAM issue. There's nothing really justifiable for a gamer that only wants a single card for 1440p or 1080p gaming and been told not to get a 970 and get a 980 or 290x when they don't need it and will cost them more. That's all i'm getting at.

[kjvnasa]

Well I can say I am an owner of the STRIX gtx 970 and I must say i was kind pissed since I will be using it or multi monitor setups. But what can I do now ehh? as far as I am aware they wont let you bring it back.

[SpriteNo5]

Now imagine you were aware that the bucket could only hold 8 gallons. You knew it was advertised as a 10 gallon bucket but only held 8, for weeks.

But you still ordered this bucket. Then ran around telling everyone to stop shitting on your bucket.

If you were truly happy with your 8 gallons and totally secure in the knowledge you'd never need more than 8 then you'd just quietly use your bucket, all happy and content.

IF however you were a bit worried about your purchase, felt insecure and thought that maybe, at some point, you might need an extra 2 gallons. Well you could either bury head and run around saying 'don't look at my bucket, no holes here, nowt to see'. Or you could think, why am I spending all this money on a bucket that may not meet my needs, I'll save a bit longer and get one of those shiny 10 gallon buckets with no holes.

I know what I'd do.