GTX 970 3,5GB + 0,5GB with 56 ROP and less cache than advertised.

[barnsley]

Forcing everyone to use the reference blower was AMD's call, and it was probably a bad one for everyones impression of the card tbh. Can't say I like nVidia's no reference approach to the 970 either though, the 980 strategy was perfect.

JR

Indeed. Once again AMD's higher ups seemed to be the ones to cause the most damage to the company.

So on one hand we have nvidia being a liar about some memory and rops which doesnt affect most people, cmon be honest it is still a good card and on the other hand we had amd forcing the shittiest cooling solution on its customers and say, its designed to run at 95 degrees C. both are pretty crap moves from these companies.

Honestly, I think lying about what the card actually has is a bigger deal then forcing a crappy cooler on the card. Also don't forget the 480, that was as much of a sweaty pig as the reference 290 is.

Both companies have been cheating bastards recently, Nvidia have edged slightly ahead this time.

 

[Dark NighT]

Indeed. Once again AMD's higher ups seemed to be the ones to cause the most damage to the company.


Honestly, I think lying about what the card actually has is a bigger deal then forcing a crappy cooler on the card. Also don't forget the 480, that was as much of a sweaty pig as the reference 290 is.

Both companies have been cheating bastards recently, Nvidia have edged slightly ahead this time.

Yeah i do agree with you there.

 

[SieB]

Nvidia apparently working on a driver update to improve recourse allocation of the 500MB section to further improve performance.

I have only seen this posted on Techpowerup and it isn't on any other sites yet, but there is a screen cap of a post from someone official from Nvidia on the Nvidia forums about it, so I guess it is legit.

 

[Doomslayer]

Nvidia apparently working on a driver update to improve recourse allocation of the 500MB section to further improve performance.

I have only seen this posted on Techpowerup and it isn't on any other sites yet, but there is a screen cap of a post from someone official from Nvidia on the Nvidia forums about it, so I guess it is legit.

Wow, so that guy is saying that we can return our cards and get a refund if we want.

 

[Warchild]

Kudos to the guy.

But long story short... Are you guys even seeing any impact on gaming performance?

 

[agent_x007]

I got source thread for that nvidia post : LINK (Post #2398)

 

[SieB]

Wow, so that guy is saying that we can return our cards and get a refund if we want.

It will come down to the retailer I think, Overclockers.co.uk stance on it is unless Nvidia issue an official statement offering returns and refunds then they wont be issuing any.
Can't blame retailers though, they would get hit by loss of profits because of it, so without Nvidia compensating them for it they would lose a lot of money.

This is a quote from the OCUK forums that someone got from customer services asking about it

We are clear, NVIDIA are clear, until as such it is proven that NVIDIA are not clear we won’t be accepting returns, so we see no fault and until NVIDIA inform us otherwise we won’t be accepting RMA’s based on threads in forums on the internet.

 

[Doomslayer]

It will come down to the retailer I think, Overclockers.co.uk stance on it is unless Nvidia issue an official statement offering returns and refunds then they wont be issuing any.
Can't blame retailers though, they would get hit by loss of profits because of it, so without Nvidia compensating them for it they would lose a lot of money.

This is a quote from the OCUK forums that someone got from customer services asking about it

Well more than likely they will not do it in Australia either

 

[Warchild]

Hilbert did some FCAT tests on shadows of Mordor over at guru3d and showed that while the were latency spikes, these were split second occurances and only a few over 30sec frametime to show that there is extremely little impact on the game which most people have complained about. So while there is some strange stuff going on with the last few chunks of memory, the card is still handling it really well.

COD AW showed no impact at all when weighing in the last 512mb of memory. I actually think there is a big fuss over something small. The card performs well, the only fault is the misinformation from Nvidia.

Im in no way defending Nvidia, I just think people are blowing this way out of proportion. Would you have preferred a lower clocked, lower memory card for the same price with L2/MC disabled?

 

[agent_x007]

Would you have preferred a lower clocked, lower memory card for the same price with L2/MC disabled?

I don't see why it would be lower clocked, but if NV did 3,5GB card from the start - (without that stupid extra 512MB to make a "magic" 4GB card) - I would Really liked that [in light of what's now happening].
Less problems for NV and less problems for Us.

I doubt someone wouldn't buy it simply because it was "a only 3,5GB VRAM card", lol (if that's what U R asking).

 

[SieB]

I've had stuttering with ACU and Dragon Age Inquisition which both use 3.5GB+, but those games run like crap anyway and lots of people are getting stuttering in those games. I can't say for sure that it is the 970 causing it, it is more likely to be the games rather than my card though.

I tested Watch Dogs the other day using DSR to downsample from 4K with low settings using 4X MSAA to max my Vram and I didn't have any stuttering with 8-15fps.

I haven't had any noticeable issues with my 970 anyway, the 970 is still a great card and apart from the 780ti and 980 it is the fastest Nvida card you can get.

 

[SPS]

It's a bit confusing because what Nvidia have done is actually really good. It gives us that extra 500MB as a support instead of just disabling it completely, but it's just the fact they marketed it as a regular 4GB partition is what's disappointing.

 

[Doomslayer]

It's a bit confusing because what Nvidia have done is actually really good. It gives us that extra 500MB as a support instead of just disabling it completely, but it's just the fact they marketed it as a regular 4GB partition is what's disappointing.

+1 This

 

[WillSK]

It's a bit confusing because what Nvidia have done is actually really good. It gives us that extra 500MB as a support instead of just disabling it completely, but it's just the fact they marketed it as a regular 4GB partition is what's disappointing.

I have to say I agree with SPS on this. Performance speaking this is a great card for the money and I would still have picked this card over a 290 or 290x I think were I someone who had bought the card (in fact I did for my brothers build)

What Nvidia have done however which is possibly worse is shown poor marketing practice. Events like this can make a company look dishonest and shady and as with a lot of things reputation counts for so so much. What we can guarantee is that people will be looking a lot closer at future Nvidia cards to make sure they are what they say on the tin and will prob take what nvidia say with a pinch of salt in the near future

 

[TPC]

But long story short... Are you guys even seeing any impact on gaming performance?

Nvidia stated that the performance hit will be at around 6%

 

[Doomslayer]

Nvidia stated that the performance hit will be at around 6%

Would that be enough to get an impact or am i wrong

 

[TPC]

Would that be enough to get an impact or am i wrong

it would be about 4 fps loss when your aiming for 60fps. Not that much imo

 

[Doomslayer]

it would be about 4 fps loss when your aiming for 60fps. Not that much imo

Unless its a game that can be heavily modded ie Skyrim

 

[steverebo]

Im hoping for an official statement from nvidia with their stance on what has happened, that should shed some more light on things.

Im with most other people, the memory architecture doesn't bother me as my cards perform well its just the way they went about it as I would have like to have known exactly what I was buying when I shed out over 600 quid.

Im not saying this information would have changed my decision but it would have definitely been an influencing factor

 

[Doomslayer]

Im hoping for an official statement from nvidia with their stance on what has happened, that should shed some more light on things.

Im with most other people, the memory architecture doesn't bother me as my cards perform well its just the way they went about it as I would have like to have known exactly what I was buying when I shed out over 600 quid.

Im not saying this information would have changed my decision but it would have definitely been an influencing factor

Same here i paid $529.00 AUD for mine and that's only for 1