Nvidia Gets Sued Over GTX 970 False Advertising

AverageNinja

Average Penis Too
A consumer has sued Nvidia for false advertising on the GTX 970. With this, he also sued Gigabyte, because he bought two GTX 970s from Gigabyte.

22051203253l.jpg

Read more on the Nvidia Lawsuit over the GTX 970.
 
I hope this does go through mainly just so companies in the future will give accurate details about their products.

Yes it's still a good card but it's like being sold a car that's advertised as having 600BHP that does 150MPH, You test it and it does indeed do 150MPH but after a while you find out the manufacturer lied to you and it only has 450BHP, You'd be royally pissed off.
 
I hope this does go through mainly just so companies in the future will give accurate details about their products.

Yes it's still a good card but it's like being sold a car that's advertised as having 600BHP that does 150MPH, You test it and it does indeed do 150MPH but after a while you find out the manufacturer lied to you and it only has 450BHP, You'd be royally pissed off.

Agreed. I do hope this is successful. However, I don't think Gigabyte deserves to be involved in this. It's not their fault :/
 
it has 4gigs of ram and the performance it showed in benchmarks.
The mistake they made was misadvertising the last 0.5gigs as fast memory.

as for your car reference it has 450bhp on one engine and a second smaller 150bhp engine wich gets blown away by the bigger engine but it's there even if it sometimes slows down the bigger engine.

I don't think this case will be over fast or that it wil be settled with a small money refund to all gtx 970 owners.
 
Hope he wins. Time will tell. Should gigabyte be punished? No, should nvidia be punished? Of course.

So glad i went the 980, 970 price at time was very attractive!
 
I got a 970 G1 Gaming about 3 months ago.

If I knew about this issue I would have purchased the 980.

Don't get me wrong the card is very good and I'm pleased with it, but I'm not happy with Nvidia for their false advertising.

Also my card has a very annoying noise pitch under heavy load, but that's not Nvidia fault, it's Gigabyte's and their "superoverclocked G1 Gaming".
 
I hope this would go through but I am sure even IF it did then Nvidia would just pay that individual some $$ through the back door and they would settle it.
 
Of course it happens in the US.

And I think it's not deserved. Numerous tests before and after exposing this proved this.
I think it's a matter of an individual opinion. And another matter of opinion are lawsuits and in the US they more often than not happen to be cashgrabs.
 
Last edited:
Of course it happens in the US.

And I think it's not deserved. Numerous tests before and after exposing this proved this.
I think it's a matter of an individual opinion. And another matter of opinion are lawsuits and in the US they more often than not happen to be cashgrabs.

It is still false advertising no matter what way it's spun.
 
This is good for us as consumers, NVidia deserves this as they're fooling us with their bad marketing strategies, our hard earned monies for their expensive products believing it will give us as what they advertise.
 
I stand behind him on the principle that nvidia falsely advertised their product but i dont expect much from this lawsuit to be honest, i think it will just quietly go away.
 
Not sure why some actually try to defend Nvidia in any way.

It was false advertising from their part, no matter what people say or what tests say.
"It's technically still 4GB"?, yeah well ONLY really useable 3.5Gb.

If they would have made correct advertising, they would have said "3.5GB + 500MB Cache" or something along those lines.

At the end of the day, despite all tests and all that... it is false advertising.
 
it has 4gigs of ram and the performance it showed in benchmarks.
The mistake they made was misadvertising the last 0.5gigs as fast memory.

as for your car reference it has 450bhp on one engine and a second smaller 150bhp engine wich gets blown away by the bigger engine but it's there even if it sometimes slows down the bigger engine.

I don't think this case will be over fast or that it wil be settled with a small money refund to all gtx 970 owners.

frametime performance was not shown in review benchmarks, at least in 99% of them

fps counter doesn't accurately represent the problem people are experiencing

also, Nvidia's excuse of:

"There was a miscommunication between R&D and Marketing, sorry!" doesn't make any difference. The end result is false advertising, whether it was intentional or not is irrelevant. False advertising is false advertising.
 
I hope this does go through mainly just so companies in the future will give accurate details about their products.

Yes it's still a good card but it's like being sold a car that's advertised as having 600BHP that does 150MPH, You test it and it does indeed do 150MPH but after a while you find out the manufacturer lied to you and it only has 450BHP, You'd be royally pissed off.

better analogy would be, you buy a car advertised as having 600BHP that does 150mph, but once you hit 100mph the car starts shaking violently lol

it's still hitting 150, but the experience is shit
 
Of course it happens in the US.

And I think it's not deserved. Numerous tests before and after exposing this proved this.
I think it's a matter of an individual opinion. And another matter of opinion are lawsuits and in the US they more often than not happen to be cashgrabs.

Its also about the ROP issue.
 
Not sure why some actually try to defend Nvidia in any way.

It was false advertising from their part, no matter what people say or what tests say.
"It's technically still 4GB"?, yeah well ONLY really useable 3.5Gb.

If they would have made correct advertising, they would have said "3.5GB + 500MB Cache" or something along those lines.

At the end of the day, despite all tests and all that... it is false advertising.

It has nothing to do with this.

It's the fact that the ROP count is lower than they claim/advertise. 4GB is 4GB regardless how it was utilised.
 
Was just posting the same Warchild, but you beat me to it. It has 4gb regardless of how it performs, it's the ROP count that was factually inaccurate in the advertised specs - that's where NV will get in trouble.

It's funny really, the Computer Press and GTX 970 owners have been praising these GPU's since launch. Indeed, many wondered at the incredibly aggressive price point vs. the GTX 980 considering the minimal performance difference. I wonder if a driver screw up actually contributed to highlighting this technical weakness in the 970?

Saying that, I do recall a friend and myself discussing the 970 having the full 4gb, considering it's cut down nature vs. the 980. The (incorrect) specs backed up the card having the full number of memory controllers, so we thought no more of it.

Personally, if they'd released the 970 as a 3.5gb card at the same price point I doubt anyone would have been disappointed, considering how the card they actually released performs when NOT hitting that final half gigabyte.

I can see why people would be royally pissed off at this, it's the same as AMD's frame pacing issues from a while back where the FPS reported by the likes of FRAPS was far in excess of the actual FPS due to the card (effectively) saying it'd done a frame when it simply hadn't. This explained all the "I get 60fps, but it still looks juddery" posts. Thankfully, that was a software fix & I believe AMD cards are as good as NV in this respect now.

You know, if my 570's hadn't become problematic when they did, obliging me to buy a pair of 680's, in all probability I'd have snagged myself a couple of 970's at launch. I'd have blocked them up of course to get the best out of them, which may indeed have made me even more annoyed with NV after putting so much personal effort (and extra money) in to building a system.

Oh, regarding Gigabytes responsibilities in this - of course they knew the EXACT spec of the GTX 970, they're not stupid, but they chose to publish the same inaccurate specs as NV themselves. Sure, they can argue that they're just using the specs NV supplied, however I'd be stunned if they (or rather someone in their organisation) wasn't fully aware of the exact specs of the GPU's they were using.

Sorta of a black mark against NV this, however, we can be assured they'll be a darn sight more careful when releasing the specs on their next GPU's!

Scoob.
 
I stand behind him on the principle that nvidia falsely advertised their product but i dont expect much from this lawsuit to be honest, i think it will just quietly go away.

I'm wondering why we havent' heard anything from the EU comission for Fair Trade. The matter wouldn't just go away like that (if it ever will in the US case)
A few months ago, Intel was ordered to pay a multi-million fine because they had been trying to stop AMD products from reaching re-tailers inside the European Union countries.
 
Back
Top