Should you be compensated for the GTX 970 issues and spec changes?

[hungtran]

Nvidia is an ISO 9000 registered company They have certain procedures that ae part of the APQP(Advance Production Quality Planning) that they are required to follow. This is why I said that there were three levels of management that should review these documents. This is a part of their QMS(Quality Management System).

If people are truly pissed the easiest way, to create heat is to call their ISO 9000 Registrar 3000-5000 calls there will stir the pot...Since they won the Intel Suit... they have been too fat and happy.

Customer satisfaction metrics are the bottom line, and UL DQS is their registrar.

800-285-4476

http://ul-dqsusa.com/contact/


The website will give people in other markets Info as well..

Everyone has their own feeling for this I know that Kyle over at [H] has encouraged action.


I could relate to Hitler, in that OMFG funny YouTube.

But then reality sinks in.

Buying a GTX 980 is a joke.

I actually know their UL ISO auditor. Trust me, the registrar won't care. All this is would be a preventive action.

 

[MrFox]

and what tech site discovered the lie? And how long did it take?

PC Per and Ryan Shrout... Their have been others that had been suspicious.

They were who interviewed the nVidia VP of GPU development.

Many other sites were not willing to risk being shunned from the ad revenue, and other perks that come with being an nV insider...

It was a rather Large Cat that got released from the bag.

There are three realities :

1, nV failed to follow basic ISO 9000 product development rules. APQP (Advance Production Quality Planning) is required by your QMS (Quality Management System) in any ISO registered company. This is there to prevent this type of occurrence during the earliest stages of development.

As a sidebar : I spoke with Lisa McCall of UL-DQS VP of Operations this afternoon and confirmed that they had this on their audit plan for their upcoming audit. I would encourage anyone that is truly pissed to call the 800 number I listed above and ask speak with Lisa McCall.

2, nV failed in Management Review they have signatory requirements that they agree with the content, and that it is correct. If there was a mistake in the APQP it should have been caught at this stage.

These are TWO major breaches of their QMS and will be difficult to play down or bury.

3, We are stuck with cards that are not to the technical specifications that they were sold as.



Hopefully people check back in with their resolutions, as the issue is resolved.

 

[Cookie Monster]

I agree with Ryan on this one.

When you work in a big corporation (actually it can happen anywhere) with many individuals/teams let alone departments.. things CAN get lost in translation. The marketing team may be technically sound on the outside.. but if you really go low level with these people, they won't have a clue. Compared to the engineering team where they literally speak low level language which could sound alien!

I know this due to personal experience and its quite amazing how non-technical people (even with an engineering degree/background) can spin things. So the idea that it was a mistake to me anyway seems plausible. People make mistakes. These things DO happen unfortunately (and the consequences could be... big). And most likely the reason their technical marketing team got swepted under the bus was probably because someone in that team made a critical mistake (or whoever it was, the responsibility would have likely fell on that team anyway for not correcting it before releasing very critical information).

I could also put my tinfoil hat and start thinking conspiracy theories such as it being deliberate but think about the risks. Once you start thinking risks of such business tactics, the idea to deliberately lie doesn't seem so bright either.. Or else everyone would be doing it!

It will be interesting to see if any driver updates in the future which could introduce a smarter method of juggling between 3.5/0.5gb of VRAM or ways in which we won't get the stutter.

And objectively speaking the product didn't suddenly lose performance over night. I think its still an excellent product and I would consider it if I was actively looking to upgrade. On top of that the extra 0.5gb could be a non issue because games that use all 4GB is most likely unplayable to begin with (4K/unrealistic game settings). Thinking performance and what it can do, I think its a non-issue for most people out there.

 

[007ELmO]

Those of us who went SLI though are suffering. I didn't even open mine so I am going to demand a full refund non stocking fee from NewEgg or they lose a customer. It will happen.

 

[Enigmoid]

Before everyone starts blaming Nvidia you have to remember that everyone makes mistakes. Remember the Mars Climate Orbiter?

That said I think Nvidia knew about this.

 

[Udgnim]

Before everyone starts blaming Nvidia you have to remember that everyone makes mistakes. Remember the Mars Climate Orbiter?

That said I think Nvidia knew about this.

Nvidia engineering should have definitely been aware of what they were designing

question is whether marketing/management was actually aware of the real specs and chose to fluff #s

 

[xthetenth]

Either marketing knew and deliberately suppressed information or they're running things so ineptly that literally nobody from engineering got asked or ever looked at the reviews for their project over the span of months.

I'm really not sure which is worse. I almost think ineptitude is worse because malice is more likely to respond to a blowup like this.

 

[HumblePie]

Been going back and forth in emails with Zotac. They keep trying to down play it and point that the card meets the official specifications as listed currently on the Nvidia website. LOL! I keep telling them it doesn't matter that the specifications have been revised at this point, but what they were at the time of my purchase.

 

[Grooveriding]

Been going back and forth in emails with Zotac. They keep trying to down play it and point that the card meets the official specifications as listed currently on the Nvidia website. LOL! I keep telling them it doesn't matter that the specifications have been revised at this point, but what they were at the time of my purchase.

The official specs are actually wrong on their website for memory bandwidth. They list it as 224GB/s. Point out that the 500MB crippled portion does not run at that speed. Lots of the articles on the issue show this as well.

 

[Rhezuss]

I just finished chatting with newegg.ca. They seems aware of this issue and the lady I was talking to will forward this to the helpdesk. They will contact me in 3-7 business days to tell me what they can do. she asked me if I still had everything from the box to every accessories and papers, which I still have.

I asked for a full refund for false advertisement (3.5gb used for high priority leaving 0.5gb sleeping, Bandwidth misinformation, ROPs count lowered) with which i'd buy another card from them (their CS rocks so it's the least I can do).

I'll keep you posted on this.

 

[oobydoobydoo]

If I had bought this card I would feel cheated, and I can see that many people here have bought this card and feel exactly that. It seems unreasonable to me to assume that engineering and marketing have no communication considering how accurate they were about the specs they thought were impressive. They got those specs right. If their marketing division is some bumbling toilet paper mummy caricature of "non tech people", why aren't all the rest of specs unicorns and rainbows? They seem to know what they were talking about otherwise.

 

[superxero044]

Anyone talk to Gigabyte at all? I still haven't heard back from Newegg.

 

[krumme]

Nvidia engineering should have definitely been aware of what they were designing

question is whether marketing/management was actually aware of the real specs and chose to fluff #s

Nv marketing and especially technical marketing is so professional there is no way this is a mistake. The entire idea is so stupid and have nothing to do with iso cert or big companies. They needed 4gb so thats what is in specs. They just "bended" it a little. Thats what most consumers would call lying but i think some internally view it different.

 

[007ELmO]

I just finished chatting with newegg.ca. They seems aware of this issue and the lady I was talking to will forward this to the helpdesk. They will contact me in 3-7 business days to tell me what they can do. she asked me if I still had everything from the box to every accessories and papers, which I still have.

I asked for a full refund for false advertisement (3.5gb used for high priority leaving 0.5gb sleeping, Bandwidth misinformation, ROPs count lowered) with which i'd buy another card from them (their CS rocks so it's the least I can do).

I'll keep you posted on this.

You've got the canned response myself and another poster in this thread have. "We'll contact you in 3-7 business days. If you don't hear from us after 7 business days, feel free to contact us again."

Haha, their last sentence is strange. I didn't even open my cards so I expect no restocking fee even though I'm well outside of the 30 day return period. I will re-order a new set of cards from NewEgg though, I'd take NewEgg credit instead of cash. That is, if they resolve this issue to satisfaction within 7 days...

 

[SunnyD]

(Answering the OP) Does the card have 4gb on it?

Answer honestly. Does the card have 4 physical, addressable, functional, usable, not up for interpretation, gigabytes of memory on it?

The answer is yes. You got exactly what you paid for specification-wise.

 

[Rhezuss]

You've got the canned response myself and another poster in this thread have. "We'll contact you in 3-7 business days. If you don't hear from us after 7 business days, feel free to contact us again."

Haha, their last sentence is strange. I didn't even open my cards so I expect no restocking fee even though I'm well outside of the 30 day return period. I will re-order a new set of cards from NewEgg though, I'd take NewEgg credit instead of cash. That is, if they resolve this issue to satisfaction within 7 days...

Yeah it is a canned response but i'll wait and see how it ends. I'm in no hurry and the card works and does what I expected it to do, run games. The false advertised specs is pretty bad from Nvidia though and that may be the last card I buy from them...depends on how they react to it.

The funny thing is I was with AMD for a long time before this 970 and wanted to try something new, so I bought the EVGA 970 SSC ACX 2.0. First EVGA advertised the ACX 2.0 cooler as a new and improved one with better performances, which ultimately ended up with just a new fan sticked on the 1.0 heatsink, so not a full ACX 2.0 cooler. Then Nvidia with those specs that are an offset the reality...

I'm not that happy with this new experience...

 

[jackstar7]

(Answering the OP) Does the card have 4gb on it?

Answer honestly. Does the card have 4 physical, addressable, functional, usable, not up for interpretation, gigabytes of memory on it?

The answer is yes. You got exactly what you paid for specification-wise.

Still this, eh?

The consensus across the rest of users seems to be they did not get what they paid for due to other specifications that are plainly incorrect. It wasn't just one specific spec, it was across several.

 

[AnandThenMan]

I don't think Nvidia gives a damn about this issue, they are going to wait it out and only deal with this if they are taken to court. On Nvidia's own page they link to reviews that have the wrong specs, that's how much Nvidia cares about the whole thing.

Really pathetic.

 

[nemesismk2]

I'd imagine, legally, that there'd be a good case for demanding a refund if the product sold isn't as advertised. At least in the EU where consumer protection laws are actually a thing.

I dont think that NV should have to give out partial compensation though. Either youre happy with the product (in which case stop whining) or youre unhappy with it (and you should be able to return it for a refund).

i agree with a fellow welshguy.

 

[Rhezuss]

Decided to keep the card. At 1080p i'm not seeing any spikes of slow downs on my games (Dying Light maxed out is the latest game I play).

But I will keep an eye on this case and see how it goes.

What I did though is ask EVGA if they could reopen my card to be eligible for a step-up to a 980 even though my 90 days is long passed.

 

[rgallant]

(Answering the OP) Does the card have 4gb on it?

Answer honestly. Does the card have 4 physical, addressable, functional, usable, not up for interpretation, gigabytes of memory on it?

The answer is yes. You got exactly what you paid for specification-wise.

it seems only 3.5 gb is fully functional when in some games it's maxed out for some peeps.

 

[skipsneeky2]

I ended up clicking yes on the poll,i know what i bought but as i pretty much need a Nvidia card with my setup i can't help but say they do owe us a bit more.That or fix the 0.5gb part NOW.

I got Titanfall just now to go from smooth at 1366x768 with Insane Textures+8x MSAA which looks and runs fantastic to stutter,lock up and crash with DSR and 1932x1086+2MSAA.Vram stayed under 3.2gb@768p but@1086p i pretty much was hitting over 3.5gb.....Performance was great for a short bit till the memory climbed up.

Silly perhaps but i got BF4 to crash as well,but i was using extreme settings purely to test my load temperatures,2732x1536+200% scale resolution+4x MSAA hit nearly 3.8gb before it froze,poofed with the nvidia vram error .....

I thought the issue was blown out of proportion but the issue is real,i have officially seen it first hand.I could lower settings in my games which isn't a issue but my own experience has wowed me. 0_O

 

[flexy]

Does the card have 4 physical, addressable, functional, usable, not up for interpretation, gigabytes of memory on it?

The answer is

 

[Rhezuss]

The answer is

Hahahahah, love it

 

[Highmodulus]

eh I own a 970, wouldn't mind a free steam game or something but not too worked up about it.