![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
My last card was a Gigabyte 7950 and lasted me a good couple of years, one of the best cards I've ever owned period. I've been leaning AMD since the 9800pro hit the market like a thousand tech years ago. This time around I snagged a 970 based on the research and results I found online, and in anticipation of the Witcher 3 coming out in February. The release date has now been moved to May, and is being developed largely around Nvidia hardware. This is a big deal to me because I've read the books, played the games and I plan on investing hundreds of hours into the final installment in the series.
I was initially upset by the reports of gimped memory and exaggerated shader capability, in all honesty I have a right to be having been mislead by false claims. Do I believe Nvidia intentionally mislead consumers? Yes. Should they be punished? Of course. Should users be entitled to a refund? I believe so, but I'm not sure I completely understand the full legality of the issue. Should AMD users be having a good laugh at our expense? Certainly. Am I going to seek a refund or exchange? Absolutely not.
Here is my reasoning. As many have stated, the benchmarks and reviews stand, no amount of AMD fanboyism (I count myself among them at times, so don't try it) can change that. You may have heard that the safest airline to fly the day after a crash is the same airline that had the crash. The logic is that the airline will be going above and beyond to avert another disaster and it's absolutely true. Two crashes would likely bankrupt the airline, not to mention the witch hunt that would ensue. I'm hoping the same logic applies here and it seems Nvidia is trying to remedy the memory issue through driver fixes, which would make an already stellar card even better, and give me more for my money than I had initially hoped.
The fact of the matter is that I've yet to encounter any performance drops when using above 3.5GB of RAM, and I've been playing some pretty memory intensive mods and games that have utilized the full 4GB capacity. No measurable drop in FPS, stutters or perceptible lag have occurred. And then there is this, what has occurred, my card mopping the floor with every card on the market except the 980. So while this whole mess is being sorted out and everyone is bickering and fighting, I'm playing the most recent titles at 1440p @ 60fps and not giving a crap. What's more is I'm expecting, and yes hoping, the card will soon be squeezing out even more potential as Nvidia hammers out the issues. While we may dispute the facts or the legality, you cannot deny me the experience I'm having and I cannot suddenly believe that the card I'm using isn't producing the results it's producing. I couldn't be happier that the card I purchased for $350 several months ago, that overclocked 200mhz core and 250mhz memory (MSI ftw) and is shredding frames like a boss.
The most recent argument that has been circulating around this thread is the "perceived loss of future potential". While this is an interesting point, one that I had to think about for a good minute, it certainly doesn't invalidate anything I've said up to this point and fails to put forth a compelling case against owning or buying this card. The 970's performance (relative to other current gpus) will be the same today as it is a year from now. Today's performance in games (which are both shader and memory intensive) are a clear indication of how the 970 will perform with future titles. If you think the 290 or 780 will magically start stomping the 970 in future titles down the road, you are not only misinformed, you're not thinking about the bigger picture. Most people who go out and a buy a $350-$400 card in the first few months of its release aren't the kind of people who hold onto a card for 3 years. Additionally, if you're telling me that the next round of AMD cards or Nvidia refreshes or whatever are going to be faster, then you might very well be the next divine prophet, of course they are going to be faster. It's all a moot point. As an end user, this is all working out in my favor and I'm content to let the forums burn and Nvidia get whatever they have coming to them, whether it be legal action or lost sales.
I was initially upset by the reports of gimped memory and exaggerated shader capability, in all honesty I have a right to be having been mislead by false claims. Do I believe Nvidia intentionally mislead consumers? Yes. Should they be punished? Of course. Should users be entitled to a refund? I believe so, but I'm not sure I completely understand the full legality of the issue. Should AMD users be having a good laugh at our expense? Certainly. Am I going to seek a refund or exchange? Absolutely not.
Here is my reasoning. As many have stated, the benchmarks and reviews stand, no amount of AMD fanboyism (I count myself among them at times, so don't try it) can change that. You may have heard that the safest airline to fly the day after a crash is the same airline that had the crash. The logic is that the airline will be going above and beyond to avert another disaster and it's absolutely true. Two crashes would likely bankrupt the airline, not to mention the witch hunt that would ensue. I'm hoping the same logic applies here and it seems Nvidia is trying to remedy the memory issue through driver fixes, which would make an already stellar card even better, and give me more for my money than I had initially hoped.
The fact of the matter is that I've yet to encounter any performance drops when using above 3.5GB of RAM, and I've been playing some pretty memory intensive mods and games that have utilized the full 4GB capacity. No measurable drop in FPS, stutters or perceptible lag have occurred. And then there is this, what has occurred, my card mopping the floor with every card on the market except the 980. So while this whole mess is being sorted out and everyone is bickering and fighting, I'm playing the most recent titles at 1440p @ 60fps and not giving a crap. What's more is I'm expecting, and yes hoping, the card will soon be squeezing out even more potential as Nvidia hammers out the issues. While we may dispute the facts or the legality, you cannot deny me the experience I'm having and I cannot suddenly believe that the card I'm using isn't producing the results it's producing. I couldn't be happier that the card I purchased for $350 several months ago, that overclocked 200mhz core and 250mhz memory (MSI ftw) and is shredding frames like a boss.
The most recent argument that has been circulating around this thread is the "perceived loss of future potential". While this is an interesting point, one that I had to think about for a good minute, it certainly doesn't invalidate anything I've said up to this point and fails to put forth a compelling case against owning or buying this card. The 970's performance (relative to other current gpus) will be the same today as it is a year from now. Today's performance in games (which are both shader and memory intensive) are a clear indication of how the 970 will perform with future titles. If you think the 290 or 780 will magically start stomping the 970 in future titles down the road, you are not only misinformed, you're not thinking about the bigger picture. Most people who go out and a buy a $350-$400 card in the first few months of its release aren't the kind of people who hold onto a card for 3 years. Additionally, if you're telling me that the next round of AMD cards or Nvidia refreshes or whatever are going to be faster, then you might very well be the next divine prophet, of course they are going to be faster. It's all a moot point. As an end user, this is all working out in my favor and I'm content to let the forums burn and Nvidia get whatever they have coming to them, whether it be legal action or lost sales.
Try #2 now
