Lawsuit Filed Against Nvidia Over GTX 970 Specs Controversy

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.


I wouldn't be too surprised if these are Dell OEM pulls or something (I used to see these in Dell, as a WPD guy, no boxes etc, just a dell box and NV card inside a static bad came here).
"Product images, including color, may differ from actual product appearance."
from the specs page there. IF you google the UPC 850438005715, they're all on ebay and such. I didn't say they don't make the ref card that everyone copies (or sent for reviews) nor did I say they don't make stuff for OEM's like Dell/HP etc (both sides HAVE to do this for time to market for OEM's that just want to slap a name and get it out the door, or in PC makers case actual parts made FOR them that get pulled etc and hawked on Ebay when they buy too many), just that 970 isn't sold by them direct to end users and I'm not sure your link is at this point either. Comments from the part# 9001G4012510000 say it isn't available in europe either.

I'm wondering about the warranty also. IE, I've bought drives from Fry's and when you come home and punch in the serial, you find out you don't get seagate's warranty (just the year from fry's or less) as it's a dell pull etc. Seagate will show them as ZERO warranty the day you come home and tell you who's drive it really is. It looks like this is just like fry's deals. I'm guessing Dell, HP, Toshiba or someone had a bunch more than needed and BestBuy made a deal for a bunch of these models. But I could be wrong.

http://www.nvidia.com/page/support.html
Note the link specifically for Bought at BEST BUY:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/support_gtx-560ti-gts-450-us.html
"*Note: this is only for the GeForce GTX 770, GTX 660Ti, GTX 560 Ti and GeForce GTS 450 Graphics Cards by NVIDIA sold exclusively at Best Buy beginning October, 2010. "

Again, 900's not mentioned. Odd...But note NO OTHER company is listed and Best Buy is directly called out for those models. But maybe they really made 900's for BestBuy. I was aware of the others, which is why I said specifically links to 900's please. IF they're Nvidia's 900's I guess NV just needs to update their pages.

"anything from any website no matter what should be taken with a grain of salt and without any paperwork or legitimate testing is just hearsay"
Not sure how you say hearsay for perf benchmarks when it's extremetech, toms, anandtech, techreport etc...LOL. They are hardware review sites. What do you call legitimate testing (tomshardware, anandtech, extremetech no legit?). They all lie about the same thing? ROFL. Ok. Write them all and tell them to take down their websites I guess... 😉 Jeez, one of the links I gave was toms testing at 4K on this card. You're ON tomshardware posting here.
 
Bestbuy, circuit city and even frys from time to time has carried the NV specific cards. Newegg does aswell. When the 980's first came out and newegg was flooded with the reference coolers but had, msi, asus, evga etc... stickers on them who do you think those cards were made by? NV made the cards those third party manufacturers just buy them up then slap their own sticker on them and sell them. They ARE NV CARDS NOT msi, evga, msi, etc.....
 
I always have mixed emotions about lawsuits against such compromises. But it's not so much the amount of discrepancies as much as it is the overall scope of what corporations do. I'm speaking in general terms. Always deliberate alterations of specifications whether large our small, simple mistakes or complicated matters are building blocks for future cases.
Certain issues which are mediocre may be won by corporations may prove to be a basis for important and serious cases involving greater misrepresentation. If that's the case, it may be in the consumers interest to sue.
However it's not always true. Like I said it may be a simple mistake. But it does become a Passover moment for future reference. There's nothing wrong in keeping industry honest. It shows there's a major buying force to the company (fan base and trust) from those who affiliate with their products.
 
I've always been hesitant about lawsuits involving such discrepancies. But most people who are loyal customers, clients and users of their products do not necessarily have to dissatisfied with the product itself. These types of lawsuits will go down as reference to future lawsuits involving future cases to be decided. In other words, if a decision is decided on the future of another case with a similar background, it can become a solidifying basis for a law practice. So whether it's a small discrepancy or a complicated menagerie of corporate conspiracy, it does matter.
But it also shows the company (Nvidia) or corporation involved, it has a loyal and trusting fan base who believe in it's products and want it's continuity to remain.
 
In the early 1990's I bought a NEO GEO game system that advertised it was 24 bit. This was during the great "bit wars" of the game consoles.

It was an absolutely mind melding experience to play and enjoy the surround sound of that NEO GEO as others were plunking Super Mario and Excite Bike. Guess what... they fubbed the bit numbers! Main processor was 16 bit 68000 for the video and the 8 bit Z80 for the sound processor. Add it up and apparently it was okay to advertise that way. Now they did have 3 GPU chips and a top of the line Yamaha YM2610 15 channel sound chip. So they could have added in those bits too I suppose. Rumor was that one of the GPU chips was 24 bit. But I digress, didn't care as the system lived up to my expectations for the high dollar.

In reality, they lied. But the game console for those lucky enough to buy it had something above and beyond. Even to this day they are coveted.

Nobody got butt hurt over the specs and sued. A great product was made.
 
Hi its very clear to anyone if you sell a product and misinterpret it you should take responsibility. Customers buy based on what they are told a products specifications are. Either Nvidia should compensate customers, with a set amount eg:$100, or refund completely or alternatively upgrade the cards to the 980 and live with the costs but wouldn't they receive such high praise. I do have a MSI 970 GTX and its a great card but it isn't the card I thought I was paying for. Under Uk law I could send it back to the supplier no problem except I don't know what else to buy and the 980 is to expensive and I want to see how all this pans out as I believe Nvidia will have to make some sort of compromise soon as this is doing them damage.
 


^+1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_kGJBv6Wr4
 


What damage? The few people whining KNOW they can't get better without spending more. You bought a 970 thinking it would run as fast as 980? They perform exactly as they are intended and to beat it you have to buy a 980. IF people ask for a refund, just like you they'll realize you have to pony up quite a bit more to do better. I don't think they'll do squat, and they shouldn't. AMD has nothing to sell to beat their cards until after June if rumors are true (maybe later if they can't get rid of cards in the channel). If they know it wasn't done on purpose, IE there is no smoking gun email like with the IRS (we have no backup tapes, drives died etc, oops there's 700, ooops there's another 400), Clinton (servers in her house, no email sent from a govt account and she didn't even OWN one for 4yrs...LOL), etc, then why should they cave to a few whiners who are trying to get something for nothing? If they had gotten the spec sheet right you're card would still run exactly as reviewers had showed it.

Even if the specs were REAL, it wouldn't have changed the review benchmarks. As they say, the scores are baked in. In other words, even if 4GB was full speeds, there was a few more rops etc, the scores in reviews wouldn't have changed from what was tested. They could have said the card had 8GB, 8million cores, 3billion GB/s bandwidth etc, and the scores would still be exactly what they all showed on tons of reviews sites. How many times have specs (that actually were true) said one thing, but performance was quite another thing. IE, AMD 290x at launch didn't REALLY run at specified mhz did they? That is FAR worse than a spec sheet error, it really slowed down as it throttled. Nobody sued AMD over something that REALLY sucked. You had to wait months to see what the card REALLY was supposed to do (after market cooling was needed). Reviews told everyone "DON'T BUY RETAIL REF CARDS UNLESS YOU'RE MINING BITCOIN", and that was the only thing that saved AMD's butt until better cooling hit the shelves. MINERS.

There will be no damage. You have no choice but to spend more for a 980 or get a refund and get a SLOWER card. Nvidia or AMD could advertise whatever they wanted on a box, commercial etc. I won't buy until I see benchmarks. PERIOD. Specs mean nothing to me if company X still kicks the crap out of company Y. People don't buy iphones for the dual core cpu's, they buy because they win vs. many quads etc when each model is released. Same story. I wouldn't touch a FREESYNC monitor until I see it tested. I know how gsync works and performs, but am waiting for the other shoe to drop first. Until I see 5-10 reviews saying there is ZERO difference I'm sitting here waiting specs or no specs. I wouldn't care if NV shipped a card with 2048bit bus, if AMD won in the games I desired to play at the res I'm going to plan to play at, AMD gets the money even if the card says 128bit bus...LOL...etc. If I buy on specs instead of perf I'm an idiot. You've already admitted you have no choice but to sit as there is no better choice even if you got a refund...ROFL. Worse you're hoping for something for free over a mistake even though you haven't been screwed out of perf and your life wouldn't change at all no matter what the spec sheet said.

Without someone being able to prove they purposely did this (smoking gun email or something internally trying to hide the truth BEFORE reviews), or that performance is hurt by the sheet somehow, this case goes nowhere.

The trouble with stupid lawsuits like this is all they do is cause a price hike to make up the loss on the next products that get released. $100...ROFL. So a card that is $329 and performs exactly as reviews should be discounted ~1/3 due to a spec sheet error? Feel free to return your card, as you said you can in UK, and even in USA they take them back if rumors are true. No harm done. Then what? :) Umm, I'll take that 970 again, because nothing else beats it unless I spend more your honor...I guess nothing changed since they sold it to me sir...Case dismissed. Jeez. It would be different if the card dropped massively in perf vs. what a 980 does in X game etc. But that is proven NOT true, as they both drop nearly the same as shown before. AMD delayed their next cards for a reason. The shelves are loaded with the old ones because PERFORMANCE sells and AMD didn't have enough. Specs or not, if AMD doesn't come up with a PERFORMER before I buy my next card, NV gets my cash. I'll go with the WINNER not some spec sheet.

Specs said Nolan Ryan (any old pitcher) should have retired much earlier, but he was still throwing faster than most guys 1/2 his age so he kept playing 😉 Get the point? If people looked at little Spud Webb's height/weight (5'7/133 lbs...ROFL, get out of here guy) they'd run away from that contract. But then you see the guy dunk a ball with a ~42 vertical leap and go WTH? You're hired.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spud_Webb
Specs don't mean squat. Ask Dominique Wilkins...ROFL. Not only did Spud win the contest, he went on to train the only other guy in NBA history that was under 6ft to win it 😉
 


I see the 970's and 980's in best buy all the time
 


That was already discussed. They can ONLY be bought there, and it wasn't on their page for these models (probably still isn't).
 
Typical reaction in the land of the zombies that we live in today, SUE, SUE, SUE. Let's bite the hand that feeds us. " I ordered a cheeseburger all I got was a hamburger...send it back!!!...sue the business...put them out of business!!! I'd rather starve. Good...once your gone that'll be once less zombie to worry about.
 


I know what you're saying here but but I'm not implying we should sue in every instance for monetary gain. Suppose you went out to buy a car (let's say a Honda Accord) with a good report and upon examining the car with a Honda Civic, it was the same car without Accord emblems. You just paid an extra 10,000 bucks for emblems. Sure, the 2 cars could be great but that's not what you buy an Accord for. You bought an Accord for the higher quality. The great drive it supports. There's not much consolation in buying a readdressed Civic, is there? No. It doesn't mean you bought a bad car. It means you paid an extra 10,000 bucks.
So, if the manufacturer gets away with product devaluation, it 'invites' or 'suggest' them to do it again or entice other manufacturers to follow suit till they're all doing it. Car manufacturers are in the business of selling cars, not making spare parts or keeping old cars running. And being that business means making a profit, if they can sell you a cheaper car every year, that will be just as good and cheaper to manufacturer, to save themselves money they'll give it consideration.
The point in the law suit is to keep the manufacturer honest to the consumer. If everyone could so easily excuse lower quality and still pay the going price, you have to believe someone in the business of selling gpu cards is watching. There's not much to doubt the manufacturer (maybe not Nvidia) may attempt to try it again. It's just the business of selling.
This has nothing to do with putting them out of business, it has nothing to do with getting a huge pay-off. It has everything to do with getting what you paid for instead getting lower quality gpu cards or readdressed gpu cards like AMD. The least AMD did, is not lie about keeping the same specs on new cards.
 
Typical legal/product liability insurance response/remedy in law suits is to fix, replace or refund after returning to original preproduct introduction. Microcenter gave me full credit for my 970s which I returned after roughly 5 months of usage and used to buy two 980s. Any desired outcome beyond that for a video card just seems vindictive and unwarranted.
 


And that is already ridiculously nice and stupid. I would maybe do that in the first 60-90 days, but never as long as you had them, especially since it did not affect performance that anyone can prove yet. The benchmarks are all the same, lie, half-truth, or mistake. It makes no difference. Even AMD loving anandtech (AMD portal still, no NV portal etc), who has openly said they were looking for corner cases, can't find one yet. I guarantee you we'd know immediately if they did! NV is looking too and probably already found the majority before release or we'd be seeing them.

http://techreport.com/review/27724/nvidia-the-geforce-gtx-970-works-exactly-as-intended
It's actually better than it could have been, and does use 4GB. Going the other way might have ended with a 3GB card. Making fuller use of a faulty chip allows them to price the card so competitively.

"Thanks to this provision, Nvidia is able to equip the GeForce GTX 970 with a full 256-bit memory interface and still ship it at an attractive price in high volumes." Would we have liked an extra $20-30 tacked on, or 3GB instead? Let me know when someone finds a corner case in an actual game that affects review scores. Even then once identified, as techreport etc says, they can work around it to fix those cases. They have been doing this type of crossbar tech for years (even AMD has done it before). If NV sucked at it Anandtech etc would have found a dozen cases by now instead of ZERO.

"Alben told us Nvidia continues to look into possible situations where the performance drop-offs are larger on the GTX 970, and he suggested that in those cases, the company will "see if we can improve the heuristics." In short, Nvidia is taking responsiblity for managing the GTX 970's funny VRAM config, and it's possible that any problems that users turn up could be worked around via a driver update. In the end, that means the GTX 970's performance may be a little more fragile than the 980's, but Nvidia has a pretty good track record of staying on top of these kinds of things. This isn't nearly the chore that, say, maintaining SLI profiles must be."

Yeah, we see that with how many CF profiles don't exist where 290x etc beats 295x2 😉
 


Here's the NVidia branded GTX970 card at Bestbuy
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/nvidia-geforce-gtx-970-4gb-gddr5-pci-express-3-0-graphics-card-silver-black/9855169.p?id=1219441201895&skuId=9855169

Here's the NVidia branded GTX980 card at Bestbuy
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/nvidia-geforce-gtx-980-4gb-gddr5-pci-express-3-0-graphics-card-silver-black/9855141.p?id=1219441205886&skuId=9855141

Here's the NVidia branded GTX970 card on Newegg.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814132038
 


Already discussed 2 months ago. Nvidia hadn't updated their page to include them as listed models for the best buy cards at the time.
 
I agree w/ overall sentiment here, but I'd rather see a government branch step in on their own and punish such behavior, rather than greedy lawyers cashing in on a companies 'mistake'.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom