QUOTE(Moogle Stiltzkin @ Feb 9 2015, 11:45 AM)
to name a few....
wolfenstein: new order (especially this game. low vram at high settings will cause the texture popping issue which is a very obvious and annoying effect where images when loading is blurred only to suddenly pop in after load. It becomes disorienting.)
shadow of mordor (if you think 4gb vram is enough, well this game needs 6gb vram to max out it's ultra settings.
http://www.kitguru.net/gaming/matthew-wils...ultra-settings/ )
Why players should be upset having 3.5gb rather than the promised 4gb vram
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/middle-ea...ess-test,7.html
So if the market has a 4gb vram card, why settle with 3.5gb ? Especially considering some of the graphics intensive games we know are very demanding in regards to vram.
More so for gamers such as myself who buy the highest end graphics card expecting to then be able to play in ultra settings. This is where vram becomes important for this ultra settings to become playable.
And this is not yet even considering people who bought the 970 bought it thinking it was a 4gb, but instead later found out it's 3.5gb Which is blatant false advertising, and already lawyers are contemplating a lawsuit against nvidia because of it.
970 is not highest end. Titan is. Never settle for less if you really serious into going ultra everything. better to collect money and get the best. Shadow of Mordor came with preset setting on different GFX. they auto detect best setting for it. If you change those means U are going beyond the card limit. Even played ultra for AC4 BF.wolfenstein: new order (especially this game. low vram at high settings will cause the texture popping issue which is a very obvious and annoying effect where images when loading is blurred only to suddenly pop in after load. It becomes disorienting.)
shadow of mordor (if you think 4gb vram is enough, well this game needs 6gb vram to max out it's ultra settings.
http://www.kitguru.net/gaming/matthew-wils...ultra-settings/ )
Why players should be upset having 3.5gb rather than the promised 4gb vram
http://www.guru3d.com/news-story/middle-ea...ess-test,7.html
So if the market has a 4gb vram card, why settle with 3.5gb ? Especially considering some of the graphics intensive games we know are very demanding in regards to vram.
More so for gamers such as myself who buy the highest end graphics card expecting to then be able to play in ultra settings. This is where vram becomes important for this ultra settings to become playable.
And this is not yet even considering people who bought the 970 bought it thinking it was a 4gb, but instead later found out it's 3.5gb Which is blatant false advertising, and already lawyers are contemplating a lawsuit against nvidia because of it.
Back to topic of misinformation yes I believe NVIDIA is at fault for not doing proper test or intentionally misled consumer. I believe this case is as car recall they should just recall all the 970 and come out with new hardware config which reflect the 4gb.
Feb 9 2015, 01:08 PM

Quote
0.0394sec
0.53
7 queries
GZIP Disabled