Originally Posted by BulletBait @Defoler
I'd hardly say they're 'playing dirty' since they admitted a problem in certain cases,
and promised to fix it.
Unlike playing deaf, dumb, and stupid to a .5 GB problem.
Just stop, you're embarrassing yourselves at this point. It's a non-issue, same as the 3.5 was back in the 970 era of gaming when few games passed 2GB, let alone 3GB. It may be an issue now and in the future, but it's almost two years after release and most nV customers upgrade every cycle anyways. Therefore it still makes it a 'non-issue' because who cares when you're spending $300-700 every cycle(2 years), right?
Its a "non issue" when you have the possibility (and with some claims already out) of killing a motherboard?
When did those 0.5GB memory difference killed a hardware component?
The only one embarrassing himself is you for claiming a hardware problem is a non-issue and comparing it to a performance of another hardware. That is just plain silly.
Also, the 970 was market for the 1080p, not the 4K right? Who in his right mind was buying a 4GB mid range card for 4K?
On the other hand, how many 480 buyers are just going to run the first driver they see for the next year or so and forget to update it?
AMD admitted the problem because, well... it seems to be killing hardware
, not causing less performance. Learn the difference.
If a car caused you to head into a tree, you will not classify it as a non-issue and compare it to a car giving 120bhp instead of 125bhp specified, right?