Why such a low GPA?

a minimum GPA usually is used as a cut-off to trim the applications down. Your portfolio might be spectacular but if the school you're applying to demands a min 3.X, then chances are they won't even take a look at yours.

Someone's looking for comfort.

Look elsewhere.

Not meaning to sound unsympathetic but you do understand the irony of an Asian student complaining about the inherent unfairness of the bell curve.

^just ask Allan Bakke.

^What I meant was that Asians are invariably the best students and throw the curve off for everyone else.

@Berns Bry

2.9 is an abysmal GPA, and blaming your performance on your school is extremely poor form. That's not one course that you could chalk up to a tough instructor, that's an entire degree averaging less than a B. 

Your portfolio had better be spectacular, because any program that accepts you is taking a huge chance that you'll continue being a terrible student.

@Lye__Nerd____Sky__Nerd 

How's that whole unapologetic racism thing working out for you?

^ If you were insulted, I apologize. Seriously, how is saying that Asians are invariably the best students racist?

At least in the US, grad schools look much more at your portfolio, references, etc.  If the GPA is low, but those other items are high quality, you're in.

Your problem may be that your portfolio and references may also be a 2.9

European schools (bar the UK, it seems) are very unconcerned with grades, so I doubt the other students are getting in based on a high GPA. In most of Scandinavia they didn't even begin grading students (in architecture, at least) until a few years before I took my degree. The concept of rating just didn't fit into their worldview.

I'm guessing those students who got into the schools you're looking at had great portfolios. How does yours measure up?

@Lye__Nerd____Sky__Nerd 

I can't believe you're obtuse enough to need this explained (and it's pretty telling that you used a non-apology apology before repeating your racist remark), but I'll give you a few of the broad strokes.

You've clearly witnessed high achievement from Asian students, as most/all of us have. For the sake of discussion (since I'm not referencing any actual data here), let's say that given a sample of high-performing students, we are likely to find many Asian students. Even if that statistical statement is true, it's still not okay to make sweeping generalizations about entire cultures. 

There are numerous reasons why many Asian students perform well, but here are just a couple. Some Asian educational cultures place a massive priority on exam performance (far greater than Western institutions), and it has historically been far more difficult and expensive to relocate from Asia to the United States, so Asian-American students disproportionately come from wealthy, successful, highly educated groups within their home countries. 

When you turn a statistical fact (still making data-free assumptions here) into a sweeping generalization you run into all kinds of problems. If African-American students are consistently outperformed by white students because of unequal access to educational and financial resources, it's hardly appropriate to say "white students are smarter than black students." Academic performance is not dependent upon race; it is mostly the result of opportunity.

And even if you don't insult or offend a single person with comments that perpetuate racial stereotypes, doing so still isn't acceptable. Racial stereotypes aren't about individual reactions. They're about historical oppression of racial groups. Saying "Asians are invariably the best students" reinforces existing power dynamics between oppressors and oppressed groups. It's like saying Asians are the "model minority;" doing so lets those in power to twist statistical fact to explain why other groups haven't had as much success.

I could go on, but I won't. It would be worth your time to actually think about what you say before you say it. 

Work for a couple of years and accomplish something and apply. The one metric the schools are really concerned with is the thickness of your wallet. I know someone who had a 2.5 undergraduate GPA at a state school and later got a 4.0 graduate GPA at a "public ivy".

I apologize for my insensitive and ignorant comments.

@Berns Bry 

 Sometimes the school/admissions committee might know about your school's grading policy (grade deflation, grade inflation, no grading system, etc). One school I applied to in the U.S. understood about how some colleges and programs had different grading policies that they take into account in admissions. But that's after they have gone through your portfolio, your personal statement, your recs, and which grades on your transcript actually pulled your GPA down (if you're an art major with a great portfolio and overall package but got a F in biology and chem that smashed your GPA, I would not hold that against you).

I look at the GPA and GRE together as 10% of the package that should be at least decent. The GRE can be an indicator where you stand with the incoming students or students coming out from your university into their program. If you have a bad GPA then yes take time off and work and explore within architecture. Time away can help if you with improvement in your work and give you time maybe to established relationships/network with more people in architecture.