Anybody successfully exchanged their Intel laptop for an AMD one because of reduced performance?

[MadDuke]

HI.

 

Anybody managed it with the manufacturer?   In EU?   I mean. Since all the security updates I'm not exactly getting what I've paid for anymore.  And no, I don't care how little percentage that is. 

[WereCat]

likely not unless you bought it very recently and you're in the 14 day return period 

[Stormseeker9]

6 minutes ago, MadDuke said:

HI.

 

Anybody managed it with the manufacturer?   In EU?   I mean. Since all the security updates I'm not exactly getting what I've paid for anymore.  And no, I don't care how little percentage that is. 

Considering we have favourable laws for consumers in EU (and NL especially) I would just contact the merchant where it is bought and make a claim. Otherwise go to like whatever institutions you have in your country for consumers and complain. Unless your laptop is like +2 years old I think you should have a valid claim 

[rickymohk]

You bought a CPU, not the performance of that CPU.

[minibois]

7 minutes ago, rickymohk said:

You bought a CPU, not the performance of that CPU.

Unless the store where OP bought it from indicated a certain level of performance (e.g. they say "Gets x amount of points in Cinebench!!") this would be my thought too.

Although it really depends on what the final OS update will be of Intel/Microsoft/Apple/Google. Google has already turned off Hyperthreading on ChromeOS, so people could make a claim similar to "your website listed this CPU as having 2 cores, 4 thread, now it is 2 cores, 2 threads with HT off. You have sold me a product that does not match its description."

 

I doubt many stores will cave in to that though, claiming it is a manufacturer thing, the consumer has to take up with Google/Intel in that case.

Although just one lawsuit against a store might be enough in setting a precedent for or against the consumer with this stuff..

 

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer!! Just a random person online sharing my thoughts, take them with a grain of salt.

[Origami Cactus]

I don't think you can. In the advertisements they say the cpu name, clockspeed and amount of threads, and they stayed the same, so it isn't  exactly a case of false advertising.

 

 

You choose a laptop yourself based on specs, and they stayed the same. It doesn't matter if it doesn't feel to you that you don't get your money's worth anymore. You made an informed decision to buy that laptop.

 

Also imo it is kinda mean to punish manufacturer for Intel's and your mistakes.

 

 

[Stormseeker9]

1 minute ago, Origami Cactus said:

I don't think you can. In the advertisements they say the cpu name, clockspeed and amount of threads, and they stayed the same, so it isn't  exactly a case of false advertising.

 

 

You choose a laptop yourself based on specs, and they stayed the same. It doesn't matter if it doesn't feel to you that you don't get your money's worth anymore. You made an informed decision to buy that laptop.

 

Also imo it is kinda mean to punish manufacturer for Intel's and your mistakes.

 

 

But when you buy something and you suddenly get half the cores... surely that ain’t right.

 

we have decent consumer laws in the EU, so might differ based on location 

[Origami Cactus]

1 minute ago, Stormseeker9 said:

But when you buy something and you suddenly get half the cores... surely that ain’t right.

 

we have decent consumer laws in the EU, so might differ based on location 

Well you don't get half the cores. The amount of cores and threads stayed exactly the same.

They aren't disabled by default.

 

Only if you want to be secure you have to disable the cores yourself.

 

[rickymohk]

Technically you can decide to do anything with the hardware you bought to fully utilise it, so...

[porina]

39 minutes ago, MadDuke said:

Anybody managed it with the manufacturer?   In EU?   I mean. Since all the security updates I'm not exactly getting what I've paid for anymore.  And no, I don't care how little percentage that is. 

I can only speak of UK implementation of EU law, which should be similar. Your contract when you buy the device is with the place that sold it to you. Your claim can only be with them, not the manufacturer of the device (unless bought through them directly), not the manufacturer of any component of the device. If recently purchased you might have some chance or arguing for refund/replacement. If some time has passed, the burden of proof will be on you to show it does not meet promises made when it was sold to you.

 

IANAL disclaimer etc.

6 minutes ago, Stormseeker9 said:

But when you buy something and you suddenly get half the cores... surely that ain’t right.

That hasn't changed. You have the same number of cores, the same number of threads available. If you choose to use them differently is up to you.

 

6 minutes ago, Stormseeker9 said:

we have decent consumer laws in the EU, so might differ based on location 

There is an underlying requirement through EU Directives. Individual country interpretations may vary but they should be broadly similar.

[BleachedFur]

my laptop has the i5 7300 and performs the same as it did when it first came out. Mostly because I don't give two shits about these "vulnerabilities" because I'm not a retarded twat who goes to shady "free download" sites and immediately gets 10 viruses.

 

Remember, you're only vulnerable if you expose yourself...you only get disease if you expose yourself to it.

 

If you don't expose yourself to the viruses that (probably) don't even make use of Intel's vulnerabilities, then you have nothing to worry about. Even if you did have a virus that made use of Spectre/Meltdown/Whatever, you'd notice a performance drop before anything got stolen.

 

I don't even use anitvirus, I just use a large hosts file and call it a day. No viruses in 10 years.

[LogicalDrm]

Unlikely, but also depends on store. Some have only 14/30-days and even thats limited to unused products. Some have full 30-days with almost any use. Some have 90-100 days with any use (no physical marks).

[MadDuke]

Have in mind. This is more to spark a conversation.  

 

My logic behind this is.  This is the same as the Battery capacity update thingy on the phones.  Yes, the capacity hasn't physically changed, but in all essence it is the same. Same goes with CPU performance in this case for me.  

[LogicalDrm]

16 minutes ago, MadDuke said:

Have in mind. This is more to spark a conversation.  

 

My logic behind this is.  This is the same as the Battery capacity update thingy on the phones.  Yes, the capacity hasn't physically changed, but in all essence it is the same. Same goes with CPU performance in this case for me.  

You are talking about platform change between Intel and AMD. Thats way different than battery upgrade. And when there are already laptops which offer storage upgrades or RAM upgrades, changing laptop because you don't like performance after return period is way, way different. If you want to take phones as example, you are asking if you can switch from Android to iPhone because you don't like performance. This is quite out of consumers right in any part of world. Its rather being elitistic and expecting someone else to pay for your mistakes.

[AlTech]

58 minutes ago, Minibois said:

Unless the store where OP bought it from indicated a certain level of performance (e.g. they say "Gets x amount of points in Cinebench!!") this would be my thought too.

The way I see it is that I bought a 4C 8T CPU and being forced to deal with 4C 4T performance is really just a huge joke. Frankly if I had the money to sue Intel right now then I probably would.

 

I bought a 4C 8T CPU expecting a 4C 8T CPU not some watered down 4C 4T CPU after a vulnerability was found. A vulnerability that Intel repeatedly tried to keep quiet from people.

58 minutes ago, Minibois said:

Although it really depends on what the final OS update will be of Intel/Microsoft/Apple/Google. Google has already turned off Hyperthreading on ChromeOS, so people could make a claim similar to "your website listed this CPU as having 2 cores, 4 thread, now it is 2 cores, 2 threads with HT off. You have sold me a product that does not match its description."

Microsoft, Intel, and Apple have all decided they won't be disabling HT to avoid lawsuits. They're making it optional even though it's very much necessary to be protected.

[Stormseeker9]

@AluminiumTech well said.

 

buying 4/8 and now I have 4/4...

 

sounds like an apple thing... slowing phones down on purpose lol

[MadDuke]

38 minutes ago, LogicalDrm said:

You are talking about platform change between Intel and AMD. Thats way different than battery upgrade. And when there are already laptops which offer storage upgrades or RAM upgrades, changing laptop because you don't like performance after return period is way, way different. If you want to take phones as example, you are asking if you can switch from Android to iPhone because you don't like performance. This is quite out of consumers right in any part of world. Its rather being elitistic and expecting someone else to pay for your mistakes.

That is a bad comparison since HP in this case makes both Intel and AMD laptops.    It's not my mistake but Intel.  100% and HP for rolling out patches which hinder performance.  

[AlTech]

1 hour ago, LogicalDrm said:

You are talking about platform change between Intel and AMD. Thats way different than battery upgrade. And when there are already laptops which offer storage upgrades or RAM upgrades, changing laptop because you don't like performance after return period is way, way different

I would argue that the CPUs which shipped with HT are now defective with HT disabled and not what the customer paid for. Someone needs to be held accountable and that is probably Intel.

1 hour ago, LogicalDrm said:

. If you want to take phones as example, you are asking if you can switch from Android to iPhone because you don't like performance. This is quite out of consumers right in any part of world. Its rather being elitistic and expecting someone else to pay for your mistakes.

This is not at all like that imho.

 

It's like buying a car with a V12 engine and suddenly through a firmware update to the car's computer it now only functions like a V6. This would not be acceptable in any other industry so why is it okay in the tech industry?

[LogicalDrm]

49 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

It's like buying a car with a V12 engine and suddenly through a firmware update to the car's computer it now only functions like a V6. This would not be acceptable in any other industry so why is it okay in the tech industry?

 

For your example, I would agree. Mine applies to OP's actual question. But would store be willing to switch it based on that? Nope.

 

1 hour ago, MadDuke said:

That is a bad comparison since HP in this case makes both Intel and AMD laptops.    It's not my mistake but Intel.  100% and HP for rolling out patches which hinder performance.  

 

You could make argument. And if its within that 30-day period, or even warranty, there's case to be made. After that there's not.

[LAwLz]

3 hours ago, BleachedFur said:

my laptop has the i5 7300 and performs the same as it did when it first came out. Mostly because I don't give two shits about these "vulnerabilities" because I'm not a retarded twat who goes to shady "free download" sites and immediately gets 10 viruses. 

 

Remember, you're only vulnerable if you expose yourself...you only get disease if you expose yourself to it. 

Just keep in mind that these vulnerabilities can be utilized by things such as JS on a website. It might also be used on a website that has been hijacked or by XSS.

I would not be surprised if you expose yourself everyday without even realizing it.

 

2 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

A vulnerability that Intel repeatedly tried to keep quiet from people. 

They did? Source?

[Arika]

3 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Just keep in mind that these vulnerabilities can be utilized by things such as JS on a website. It might also be used on a website that has been hijacked or by XSS.

I would not be surprised if you expose yourself everyday without even realizing it.

Since he has an i5 this threat is next to nothing since the i5 doesn’t have HT, correct me if I’m wrong

[MadDuke]

23 minutes ago, LogicalDrm said:

 

For your example, I would agree. Mine applies to OP's actual question. But would store be willing to switch it based on that? Nope.

 

 

You could make argument. And if its within that 30-day period, or even warranty, there's case to be made. After that there's not.

Yep. In my case I  since it's and Elitebook 840 G5 with extended HP warranty (with even pick up on site) the warranty is all the way to June, 2021.

 

As mentioned. This is more a question and to start a discussion. I'm pretty tired of  these practices which in the end break on the consumers back.  

[AlTech]

18 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

They did? Source?

https://www.techpowerup.com/255563/intel-tried-to-bribe-dutch-university-to-suppress-knowledge-of-mds-vulnerability

 

https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2019/05/14/hackers-mikken-op-het-intel-hart-a3960208

 

15 minutes ago, Arika S said:

Since he has an i5 this threat is next to nothing since the i5 doesn’t have HT, correct me if I’m wrong

I expect this to affect more laptop owners since a large majority of Intel's laptop CPUs including i5s and i3s have HT.

 

Anyone with a CPU which doesn't have HT is basically safe and can for the most part completely ignore this epic failure on the part of Intel.

[Arika]

1 minute ago, AluminiumTech said:

I expect this to affect more laptop owners since a large majority of Intel's laptop CPUs including i5s and i3s have HT.

Ooh right. The older U series are dual cores with HT, and the newer ones are mostly 4c/8t welp

[porina]

2 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

Frankly if I had the money to sue Intel right now then I probably would.

What legal ground do you think you have for going directly to Intel? Usual I'm not lawyer disclaimer, but you have no contract with Intel to take civil action. You wouldn't have the standing to raise a criminal case, and I don't think there is any claim of that to support one anyway. What you would be limited to doing is suing whoever sold you the Intel product or containing product, at best on some grounds that what you have now is not what was sold. 

2 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

Microsoft, Intel, and Apple have all decided they won't be disabling HT to avoid lawsuits. They're making it optional even though it's very much necessary to be protected.

It is all about an appropriate level of risk mitigation. Not everyone wears a foil hat.

9 minutes ago, Arika S said:

Since he has an i5 this threat is next to nothing since the i5 doesn’t have HT, correct me if I’m wrong

Mobile i5s may have HT.