Hardware reviews do not follow warranty specs and mislead to warranty loss

[mr moose]

11 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

And I get that. But not every small business can afford an investment that large while opting for a vehicle that is more manageable. I wouldn't call Uber as "commercial" use as much as I would a tow truck or delivery truck. 

If a small business can't afford the proper tools then that small business is kinda doomed before it starts, uber is like that in many ways as it doesn't earn enough to cover the costs.   PL insurance is very expensive here, but if you can't afford it then trying to run a business without insurance (which is essentially what people are doing when they work from home on their house insurance's PL) then they are open to a lot more problems.   Also driving a car around all day (especially if it is stop start) puts a lot moire stress on an average car than the twice a day trip most of them do. 

 

 

11 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

To bring it back to electronics, if you sell a product as "unlocked" and then say the warranty is void if you use it as "unlocked", then what's the point of buying the product?

I agree with that, that is misrepresenting the product. Advertising boost speeds and then not honoring that in warranty is a dogs act,  fortunately it doesn't look like they have rejected a claim on those grounds.

[markr54632]

7 minutes ago, ARikozuM said:

Except that does not make sense. Most manuals for cars and trucks tell you to replace the oil every 3000/5000 miles or every 6 months. Delivery of pet food once a day for a total of 30 miles is nothing. Doing Uber for 4 hours a day at let's say 200 miles is still within most consumer uses. 

 

To call that commercial is trying to push the lower fringes into a higher category.

Except they dont. Fully read the maintainence intervals in an owners manual. The mileage is a suggested metric that doesnt work or apply to vehicles that spend extended time idling.

 

More on topic the unlocked processor skus never made much sense to me as overclocking has always been about pushing parts past their designed limits. If the part is designed to be "overclocked" is it really even overclocking anymore? 

[Curufinwe_wins]

4 minutes ago, markr54632 said:

Except they dont. Fully read the maintainence intervals in an owners manual. The mileage is a suggested metric that doesnt work or apply to vehicles that spend extended time idling.

 

More on topic the unlocked processor skus never made much sense to me as overclocking has always been about pushing parts past their designed limits. If the part is designed to be "overclocked" is it really even overclocking anymore? 

But that's the wrong way to look at it.

 

For traditional Intel skus (things have gotten much more messy in recent days with dynamic boost algorithms) for example, the rated specs were say 10+ years operation at frequency and power spec with minimum 6 sigma failure rate. 

 

Even if you take the failure rate as a mostly constant, rating a cpu at a specific frequency+power spec is very important for system integrators and what overclocking does is smear the margins dramatically. Additionally it almost never breaks your CPU to overclock into instability (even pure frying of CPUs on LN2 is pretty rare), it just degrades future above spec operation because the spec operation has a large safety margin in place to make sure almost every part can meet the metric. 

 

It is theoretically possible for Intel to build hardware checks into their cpus for above spec operation, but that would be costly/complex/and generally not worthwhile for the tiny proportion that do overclock. It also would be possible for intel to throw your CPU into an SEM (after polishing down to whatever failure plane) and assess a likelihood of damage, but even that is very manual and expensive work. So honestly the company just doesn't bother.

 

So in the current market unless you try to get it nullified, it simply isnt worth intels time to bother checking against overclocking for warranty.

[Slottr]

-Moved to General Discussion-

OP Please read the Tech News posting guidelines

[markr54632]

On 2/29/2020 at 6:43 PM, Curufinwe_wins said:

But that's the wrong way to look at it.

 

For traditional Intel skus (things have gotten much more messy in recent days with dynamic boost algorithms) for example, the rated specs were say 10+ years operation at frequency and power spec with minimum 6 sigma failure rate. 

 

Even if you take the failure rate as a mostly constant, rating a cpu at a specific frequency+power spec is very important for system integrators and what overclocking does is smear the margins dramatically. Additionally it almost never breaks your CPU to overclock into instability (even pure frying of CPUs on LN2 is pretty rare), it just degrades future above spec operation because the spec operation has a large safety margin in place to make sure almost every part can meet the metric. 

 

It is theoretically possible for Intel to build hardware checks into their cpus for above spec operation, but that would be costly/complex/and generally not worthwhile for the tiny proportion that do overclock. It also would be possible for intel to throw your CPU into an SEM (after polishing down to whatever failure plane) and assess a likelihood of damage, but even that is very manual and expensive work. So honestly the company just doesn't bother.

 

So in the current market unless you try to get it nullified, it simply isnt worth intels time to bother checking against overclocking for warranty.

Put the warrantee aspect aside for a second, it doesnt make sense to overclock anymore. You have to pay extra for an unlocked processor, you have to pay extra for a supported chipset, when you could have just gotten the higher performance sku in the first place. 

 

Overclocking made sense when you could buy a cheap processor like an athlon 2500 for next to nothing and overclock the snot out of it. Or making cheap xeons work in consumer boards. Or when you could unlock cores in the older phenoms. It was free performance. The only cost being a certain loss of reliability and endurance.

 

If I have to pay for that, it still voids my warrantee, and it still comes with the same reliability costs what exactly is gained by modern overclocking?

 

This gets further muddied when you look at binned skus. If a clock speed is guaranteed it isnt "overclocking" anymore.

[Sakkura]

On 3/2/2020 at 9:10 PM, markr54632 said:

Put the warrantee aspect aside for a second, it doesnt make sense to overclock anymore. You have to pay extra for an unlocked processor, you have to pay extra for a supported chipset, when you could have just gotten the higher performance sku in the first place.

You don't have to pay extra for overclocking support if you pick AMD.

[Kisai]

On 3/2/2020 at 12:10 PM, markr54632 said:

Put the warrantee aspect aside for a second, it doesnt make sense to overclock anymore. You have to pay extra for an unlocked processor, you have to pay extra for a supported chipset, when you could have just gotten the higher performance sku in the first place. 

 

Overclocking made sense when you could buy a cheap processor like an athlon 2500 for next to nothing and overclock the snot out of it. Or making cheap xeons work in consumer boards. Or when you could unlock cores in the older phenoms. It was free performance. The only cost being a certain loss of reliability and endurance.

 

If I have to pay for that, it still voids my warrantee, and it still comes with the same reliability costs what exactly is gained by modern overclocking?

 

This gets further muddied when you look at binned skus. If a clock speed is guaranteed it isnt "overclocking" anymore.

Overclocking was never officially supported at any time, ever. Neither Intel or AMD want you to buy a cheaper product instead of their premium product, hence why "unlocked multipliers" on the K chips were only the highest tier parts already (i5/i7/i9). It's been quite some time since chips were manually able to be overclocked. Those higher tier parts are left unlocked because they know some portion of their customers would buy them just for benchmarking contests, while the vast majority of people who buy them, (eg Dell, HP) are using them in exactly stock configuration.