It’s not shitty, it’s fair. If damage is cause by the overclock why should the manufacturer foot the bill? You modified the product to run outside the specs!
Betch@lemmy.world 9 months ago
That’s a bit shitty but hopefully they don’t just use it as a trap to deny any warranty coverage on an overclocked CPU.
Meanwhile Intel will void your warranty if you’ve enabled XMP. I don’t know if they have a way of telling if you did so or not but they will try to trick you into admitting it when you’re asking for an RMA.
pathief@lemmy.world 9 months ago
AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world 9 months ago
The “shitty” part of it is it’s a binary one time feedback. If the fuse blows that’s it. It doesn’t matter if the CPU failed for something else the fuse can’t unblow. I don’t know what type of fuse they’re using, would it blow with any level of over clocking, or with an extreme amount, is it a time delayed fuse that requires a bunch of time over clocked or is it instant? If i want to over clock just a bit but test it at a higher clock rate before setting my desired speed will that blow the fuse? The only point of the fuse is to determine if the user “missused” their cpu at any point.
Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 9 months ago
It’s probably a collection of fuses instead of just a single one. One for xmp, one for each of the pbo options, various ones for manual OCs. I’d guess there’s tiers of how aggressive the OC is, maybe a counter for how many times it was booted with that OC enabled.
AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world 9 months ago
I wonder how much extra cost that would add to CPU production. There’s probably some cost benefit analysis looking at the saving from denying warranties to the cost of extra components on the chip.
Betch@lemmy.world 9 months ago
It’s a bit shitty because we then have to trust that they won’t use this as an excuse to void the warranty on chips that had a fatal defect to begin with. Overclocking is pretty safe unless you’re doing extreme overclocking and they won’t say how they determine if a failure was caused by an overclock or not.
It’s definitely “more fair” for AMD than Intel to do it since they don’t charge a premium for unlocked processors but I still don’t like it. They developed PBO, it’s a feature included with the CPU I bought, I want to be able to use it without fear of losing my warranty, but even just enabling that will trip that fuse.
GBU_28@lemm.ee 9 months ago
If they start selling new ones with the proper terms of sale (“overclocking voids warranty”) then there’s nothing wrong with that.
Betch@lemmy.world 9 months ago
It would definitely be within their rights to do so.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Not in every market. That wouldn’t fly in the EU. They’d only be able to deny warranty claims if they could prove that the overclock is what broke the chip
barsoap@lemm.ee 9 months ago
Dunno whether it’s uniform all over the EU but in Germany the burden of proof shifts from the manufacturer to the consumer a year after sale, that is, if you want to rely on AMD having to prove that it was the overclock you better break the thing fast.
Betch@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Probably not, it was just a way of saying that there is absolutely something wrong with that.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Reviewers really should say “ok, well if it’s not covered by warranty then we’ll just do CPU benchmarks at the minimum JDEC speeds, as the manufacturer recommends”
Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Any good reviewer should already be doing a typical non-OC’d benchmark and an OC’d benchmark anyway.
The majority of people don’t overclock so would only care about the stock performance anyway. And overclockers should recognize that if you damage the chip by pushing it too far, it shouldn’t be covered.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Most people don’t consider enabling the advertised memory clock speeds as an overclock.
We aren’t talking about taking your CPU and overclocking it. We’re talking about a simple UEFI checkbox that everyone is told to do.
Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Who the fuck is “we” here? Because the article is about CPU overlocking. I don’t give a fuck about the parent comments offhand comment about Intel. Intel is irrelevant here.
Betch@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Well what we’re talking about here is just memory speeds, not core overclocking. If you’re building a computer and you’re paying for RAM that is rated at a certain speed, you need to enable XMP to have it run at that speed. Since the memory controller is now integrated into CPUs, intel considers that overclocking so it voids your warranty. I think most people who are buying CPUs to build their own PCs know this and will not run at base JEDEC speeds.
EatYouWell@lemmy.world 9 months ago
That’s definitely not common knowledge for people who build their own PC.
Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world 9 months ago
There is literally nothing in the article about memory speeds
It’s entirely about overlocking the CPU .
Betch@lemmy.world 9 months ago
Hah yeah actually, that should become the standard for Intel CPU reviews.