AMD getting sued (allegedly) for faulty notebook chips. Source is eweek.com.

[Arkadrel]

But how can this relate to what happened to Nvidia a few years back?

It cant, because that happend to all the OEM venders... they all had chips that died.

In this case, its just 1 OEM out of many, that didnt have issues.

why does the 1 OEM have them then? cuz they didnt follow specs like the other OEMs did, they cut corners to save $.

 

[notty22]

The ATI days just officially stopped in late 2010.

I have a 2005 Sony 15.6 laptop with a ATI 9200 that cooked itself to death, I'd love to be able to send it somewhere for anything !

 

[96Firebird]

Now when you say OEM, do you mean the brands like ASUS, HP, Apple, etc...?

From what I gathered, Quanta makes the boards and everything that they sell to these other companies. Or do they have their own division that sells directly to customers?

It is the largest manufacturer of notebook computers in the world.[1] Its customers include Apple Inc., Compaq, Dell, Gateway, Hewlett-Packard,[2] Alienware, Amazon.com, Casper, Cisco, Fujitsu, Gericom, Lenovo, LG, Maxdata, MPC, Research In Motion, Sharp Corporation, Siemens AG, Sony, Sun Microsystems, and Toshiba.

Wikipedia

As the world's largest laptop ODM manufacturer, one out of every three laptop PC in the world is manufactured by QUANTA. That's why all the top ten PC companies in the world have chosen Quanta as their ODM partner.

Quanta's website

 

[Firestorm007]

This thread had one purpose only and I don't think it was to inform the consumer. What's that line about a sheep and clothing again?


Derailment and insinuating nefarious intentions on the thread starter. Seriously, you guys know we don't allow personal attacks and derailment right? How can a combo be acceptable, then?

Moderator jvroig

 

[Keysplayr]

I have difficulty believing that the ABT link was posted in good faith, given the baiting about Anandtech forum posters contained in that thread.

Did you think this would do anything other than spark a flame-thread, Keys?

I would imagine that this thread would be perceived as a "flame-thread" by those who might have an interest in protecting the theoretical "flame-ee". Whoever you think that might be.
If this isn't the case then I cannot imagine what issue you might have with it. It's a linked to, published article that came to my attention first while browsing ABT. If you or any other member here has an issue with linking to articles or discussions on other forums, then I think you, and they, should report that you have an issue with it.

Thanks,

Keys

 

[Kenmitch]

This thread had one purpose only and I don't think it was to inform the consumer. What's that line about a sheep and clothing again?

I'd agree....Intent was not honorable and most likely was to cause infractions, temp banning, etc.

As far as the topic goes....I'd lean more towards Quanta being at fault than ATI. But without all the details it's hard to make a call on who is trully at fault.


Re: Intent was not honorable and most likely was to cause infractions, temp banning, etc.

This is also not acceptable. Not only are you continuing a thread derail, you are also participating in an attack against the thread-starter through a discussion of something intangible such as "intent". If we played that kind of game, every other member can do the same to you simply by saying "the intent of the poster is to defend AMD at all costs". See how simple but extremely unproductive this behavior is?

Moderator jvroig

 

[Madcatatlas]

I'd agree....Intent was not honorable and most likely was to cause infractions, temp banning, etc.

As far as the topic goes....I'd lean more towards Quanta being at fault than ATI. But without all the details it's hard to make a call on who is trully at fault.

I completely agree. how the intent behind this topic could be anything but flamebait is beyond me. Someone objective and with a clue about the actual problem hinted to, trough a link to another forum where there is also flamebait, should make a topic with the case itself as the main ingrediant.


Re: "how the intent behind this topic could be anything but flamebait"

Again, not acceptable. See mod note in the post above.

Guys, this is crazy. I hope this is just some temporary post-Christmas insanity brought on by too much egg-nog.

No personal attacks. No thread derails.

Attack the message, not the messenger.

Moderator jvroig

 

[Keysplayr]

I completely agree. how the intent behind this topic could be anything but flamebait is beyond me. Someone objective and with a clue about the actual problem hinted to, trough a link to another forum where there is also flamebait, should make a topic with the case itself as the main ingrediant.

I believe that "someone objective and with a clue about the actual problem" would actually be commenting on the thread content. Not about why they "think" the thread was created. At least discuss what the topic is.

 

[MrK6]

I believe that "someone objective and with a clue about the actual problem" would actually be commenting on the thread content. Not about why they "think" the thread was created. At least discuss what the topic is.

Stop deflecting.

Oh, and Quantas is bad, m'kay?

 

[Flipped Gazelle]

What happened to this thread... Hopefully it gets cleaned up, I went from reading a discussion about AMD chips frying (I think?) to ABT being the devil. Nice to know the attacks haven't stopped...

Anyways, to get back to the topic at hand, is this similar to what happened with Nvidia and their laptop chop problems a while back? I'm not really familiar with what happened, just that they had to pay out a sum of money and free laptops for the victims followed. Did those original problematic laptops not have sufficient cooling, like some claim happened here? Placing the blame on the laptop designer?

IIRC, the Nvidia 8x00 GPU issue was a result of poor soldering, so the cycle of power-on/power-off eventually damaged the chip

I have a Dell Vostro 1500 with a 8600m GT from this time frame, and so far it's been fine, 4 yrs old.

 

[railven]

Reading from the original post, the object in both links are provided for discussion. Once is an article on a heating issue on legacy chipsets from AMD/ATI and the other is about the same but riddled with anti-ATF banter and accussations of it's posters.

Both topics are being discussed from what I'm seeing. It seems just from my light browsing about the ABT forums - there is a serious hate for the posters on this forum. It's amazing, do people who post here leave to post there just to talk smack that they can't post here because they'd get infracted? Most be the bias moderation/administration over there.


For the record this thread is about AMD and Quanta, not about ABT.

ABT was cited in the OP as "credit to where I came across it". No different than threads started in CPU where the OP credits XS or [H] as being the forum where they came across the topic.

Administrator Idontcare

 

[Kenmitch]

I believe that "someone objective and with a clue about the actual problem" would actually be commenting on the thread content. Not about why they "think" the thread was created. At least discuss what the topic is.

Somewhat in your defense.

Nope, but I might get a 7950 down the road a piece.

The timing is the key issue with the topic that is and isn't being discussed currently.

Those whom like Nvidia seem to post topics to make AMD look bad just before a release of a new product. Those who like AMD do just the opposite. These kinda threads with subjective content/intentions don't help the community at all.

Who's at fault Quanta? AMD? Most likely we will never get enough data to make a logical decision.

 

[Madcatatlas]

Please head over to this http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=32818423#post32818423 topic for a fresh start at discussing a the actual case, and not some flamebait within a flamebait.


No, this is not acceptable. We do not intentionally hijack a thread and repost it just because a vocal handful of miscreants crap all over the existing one.

When people speed on the highway the state police don't shut down the highway and build another one devoid of speeders. You cite the speeders and deter repeat behavior as well as copy-cat behavior.

Administrator Idontcare

 

[Keysplayr]

Stop deflecting.

Oh, and Quantas is bad, m'kay?

Stop what?

 

[96Firebird]

IIRC, the Nvidia 8x00 GPU issue was a result of poor soldering, so the cycle of power-on/power-off eventually damaged the chip

I have a Dell Vostro 1500 with a 8600m GT from this time frame, and so far it's been fine, 4 yrs old.

Now I'm even more confused, did Nvidia provide a whole board with the chip on it, or just a chip? I can't see how poor soldering of the chip onto the board is Nvidia's fault if they just ship the silicon chip...

Edit - Seems I should research before posting... Are we talking about something like this, where the chip is soldered to the small green PCB, and then that is shipped to the laptop maker?

http://news.softpedia.com/newsImage/Nvidia-Officially-Launches-the-500M-Mobile-GPU-Family-2.jpg/

 

[tincart]

Edit - Seems I should research before posting... Are we talking about something like this, where the chip is soldered to the small green PCB, and then that is shipped to the laptop maker?

http://news.softpedia.com/newsImage/Nvidia-Officially-Launches-the-500M-Mobile-GPU-Family-2.jpg/

Yes.

 

[Keysplayr]

IIRC, the Nvidia 8x00 GPU issue was a result of poor soldering, so the cycle of power-on/power-off eventually damaged the chip

I have a Dell Vostro 1500 with a 8600m GT from this time frame, and so far it's been fine, 4 yrs old.

Yeah, I have a Dell Vostro 1500 also with the 8600m GT. The Seagate hard drive it came with died about two years ago, and I replaced it with a 250GB Hitachi. Still running fine.
I have not owned any product with the chips in this thread topic however.

 

[96Firebird]

Yes.

Thanks, always good to learn something. :thumbsup:

 

[jvroig]

I'm not even finished reviewing the thread, discussing with my peers, and giving out necessary warnings and/or infractions, but this thread just keeps on delivering the wrong posts.

Ok, here's how it will go. Beyond this mod post, the discussions must be about Quanta, AMD, source / reason behind the supposed faulty chips, cooling or lack of cooling, etc.

I don't want to see any meta-discussions about intent, or butthurt, or whatever else outside of the topic. Continue to do so at your own peril, this serves as your official warning. If this thread makes you angry, don't participate, or better yet, enlighten the rest of the community by contributing meaningful posts regarding the actual topic. Do not make this an anti-Keys ranting place, nor an anti-ABT ranting thread.

Moderator jvroig

 

[Phynaz]

nevermind

 

[Attic]

It is worth considering that this thread title is an intentional knock on the eve of the 7970 release.

The link in the OP links directly to an article that makes clear indication that the chips in the lawsuit are Notebook chips and yet the thread title here makes a clear ommission of this important fact. Given the circumstances and affiliation of the poster this is a red flag.

The article name from the link
"Quanta Sues AMD Over Alleged Faulty Notebook Chips"
Comparing the thread title here as chosen by the TS
"AMD getting sued (allegedly) for faulty chips. Source is eweek.com. Link in OP"

The thread title should reflect more clearly the specifics of the topic, especially given that it went to such great lengths to mention the specifics of everything besides the fact that the issue is regarding notebook chips.


The most important piece in the article to me is,

Silverman also noted that there have been no other complaints—from Quanta or other systems makers—regarding the chip in question, which he said AMD no longer sells.

It is cicumspect that a chip used by many system makers and in different environments is only bringing complaints from Quanta. It's reasonable to expect that if the chip was faulty there would be universal complaints.

When nVidia had to settle regarding faulty notebook chips there were complaints and issues with Dell, HP, Gateway. The nVidia quadro NVS110M had numerous failure rates across multiple manufacturers product line up. If the video issues were only being reported by gateway,but yet dell and HP sold 10's of thousands of systems using this chip I think it would be reasonable to assume that gateway was either fabricating issues or was themselves responsible due to their system design for the issues in their notebooks.

Regarding this lawsuit from Quanta, why should we believe a chip used in numerous scenarios is faulty based on evidence that shows the Quanta is the only commonality to failure being reported and not the chip itself. The lack of any issue with these chips regarding their use by other builders is meaningful.


The first three sentences of this post are not acceptable. It is threadcrap and insult.

Administrator Idontcare

 

[Lonbjerg]

It is worth considering that this thread title is an intentional knock on the eve of the 7970 release.

The link in the OP links directly to an article that makes clear indication that the chips in the lawsuit are Notebook chips and yet the thread title here makes a clear ommission of this important fact. Given the circumstances and affiliation of the poster this is a red flag.

The article name from the link
"Quanta Sues AMD Over Alleged Faulty Notebook Chips"
Comparing the thread title here as chosen by the TS
"AMD getting sued (allegedly) for faulty chips. Source is eweek.com. Link in OP"

The thread title should reflect more clearly the specifics of the topic, especially given that it went to such great lengths to mention the specifics of everything besides the fact that the issue is regarding notebook chips.


The most important piece in the article to me is,


It is cicumspect that a chip used by many system makers and in different environments is only bringing complaints from Quanta. It's reasonable to expect that if the chip was faulty there would be universal complaints.

When nVidia had to settle regarding faulty notebook chips there were complaints and issues with Dell, HP, Gateway. The nVidia quadro NVS110M had numerous failure rates across multiple manufacturers product line up. If the video issues were only being reported by gateway,but yet dell and HP sold 10's of thousands of systems using this chip I think it would be reasonable to assume that gateway was either fabricating issues or was themselves responsible due to their system design for the issues in their notebooks.

Regarding this lawsuit from Quanta, why should we believe a chip used in numerous scenarios is faulty based on evidence that shows the Quanta is the only commonality to failure being reported and not the chip itself. The lack of any issue with these chips regarding their use by other builders is meaningful.

Right now we have word against word.
I would be carefull to point the finger anyway before the legal battle is over or settled.

 

[Keysplayr]

Nobody's perfect. That doesn't exclude corporations. They all stumble once in a while.

 

[blastingcap]

It is worth considering that this thread title is an intentional knock on the eve of the 7970 release.

The link in the OP links directly to an article that makes clear indication that the chips in the lawsuit are Notebook chips and yet the thread title here makes a clear ommission of this important fact. Given the circumstances and affiliation of the poster this is a red flag.

The article name from the link
"Quanta Sues AMD Over Alleged Faulty Notebook Chips"
Comparing the thread title here as chosen by the TS
"AMD getting sued (allegedly) for faulty chips. Source is eweek.com. Link in OP"

The thread title should reflect more clearly the specifics of the topic, especially given that it went to such great lengths to mention the specifics of everything besides the fact that the issue is regarding notebook chips.


The most important piece in the article to me is,


It is cicumspect that a chip used by many system makers and in different environments is only bringing complaints from Quanta. It's reasonable to expect that if the chip was faulty there would be universal complaints.

When nVidia had to settle regarding faulty notebook chips there were complaints and issues with Dell, HP, Gateway. The nVidia quadro NVS110M had numerous failure rates across multiple manufacturers product line up. If the video issues were only being reported by gateway,but yet dell and HP sold 10's of thousands of systems using this chip I think it would be reasonable to assume that gateway was either fabricating issues or was themselves responsible due to their system design for the issues in their notebooks.

Regarding this lawsuit from Quanta, why should we believe a chip used in numerous scenarios is faulty based on evidence that shows the Quanta is the only commonality to failure being reported and not the chip itself. The lack of any issue with these chips regarding their use by other builders is meaningful.

Yeah the fact that nobody else is experiencing the same problem, after all this time, says something.

 

[Madcatatlas]

I am extremely unhappy with the moderation or better yet, lack of moderation and reaction to what is so very obviously a flamebait.

I and several others have been given infractions for not overlooking such obvious flamebaiting when there was, and still is, NO moderator reaction to the flamebaiting.

I do feel butthurt indeed...

Keysplayr is per the words of Idontcare, to be regarded as any other member while in this forum, and his flamebaiting should be treated like any other flamebaiting, with a reaction.

Madcat

I grow weary of saying this, moderation issues belong in Moderation Discussions. If you're going to beat your chest in public like an ape, don't be surprised if we throw you in a cage like one as a result.
-ViRGE