Anyone ever RMA an intel CPU?

[bryanW1995]

I would be fine ethically if you were up front with what you did that killed it and they replaced it anyway. I'm guessing that doesn't happen much and they could be on a don't ask don't tell policy for public relations reasons.

yes, I agree, this is the real problem. some people would be honest about this, most would not. I personally wouldn't have a problem calling them to say "i put 1.5v on my d0 i7 920 and it fried 2 days later, was I out of line?", but to many of us $300 is a lot of money and just hard to walk away from. Would I have done that in college? I'd like to think i would, but honestly I would have bought a $50 cpu back then instead of $300.

speaking of those old college days, I remember using a 486 sx 25 for a while and thinking "boy this is FAST". I wonder if I could trade my d0 i7 920 for an equivalent computing ability of 486 sx 25's? hmmm...

 

[Cogman]

it is EXTREMELY rare for someone to get a "bad" cpu. Thus it is somewhat rare for someone to (legitimately) RMA a CPU.

 

[utnorris]

I one billion percent agree with this. So often do I see reports of someone RMA a part that they overclocked. If overclocking is included in the warrenty (EVGA + Others?) then I really don't have a problem, but most vendors are not that lenient.

So the fact that the all mother boards come with overclocking capability means it still your fault if a chip dies because of overclocking? And I am not talking LN2, but something like Asus turbo boost or EVGA's "Dummy Overclock" features.

They may not be, but it's still dishonest and costs more for everyone in the long run.

RMA's, aka failures, are already built into the cost, whether you use it or not.

well now I feel bad because I didn't really think about it when I RMA'd it (the costs or the fact oc'ing would void it)

Don't feel bad. Do you think companies feel bad when they release an item with a known issue, i.e. AMD's chip issue two years ago or Intel's bad FW on their SSD. These all cost the consumer time and money, which they did not compensate people for. So, no I do not feel bad when I RMA a part because it was overclocked. If it was extreme, such as LN2 or some crazy voltage that put it way out of specs, then that's different, but a mild overclock I do not even hesitate. And as far as overclocking goes, my 980x comes with an unlocked multi, but Intel does not advertise it as being designed for overclocking even though they know and you know that's what it is for.

People need to stop worrying about what other people do and worry about themselves first. If you walk on water, by all means preach away, otherwise stop trying to make folks feel guilty about something that every company has excepted as the norm.

 

[Vesku]

Utnorris, if you run a chip outside it's advertised specifications and it breaks then yes it's your responsibility. Sure you can try to RMA it but I would not fault Intel or AMD for denying the RMA if they found clear signs of the CPU being run heavily outside it's parameters. Now, if it was a Black Edition or K series that wouldn't apply as they are specifically selling to the overclocking market. I'd think the same applies to a thousand dollar chip with no locked multiplier.

 

[Markfw]

it is EXTREMELY rare for someone to get a "bad" cpu. Thus it is somewhat rare for someone to (legitimately) RMA a CPU.

+1

I have owned probably 50-60 cpus in the last 15 years, and the only 2 that died were out of warranty (Athlon XP 2400's both), and never overclocked.

I even has Duron 700's, Intel 200mmx and a few other chips that all work !