Intel facing a class action lawsuit in the state of Illinois

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Insane3D

Elite Member
May 24, 2000
19,446
0
0
Ok, just curious for all of you that have "lost a little more respect from AMD everytime they see something like this", please explain. First, if I read the article correctly it is the State of Illinois that has brought the lawsuit, not AMD. Sure AMD had some comments about Intel, but nothing new there, that happens from both sides. I think it is so funny when you guys get all upset over stuff like this...it's called business people. You get this sort of thing from both sides all the time.

Also, specifically in the case of SexyK, Amused One, and ToBeMe who all said the same thing (SexyK's post), you all seem fine using RAMBUS' technology when that company has done far worse things than AMD just spouting some crap at Intel, yet you seem to be ok with that. Do you still "respect" RAMBUS for their honest and wholesome business paractices?
rolleye.gif
rolleye.gif



Geez guys, come on down from those high horses now...ok? You read way too much into things.

IMO <---Disclaimer ;)

:)
 

CubicZirconia

Diamond Member
Nov 24, 2001
5,193
0
71
Geez guys, come on down from those high horses now...ok? You read way too much into things.

It doesn't take much for some people to be swayed one way or another. Right now it seems everyone despises amd. Little things like this just add fuel to the fire.


 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
Originally posted by: CubicZirconia
Geez guys, come on down from those high horses now...ok? You read way too much into things.

It doesn't take much for some people to be swayed one way or another. Right now it seems everyone despises amd. Little things like this just add fuel to the fire.

That is because some people are stupid. Let's face it guys, anyone who looks at some arbitrary product numbers (the fact that the P4 uses "real" speed ratings makes it no more accurate than AMD's PR rating) and listens to some marketing BS deserves whatever they get. Marketing (from either the Intel or the AMD camp) is a bunch of half-truths and outright lies.

Everytime I read something like this, my respect level for AMD drops a few notches lower. If all that is true, then this is one of the biggest most pathetic cry-baby attempts at PR that i've ever seen in my life.

Kramer

Why? Are you surprised that AMD is trying to make their products sound better? It's called marketing, Intel does it too.
 

BD231

Lifer
Feb 26, 2001
10,568
138
106
Originally posted by: CubicZirconia
Geez guys, come on down from those high horses now...ok? You read way too much into things.

It doesn't take much for some people to be swayed one way or another. Right now it seems everyone despises amd. Little things like this just add fuel to the fire.

What I hate is the bullsh*t these PR teams come up with. I wish these companys put as much work into their products as they do trying to trick uninformed people into thinking their products are better than they really are.
 

BFG10K

Lifer
Aug 14, 2000
22,709
3,005
126
This has got to be one of the dumbest lawasuits I've ever seen.

AMD should be concentrating on getting the Hammer out instead of playing these silly little childish games.
 

Insane3D

Elite Member
May 24, 2000
19,446
0
0
Originally posted by: BFG10K
This has got to be one of the dumbest lawasuits I've ever seen.

AMD should be concentrating on getting the Hammer out instead of playing these silly little childish games.

Ok, I'll say it again... From the article I read, it appears the lawsuit was brought by the State of Illinois, not AMD. Am I missing something?
 

Mday

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
18,647
1
81
hehee, the same thing happened with the p4, the initial p4 were being outperformed by the regular p3s, and then when the tualatins came out, ROL... =D
 

SexyK

Golden Member
Jul 30, 2001
1,343
4
76
Also, specifically in the case of SexyK, Amused One, and ToBeMe who all said the same thing (SexyK's post), you all seem fine using RAMBUS' technology when that company has done far worse things than AMD just spouting some crap at Intel, yet you seem to be ok with that. Do you still "respect" RAMBUS for their honest and wholesome business paractices?
rolleye.gif
rolleye.gif

I guess my reply to this would be as follows:

As I've said in other threads, I think AMD makes a great product, they are finally some real competetion for Intel and have been for a while now, which is quite a feat. For that, I give them respect. That doesn't mean that I have to respect their buisness practices, and that doesn't mean I have to buy their products. For me, right now, I personally prefer Intel chips. Nothing against any AMD technology, but the benefits of the Intel route are worthwhile to me, so that's what I buy. If AMD had a chip that won me over and a stable platform to go with it, I'd buy their chip, reguardless of any marketing strategy or lawsuit. In the same vein, sure, I know RAMBUS has made some questionable moves in the past, but, again, I respect their technology, and not their buisness practices. It just so happens, that unlike AMD, RAMBUS offers a product that I personally find desireable right now, so I buy it. It doesn't mean I like what they've done, but they earned my cash through their engineering and not their PR.

So to sumarize, I'm not okay with AMD spouting crap, I'm not okay with RAMBUS spouting crap, but this is capitalism, and I'm going to support companies that give me what I want. In this case, power and stability.

Kramer
 

Insane3D

Elite Member
May 24, 2000
19,446
0
0
Originally posted by: SexyK
Also, specifically in the case of SexyK, Amused One, and ToBeMe who all said the same thing (SexyK's post), you all seem fine using RAMBUS' technology when that company has done far worse things than AMD just spouting some crap at Intel, yet you seem to be ok with that. Do you still "respect" RAMBUS for their honest and wholesome business paractices?
rolleye.gif
rolleye.gif

I guess my reply to this would be as follows:

As I've said in other threads, I think AMD makes a great product, they are finally some real competetion for Intel and have been for a while now, which is quite a feat. For that, I give them respect. That doesn't mean that I have to respect their buisness practices, and that doesn't mean I have to buy their products. For me, right now, I personally prefer Intel chips. Nothing against any AMD technology, but the benefits of the Intel route are worthwhile to me, so that's what I buy. If AMD had a chip that won me over and a stable platform to go with it, I'd buy their chip, reguardless of any marketing strategy or lawsuit. In the same vein, sure, I know RAMBUS has made some questionable moves in the past, but, again, I respect their technology, and not their buisness practices. It just so happens, that unlike AMD, RAMBUS offers a product that I personally find desireable right now, so I buy it. It doesn't mean I like what they've done, but they earned my cash through their engineering and not their PR.

So to sumarize, I'm not okay with AMD spouting crap, I'm not okay with RAMBUS spouting crap, but this is capitalism, and I'm going to support companies that give me what I want. In this case, power and stability.

Kramer

Fair enough. :)

Luckily I've found stability and power with both, so I use both. :)

 

SexyK

Golden Member
Jul 30, 2001
1,343
4
76
Fair enough. :)

Luckily I've found stability and power with both, so I use both. :)

I'm glad we can agree :D

It's easy to be cynical these days with corporate fraud so rampant, so I may be just a hint guilty of coming down a bit hard on AMD, I will admit.

Kramer
 

Tanked

Senior member
Jun 1, 2001
205
0
0
Quote
Interestingly, in the last month or so, a class action lawsuit is ongoing in the state of Illinois that says Intel has been selling lower performing processors at higher prices by implying that the new ones are superior when in fact they aren?t. It will be quite remarkable to see what resolves from this.

Why is this paragraph so confusing? Here's my interpretation:

Intel has been selling lower performing processors [Willamette-128 Celerons] at higher prices by implying the new ones are superior [Higher GHz rating] when in fact they aren't.

Am I missing something...?

And why does everyone saying this is a pathetic marketing attempt? Intel branded a inferior graphics part "extreme", which is obviously not the case, especially if it can't run some newer games. I realize that they can call it anything they want, but it's obviously misleading, and AMD is trying to inform the masses that it doesn't perform well.

Why is that so bad? You can call AMD's PR system is misleading (although, performance wise, its not), and look what Intel / Dell did to it - they said a bunch of nasty stuff about it. Same thing, either way. I don't see why it's any different.
 

videobruce

Golden Member
Nov 27, 2001
1,072
11
81
When you are dealing with a monopoly like Wintel, sometimes you have to fight fire with fire!

More power to AMD......................

Stop supporting Intel, they are grossly overrated!
 

Macro2

Diamond Member
May 20, 2000
4,874
0
0
More...


http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,104075,tk,dn081602X,00.asp

Intel, PC Makers Sued Over P4 Performance

Customers seek class action status in charge that vendors misrepresented the power of Intel's top chip.

Tom Mainelli, PCWorld.com
Friday, August 16, 2002

A small group of PC owners has quietly filed a class action lawsuit against Intel, Gateway, and Hewlett-Packard alleging the companies misled them into believing the Pentium 4 was a superior processor to Intel's own Pentium III and AMD's Athlon.

The complaint--Neubauer et al v. Intel et al--was filed June 3 in the Third Judicial Circuit in Madison County, Illinois. The case is in limbo awaiting a ruling on whether it belongs in a state or federal jurisdiction, and has not yet achieved class action status. It came to light this week after a copy of the complaint was sent to PCWorld.com anonymously.

The plaintiffs claim the companies deceived the public when marketing Intel's flagship processor and allege that it is "the material fact that there is no benefit to consumers in choosing the Pentium 4 over the Pentium III." The complaint alleges that "the Pentium 4 is less powerful and slower than the Pentium III and/or the AMD Athlon."

Thousands of Plaintiffs?

Advertisement

Noting the sheer number of P4s Intel has sold, the complaint goes on to say the "Class is so numerous that the individual joinder of all members is impracticable" and that the Class could include "hundreds of thousands of members." According to MicroDesign Resources, Intel has shipped upward of 50 million P4s since its launch in November 2000.

The complaint does not name the monetary amount sought by the plaintiffs. It does, however, cite what it says is law in California--where the companies are headquartered--that each plaintiff is entitled to actual damages, restitution of property, and punitive damages. The complaint notes that the cumulative total would be less than $75,000 each.

Attorneys Stephen M. Tillery and Aaron M. Zigler of the law firm Carr Korein Tillery in St. Louis, Missouri, filed the complaint on behalf of five plaintiffs. The firm declines to comment about the case, but Zigler confirms the June 3 filing.

Intel and Gateway executives also decline to comment on the complaint, citing company policies regarding ongoing litigation. HP did not return calls seeking comment.

The plaintiffs do not appear to be accusing Intel of lying about the P4's clock speed, says Rob Enderle, a research fellow with Giga Information Group. They're complaining about the P4's performance, and that's a crucial element to the case's viability, he says. "As long as the market is going after megahertz, and Intel is reporting the correct megahertz, then I do not think this is actionable," he says. "Megahertz is misleading, but that has to do with the fact that the industry doesn't use benchmarks."

MHz Myth?
PCWorld.com's own reviews have shown AMD Athlon-based PCs often keep pace with or beat P4-based systems that have faster clock speeds, as measured by the PC WorldBench benchmark (which focuses mainly on standard office applications). However, the P4 has tended to perform better on certain computationally intensive tasks, such as video processing, in those same PC WorldBench tests.

In recent months, thanks to ever-increasing clock speeds and improvements to supporting technologies, P4-based PCs have started to outrun Athlon XP-based systems under PC WorldBench. For example, in a recent test of each company's top CPUs, a system with Intel's 2.53-GHz P4 edged past a PC with an Athlon XP 2100+ chip (running at 1.73 GHz) in PC WorldBench 4.

Analyst Enderle thinks the PC industry should throw out megahertz altogether as a system of measuring performance. The actual clock speed matters less than the overall system performance, he says.

"The right answer really is benchmarks," he says. "We need to have a way that people can really see the difference between PCs."

In fact, in the tech industry several benchmarks have achieved enough coverage to qualify as industry standards. However, it's unlikely any one benchmark would satisfy the legion of vendors that build the components of any one PC.

AMD took matters into its own hands with its launch of the Athlon XP processor last October, when it also introduced a new naming convention that attaches faster-sounding names to AMD's slower-running chips. Results have been mixed
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,402
8,574
126
theres that whole "download and run webpages faster" crock that a certain company put into consumers heads too.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,999
308
126
Come to think of it, there are alot of Pentium 4 1.3GHz processors out there that were touted as "higher performing" parts. Most were paired with PC600 RDRAM because that was the cheapest Intel supported memory at the time, while the benchmarks in their ads cited performance with PC800 memory! Perhaps that is the problem?
 

BD231

Lifer
Feb 26, 2001
10,568
138
106
I dont think any one event caused this lawsuit, it has to do more with ALL the many missleading events that took place. When AMD hit home and took the crown from Intel, thats when all the miss information was crocked up about the P4 and its been going on ever since. I know computer companys have to produce convincing marketing scheems, and doing so always leads them to lying or turning attention to weak points in their competitors products, but Intel has ripped off ALOT of people who dont know any better. People go into a store thinking their getting the best of the best and come out with a product that at times, cant even hold a light to its predecessors best offerings. I think Intel has gotten away with it for so long now because of new memory technologys and the fact that alot of the people who are being ripped off have no idea their machine is not worth what they paid for. The fact that more power is not really needed for your day to day office work is a big one to. Kind of hard to tell there's a speed difference in your typing/internet program. Intel has been way to deceptive this time around.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,402
8,574
126
Originally posted by: MadRat
Come to think of it, there are alot of Pentium 4 1.3GHz processors out there that were touted as "higher performing" parts. Most were paired with PC600 RDRAM because that was the cheapest Intel supported memory at the time, while the benchmarks in their ads cited performance with PC800 memory! Perhaps that is the problem?

how bout p4 + sdram? heheh my old roommate was in disbelief when i showed him the benchmarks from those setups, and hes a rather computer savvy person.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,999
308
126
So is showing the CPU with the ultimate memory setup misleading when the system contains otherwise? Intel showing benchmarks with PC800 doesn't say the customer is buying the same memory and chipset as the test machine, it merely shows the potential of the CPU. If they are touting their system against a competing system and then show each with its own ultimate setup then is this also misleading?

If that is the case then alot of manufacturers are lying, too. Oh, boy, we may have just scratched the surface when it comes to the CPU market. If I was any high technology manufacturer I'd be leary of the outcome in this lawsuit, good or bad.
 

Natej

Member
Mar 14, 2002
86
0
0
You Intel guys are just mad because the truth is out. I hate intel and microjerks equally. Both are overpriced and overrated.
 

LikeLinus

Lifer
Jul 25, 2001
11,518
670
126
I use AMD now in all my machines but my Server (which is dual 800mhz P3). I love the chips performance and their pricing also. But damn can the company not just shut their mouth and sell a product. Lousy doesn't even begin to start describing their PR department. They have the worst marketing and advertising.

Intel might mislead their customers to some extend also, but damn atleast they are smart about it! AMD acts like retards half the time.
 

crypticlogin

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2001
4,047
0
0
If you happen to visit the Intel website and look for information on the 845G/GL chipsets, you will notice that there is a lengthy list of games that do not run at all on the integrated graphics core. These include games like Madden 2002 and Tiger Woods Golf 2002 ? not exactly the most strenuous of video games.
Wait, what? Unless I'm looking at the wrong list (I'm looking at this one), Intel notes those games having some visual screwups but that's a far, far cry from "do not run at all."

(tongue-in-cheek) And I know no game ever needed an nVidia or ATI patch.
 

Tanked

Senior member
Jun 1, 2001
205
0
0
Quote by LikeLinus01

I use AMD now in all my machines but my Server (which is dual 800mhz P3). I love the chips performance and their pricing also. But damn can the company not just shut their mouth and sell a product. Lousy doesn't even begin to start describing their PR department. They have the worst marketing and advertising.

Intel might mislead their customers to some extend also, but damn atleast they are smart about it! AMD acts like retards half the time.


"But damn can the company not just shut their mouth and sell a product?"

AMD has been extremely good about keeping their mouth shut in the past. Intel has been misleading the entire industry for at least 10 years, and let's not forget Intel's "FUD Machine" that they've used before.

Want some examples? Sure...

The infamous 486SX - purposely crippled by removing the FPU, then Intel sold a complete 486DX chip remarked as a "487SX", so the user ended up buying two chips instead of one.
The 486DX4 - Only had a 3x multiplier but Intel called it a "DX4" so it sounded more powerful then IBM's 486DX3.
Intel's migration to Slot processors - Intel stated that they moved to the Slot 1 platform because "socketed designs would not allow above 300 MHz operation". Of course, as soon as Slot 1 became popular, they switched back to sockets.
The P4 - This one has been beaten to death, and we all know that the P4 (at least a Willamette) has a high GHz rating but poor performance.
"Netburst" - Highly implying that the P4 will make your Internet experience better, or a better connection. We all know this is untrue.
Misc. - I've seen Intel ads in gaming magazines describing how "The Pentium 4 maximizes your gaming experience, delivering split-second hit detection and reaction times". So will any other processor on the planet.

While Intel does have a good marketing strategy, they have mislead more people then most other companies, and AMD does not come even close.

Also remember that AMD did not file the lawsuit.

 

SexyK

Golden Member
Jul 30, 2001
1,343
4
76
I don't understand why people think the P4 is in any way misleading. It was designed to ramp up in clockspeed. Sure at first it performed like crap, but the P60 and P66 were crap also compared to the later chips in the series, and the PPro was nothing compared to the tualitin, even though they are the same basic cores. The P4 isn't marketed as the fastest chip out there based on clock speed alone people, look at the scores, the P4 is the fastest chip out there right now. To say "we all know that the P4 (at least a Willamette) has a high GHz rating but poor performance" is ludacris in the here and now. The Willamette is dead and gone, the truly poor performers of the family (1.4 and 1.5GHz chips, the 1.3GHz was only available to OEMs for a very very short time) were gone about 6 mothns after the chip was introduced. Since then every chip has offered competitive performace, and lately have offered dominant performance.

If you think the Intel PR guys went over to the engineers and said "hey make sure the new arcitecture is designed only for MHz, not for real power. K thx!" then you're fooling yourself. Intel knows what they are doing, and to make a decision about the architecture that they will ride for the next 5 or 6 years based on PR concerns is not something they would do. Right now, AMDs chips cannot physically compare to the clock speed or performace of a P4 at the high end, and to insinuate that Intel has somehow broken the law by a) designing a chip for the future that AMD hasn't been able to keep pace with lately and b)having the capability to move to new technology (like .13u and soon .09u) faster is pretty dumb.

Kramer