Is this fraud?

[galego]

Following moderator advice, I am moving this to a new thread.

Up to is actually a legal term. And its marketed by its base clock.
Example:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-900X3D-13-3-inch-Laptop-Silver/dp/B009SJCZF2

Do you see the difference between these two?
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...048&CatId=8741

Vs

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...kp5M6qHVe8lWEg

One of them is commiting fraud....

Since the 5Ghz is due to turbo, all kinds of restrictions apply. Its a 4.7Ghz chip. And the only correct marketing method is to call it up to 5Ghz. Since you cant garantee 5Ghz all the time when needed, but only 4.7Ghz.

Its already a settled case with plenty of examples. Also why no ISP here dare to sell you, say a 20Mbit DSl line. Simply because they cant garantee you 20Mbit. Instead they will sell you a "Up to 20mbit". Assuming you are not in the category for a lower product.

I am quite sure your 3770K clocks down to 1.6Ghz and not 1.5Ghz. However when needed in any situation that demands it, your 3770K will be able to do 3.5Ghz. I cant imagine why you even try to compare the two scenarios.

If AMD really tries to sell it as a 5Ghz CPU. It will end up as a police case here. And I assume its why we see the 9590 labelled sofar as 4.7Ghz in EU countries.

Only one of your TD links works and it is advertising an intel chip as

Intel Core i7-4770K Processor - Quad Core, 8MB L3 Cache, 3.5GHz, 84W, Fan, Unlocked Multiplier, 1250 MHz Graphics Core Speed (BX80646I74770K)

That is a turbo speed. The core base speed is of 350 MHz. There is not "up to". Therefore, I assume that you consider that Intel chips are being advertised/sold fraudulently. No?

Note:
4.7GHz vs 5.0GHz -> 6% more
350MHz vs 1250MHz -> 257% more

 

[guskline]

galego, I don't understand the "Is this fraud" question. Specifically, I doubt a fraud claim will hold up in the U.S. concerning either the FX 9370 OR the FX 9590 because they both do actually run at the advertised speeds sometimes. IF the ad says the 9590 ALWAYS runs at 5 ghz then, yes, that is untrue.

Personally, I wouldn't get too bothered about such caustic claims of fraud. I learned along time ago that claiming fraud and "proving" fraud are much different things.

Goodness, both AMD and Intel have enough lawyers at their disposal to fight this out. If there was real merit in the claim that the AMD advertising the 9590 as a 5 Ghz chip was fraudulent, I would bet all the tea in China that Intel's attorneys would have already been in court ( or perhaps they don't care because they don't want to give AMD free publicity). Either way, proving fraud is a high standard.

I know some posters on this forum HATE car analogies but I thought about a 4 cylinder turbo-charged engine as an example. When the manufacturer tells you the horsepower they don't say "up to" when mentioning it even though the engine doesn't usually produce that much horsepower until the turbo kicks in. Perhaps the fraud standard is different in the EU.

PS: I defer to others about standards in the EU.

 

[ShintaiDK]

350Mhz is the idle speed of the GPU....

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Someone should do an Anandtech timeline.

 

[Tsavo]

350Mhz is the idle speed of the GPU....

My 3570K now has a rough idle....I think the bit injectors are dirty, might as well do a CPU oil change while I'm in there.

 

[Idontcare]

galego, I don't understand the "Is this fraud" question. Specifically, I doubt a fraud claim will hold up in the U.S. concerning either the FX 9370 OR the FX 9590 because they both do actually run at the advertised speeds sometimes. IF the ad says the 9590 ALWAYS runs at 5 ghz then, yes, that is untrue.

There must be loads of wiggle room in the legal sense with this stuff because even a processor like the 3770k marketed as 3.5GHz doesn't actually run at 3.5GHz.

It is always moving around do to the spread spectrum settings that intentionally force the clockspeed to be a moving target over time.

So it might be 3.49GHz one minute (under load) and 3.51GHz the next.

Likewise when the processor gets advertised as a 22nm processor (or 32nm in AMD's case)...there isn't anything in the processor that is 22nm per se (except by unintended coincidence when something just so happens to line up that way) and yet there are no class action lawsuits over it against Intel or AMD.

So just how wide are the tolerance bands for this kind of stuff before it becomes actionable in a legal sense? I'm guessing wide enough to cover everything we are seeing here and then some.

 

[frozentundra123456]

There must be loads of wiggle room in the legal sense with this stuff because even a processor like the 3770k marketed as 3.5GHz doesn't actually run at 3.5GHz.

It is always moving around do to the spread spectrum settings that intentionally force the clockspeed to be a moving target over time.

So it might be 3.49GHz one minute (under load) and 3.51GHz the next.

Likewise when the processor gets advertised as a 22nm processor (or 32nm in AMD's case)...there isn't anything in the processor that is 22nm per se (except by unintended coincidence when something just so happens to line up that way) and yet there are no class action lawsuits over it against Intel or AMD.

So just how wide are the tolerance bands for this kind of stuff before it becomes actionable in a legal sense? I'm guessing wide enough to cover everything we are seeing here and then some.

At least in the US, the short answer is: no, it is not fraud. There is no law saying what clock you have to advertise, so legally they are safe.

OTOH, it is deceptive, in that in the vast majority of cases, processors are advertised by their base clocks, not the turbo clocks. Actually though, is seems to me that this is "much ado about nothing", as the performance of the chip is what it is, regardless of the advertised clockspeed, and it also seems that retail availability of the 9590 has dried up anyway.

Edit: I also agree with guskline, that the whole thread seems pointless, as at least in the US it is obviously not something AMD will get sued for, and it has been discussed already in another thread.

 

[galego]

galego, I don't understand the "Is this fraud" question. Specifically, I doubt a fraud claim will hold up in the U.S. concerning either the FX 9370 OR the FX 9590 because they both do actually run at the advertised speeds sometimes. IF the ad says the 9590 ALWAYS runs at 5 ghz then, yes, that is untrue.

Personally, I wouldn't get too bothered about such caustic claims of fraud. I learned along time ago that claiming fraud and "proving" fraud are much different things.

Goodness, both AMD and Intel have enough lawyers at their disposal to fight this out. If there was real merit in the claim that the AMD advertising the 9590 as a 5 Ghz chip was fraudulent, I would bet all the tea in China that Intel's attorneys would have already been in court ( or perhaps they don't care because they don't want to give AMD free publicity). Either way, proving fraud is a high standard.

I know some posters on this forum HATE car analogies but I thought about a 4 cylinder turbo-charged engine as an example. When the manufacturer tells you the horsepower they don't say "up to" when mentioning it even though the engine doesn't usually produce that much horsepower until the turbo kicks in. Perhaps the fraud standard is different in the EU.

PS: I defer to others about standards in the EU.

I agree with you and others in the other thread on that there is no fraud. But one poster claims that there is fraud in his country. And if I understood him correctly he claims that will be considered fraud in the entire EU.

350Mhz is the idle speed of the GPU....

No. 350MHz is the base graphics frequency. 1250MHz is the turbo graphics frequency.

Is advertising turbo for GPUs considered fraud in your country? Or it is only fraud for CPUs?

There must be loads of wiggle room in the legal sense with this stuff because even a processor like the 3770k marketed as 3.5GHz doesn't actually run at 3.5GHz.

It is always moving around do to the spread spectrum settings that intentionally force the clockspeed to be a moving target over time.

So it might be 3.49GHz one minute (under load) and 3.51GHz the next.

Likewise when the processor gets advertised as a 22nm processor (or 32nm in AMD's case)...there isn't anything in the processor that is 22nm per se (except by unintended coincidence when something just so happens to line up that way) and yet there are no class action lawsuits over it against Intel or AMD.

So just how wide are the tolerance bands for this kind of stuff before it becomes actionable in a legal sense? I'm guessing wide enough to cover everything we are seeing here and then some.

An 1% variation in the clock speed is within the tolerances of the fabrication in series. That is different to what is being discussed here: Advertising a 257% higher graphics frecuency, without noticing that is a turbo frequency or adding an "up to" legal label that the other poster claims is required by law in EU countries.

The 22nm are also a different issue, because there is not definition to what those 22nm are measuring. However, some people has noted that intel nanometer is larger than everyone else nanometer used in the industry. That is that their 22nm are more close to others 28nm.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Is advertising turbo for GPUs considered fraud in your country? Or it is only fraud for CPUs?

It covers both.

And as you can see on these examples. Its correctly advertised:
http://www.komplett.dk/k/ki.aspx?sku=780483#extra
http://www.proshop.dk/CPU/Intel-Core-i7-4770K-Haswell-Box-2414177.html#Spec
http://www.mylemon.at/artikel/intel/bx80646i74770k/cpu-core-i7-4770k-3.html

Thats the benefit of living in a place that cares about consumers. And hence why there are no 5Ghz AMD FX CPUs, but only a top 4.7Ghz FX-9590. Maybe AMD could try disable some modules to actually hit 5Ghz in a way they could also sell it as so.

But considering its released 3 days ago and nothing to see. Perhaps it was just all paper. Then no consumers would get cheated.

 

[galego]

It covers both.

And as you can see on these examples. Its correctly advertised:
http://www.komplett.dk/k/ki.aspx?sku=780483#extra
http://www.proshop.dk/CPU/Intel-Core-i7-4770K-Haswell-Box-2414177.html#Spec
http://www.mylemon.at/artikel/intel/bx80646i74770k/cpu-core-i7-4770k-3.html

Ok. I can see both the base (350 MHz) and the turbo frequency (1250 MHz) are advertised. However, the tigerdirect link that you gave before only advertise the 4770k by its turbo speed and the base frequency is not mentioned.

Being consistent with your own words (quoted above) they are "commiting fraud".

 

[ShintaiDK]

Ok. I can see both the base (350 MHz) and the turbo frequency (1250 MHz) are advertised. However, the tigerdirect link that you gave before only advertise the 4770k by its turbo speed and the base frequency is not mentioned.

Being consistent with your own words (quoted above) they are "commiting fraud".

AMD markets it as the first 5Ghz CPU, yet its not. TD sells it as 5Ghz.

So yes, both are commiting fraud. Its only a matter if the places they commit fraud got any laws in terms of punishment.

 

[Sweepr]

This might help:

AMD Unleashes First-Ever 5 GHz Processor

AMD (NYSE: AMD) today unveiled its most powerful member of the legendary AMD FX family of CPUs, the world’s first commercially available 5 GHz CPU processor, the AMD FX-9590. These 8-core CPUs deliver new levels of gaming and multimedia performance for desktop enthusiasts. AMD FX-9000 Series CPUs will be available initially in PCs through system integrators.

“At E3 this week, AMD demonstrated why it is at the core of gaming,” said Bernd Lienhard, corporate vice president and general manager, Client Products Division at AMD. “The new FX 5 GHz processor is an emphatic performance statement to the most demanding gamers seeking ultra-high resolution experiences including AMD Eyefinity technology. This is another proud innovation for AMD in delivering the world’s first commercially available 5 GHz processor.”

 

[ShintaiDK]

This might help:

I am quite aware AMD likes to lie in their PR material.

You could buy commercial 5Ghz CPUs since...2007?

 

[Mushkins]

An 1% variation in the clock speed is within the tolerances of the fabrication in series. That is different to what is being discussed here: Advertising a 257% higher graphics frecuency, without noticing that is a turbo frequency or adding an "up to" legal label that the other poster claims is required by law in EU countries.

The 22nm are also a different issue, because there is not definition to what those 22nm are measuring. However, some people has noted that intel nanometer is larger than everyone else nanometer used in the industry. That is that their 22nm are more close to others 28nm.

With all due respect, i'm confident that AMD's team of lawyers and marketers probably have a better grasp on what they can and cannot say about their products in the legal sense both in the US and the EU. They know what they're doing, and their advertisements passed muster and were approved by all the relevant AMD bigwigs.

This is a non-issue.

 

[Chiropteran]

I am quite aware AMD likes to lie in their PR material.

You could buy commercial 5Ghz CPUs since...2007?

Source?

 

[bononos]

Ok. I can see both the base (350 MHz) and the turbo frequency (1250 MHz) are advertised. However, the tigerdirect link that you gave before only advertise the 4770k by its turbo speed and the base frequency is not mentioned.

Being consistent with your own words (quoted above) they are "commiting fraud".

Its looks like fraud if they don't follow the common convention of using the base clock.
Video cards don't advertise their idle/2d speed so its acceptable for Intel/AMD to use the 3d speed in their adverts.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Source?

Power6 and Power6+ series for example. Might not have shipped in systems before 2008 tho. Still..5 years before.

 

[Sweepr]

I am quite aware AMD likes to lie in their PR material.

You could buy commercial 5Ghz CPUs since...2007?

Power6 reached 5GHz back in 2008. Wow, five years ago.

 

[dawheat]

IMO fraud is far too strong a charge here. At most, the FTC will fine AMD/vendors for deceptive advertising.

However, if the stock CPU can hit 5Ghz (even via Turbo), then AMD doesn't have much to worry about in the US. If only certain binned CPUs could hit 5Ghz in Turbo mode and others couldn't, then they'd be in some trouble.

 

[guskline]

IMO fraud is far too strong a charge here. At most, the FTC will fine AMD/vendors for deceptive advertising.

However, if the stock CPU can hit 5Ghz (even via Turbo), then AMD doesn't have much to worry about in the US. If only certain binned CPUs could hit 5Ghz in Turbo mode and others couldn't, then they'd be in some trouble.

Excellent point.

 

[tential]

With all due respect, i'm confident that AMD's team of lawyers and marketers probably have a better grasp on what they can and cannot say about their products in the legal sense both in the US and the EU. They know what they're doing, and their advertisements passed muster and were approved by all the relevant AMD bigwigs.

This is a non-issue.

So a company can't make a mistake?

 

[Chiropteran]

So a company can't make a mistake?

A company can make a mistake, but any "mistake" that ShintaiDK catches is obviously also noticeable to the company lawyers, and they have clearly thought about things before proceeding.

 

[ShintaiDK]

A company can make a mistake, but any "mistake" that ShintaiDK catches is obviously also noticeable to the company lawyers, and they have clearly thought about things before proceeding.

Is that why the fabled 5Ghz CPU is only a 4.7Ghz one depending on your counrty?

http://www.kombo.krakow.pl/index.php?idx=KBPROAMDFX10015
http://olimp.sklep.pl/produkt/228557,procesor-amd-x8-fx-9590-4-7ghz-box-am3-220w-16mb
http://kdo.pl/procesor-amd-x8-fx-95...a.pl&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=porownywarki

 

[Vesku]

It's because advertising and consumer laws vary by country. You show knowledge of this basic fact in your posts ShintaiDK, I don't understand why you are harping on this unless AMD is advertising it locally to you in a manner that does not conform to your local laws.

 

[ShintaiDK]

It's because advertising and consumer laws vary by country. You show knowledge of this basic fact in your posts ShintaiDK, I don't understand why you are harping on this unless AMD is advertising it locally to you in a manner that does not conform to your local laws.

Due to ethics and because I care for more than my local area.