Intel warranties flimsier than the paper they are printed on!

[richieuk]

I asked on this forum about a month ago if I could use a Xigmatek heat-sink on a Q6600 without voiding warranty, and I got a hopeful probably. Which would have been fine...

I also wondered if a mild overclock without adjusting voltages from stock would be ok, again, I got a possibly. I would have LOVED this.

Then, I covered my bases and checked with intel...

... I got this response...

We do not recommend using third party cooling solutions nor third party thermal interface material since by doing so will void the warranty of the processor. I see that you are also looking for information on “overclocking”. Overclocking is neither recommended nor supported by Intel(R).

Well, heres my response to intel...

Well, my middle fingernail is looking in your direction! I'm doing it anyway, and next time I see you advertise anything that supports overclocking I'm gonna petrol bomb your mothers!

Join me in my rage!!!! RAWRRRR!!!!

[mediaboy]

AMD don't support non-stock cooling solutoins either... They do, however, cover it all on their Black Editions (I think) as they are meant to be OCed, and don't come with a cooler...

[TAKTAK]

but it all can be avoided by not telling them that you have overclocked it....

overclocking voids the warranty because it can shorten the components lifespan...
the processors are only sold to run @ the advertised speed.. nothing more... (obv, having a little more is what alot of people want) but proving that you've overclocked something is nigh on impossible aslong as you don't state that you have or send them the mobo aswell...

another interesting point is this:

I see that you are also looking for information on “overclocking”.

did you mention overclocking with them or have they been snooping into your web habbits?.....

[richieuk]

I asked them if I could without voiding warranty, if so, to what limits. lol

Either way, i'll see how it goes when I get it. But man am I miffed...

At least corsair allow overclocking under 2.1 volts on thier ram...

[this_is_gav]

Why the rage?

They're covering their own arses. What if you used a heatsink that wasn't suitable, and as such damaged the CPU (though in theory it should cut off before damage)?

Overclocking, again, what if you don't know what you're doing and pump too many volts through it in order to get a higher overclock because that's what you've seen others doing? If it fails, then why shouldn't be covered? You've messed up, so why should they lose out?

It's why the built-in overclocking functions that some AMD-based motherboards and ATI graphics cards (through the Catalyst Control Center) only allow for basic and safe automatic overclocks. The facility is there for you to overclock further, but it's clear you're doing so at your own risk.

Sorry, I'm struggling here... I just can't see the logic in complaining. The very worst thing about it that I can see is you claim you've seen some PR that's mentioned overclocking...

[Saracen]

....... The very worst thing about it that I can see is you claim you've seen some PR that's mentioned overclocking...

There was some recently.

If I remember correctly, Intel announced that they were going to unlock chips to make it easier for people to overclock ..... but they did effectively add "at your own risk" because they did point out it would not be covered by warranty. In effect, they acknowledge that a small but significant group of customers do this and are, apparently, stopping attempts to prevent it. But if you do it and it causes problems, they won't cover it. And realistically, of course, why should they?

Gav, you're spot on. Intel test various configurations and speeds. They can be held to account, legally, for claims they make. So they warrant their products ONLY to perform to rated specs, which are actually generally fairly well inside their tested performance. That way, they have a decent margin of error before chips fail to perform as claimed because if that happens they would be in breach of contract.

Accordingly, chips are only warranted if installed and used in accordance with Intel instructions. They won't warrant third-party coolers because they have no idea what people will use, which cooler, which TIM, whether it's properly applied, what fan will be used, etc.

[richieuk]

I guess thats true, but you'd thing they'd offer a little leway (like for example oc by no more than 20% and no extra volts or something)

I can understand the cooler thing though, but maybe if they approved a series of coolers that'd help.

I'm just stunned by the fact everythign is so absolute...

...even if they offered ready overclocked Q6600s at 3.0gg for 20 quid more... they can test they are stable etc and I'd be happy to purchase them...

ah well..

[DDY]

...even if they offered ready overclocked Q6600s at 3.0gg for 20 quid more... they can test they are stable etc and I'd be happy to purchase them...

ah well..

Why would Intel want to do that? In your world Intel might as well be charging £130 for QX6850s.

[Saracen]

I guess thats true, but you'd thing they'd offer a little leway (like for example oc by no more than 20% and no extra volts or something)

I can understand the cooler thing though, but maybe if they approved a series of coolers that'd help.

I'm just stunned by the fact everythign is so absolute...

...even if they offered ready overclocked Q6600s at 3.0gg for 20 quid more... they can test they are stable etc and I'd be happy to purchase them...

ah well..

I agree ..... and I'd like a McLaren Mercedes CLR Black for the price of a Mondeo too!

Intel do offer a faster chip. You can add about £30 and go for what is effectively a faster Q6600, called the Q6700.

Or you can have the 3.0GHz version (albeit at 1333MHz) ..... if you part with £600.

Let me ask you a question, though. If a 3GHz chip was available at £20 more than the Q6600, how many £600 QX6850's do you think they'd sell?

Odds are, most of the Kentfield quads come of the same production line, and quite possibly out of the same wafers. They certainly used to do that. They'd then quality-test the chips and speed-rate them accordingly .... perhaps down-rating sometimes if market conditions demanded a particular speed and production was limited. So if you like, what they're doing with the really fast variants is cherry-picking those that pass speed tests with the best results.

Do ..... if a QX6850 sells at £600 (inc VAT), and the Q6600 at £117 (Inc VAT), by the time it gets to retail, there a differential in the profit margin of some £400 and change. Intel will be getting a good chunk though by no means all of that. They'd have to sell several Q6600s to make the same margin as a single QX6850.

So look on the bright side. You may want a 3GHz 6600 at £140, but it's the people that do buy the faster models at the much higher prices that are allowing Intel to sell the Q6600 at the price you and I both like. Were it not for those high margin items, we could expect to be paying more for the Q6600.

Intel won't let you clock the 6600 and still offer the warranty because if they did, you'd be getting what people pay five or six times as much for.

If Intel test a chip and it can do, for arguments sake, 3.1GHz and they sell it at 2.4GHz, there's a very small chance that it'll fail at that modest level. But if they rate it at 3GHz, it strains the chip a lot more, generates extra heat and gives a MUCH higher chance that it'll fail, which means a much higher chance of Intel having to honour the warranty .... which is why they charge so much more for it - they take a bigger chance with it.

A lot of what goes on in the chip market is sheer kiddology, marketing hype, as it is in so much of the computer industry.

And, by the way, everything isn't quite as absolute as you think. From what I've heard from Intel, clocking it wouldn't necessarily void the warranty, if for no other reason than it's very unclear how they;d know you had but if they felt that the reason for the chip failing was that it had been clocked, well, can you blame them. If you buy a car, and then replace half the engine with tuned racing parts, don't expect the car manufacturer to replace the engine of you blow it up.

Oh, and that doesn't just apply to our warranty, but also to your statutory rights, which would also be jeopardised if you're clocking the chip. And quite rightly.

[TooNice]

...even if they offered ready overclocked Q6600s at 3.0gg for 20 quid more... they can test they are stable etc and I'd be happy to purchase them...

Intel may not be interested in doing it (why cannibalise their other productions) but I've seen some e-tailers offering pre-overclocked or 'guaranteed overclock' at extra cost. The practice is rare now, OcUK is the only ones I know in the UK that does it. Some people actually criticised them for doing it. Personally I am not against it, but I find it interesting that there are people who would be interested into such product these days. In practice, it's unlikely that you'll fry a Q6600 @ 3.0Ghz if you install everything with due care.

[Ferral]

If you read the small print on most PC parts it does state that overclocking voids the warranty, so you run the risk if you decide to push it even a little bit. You want more power buy the next chip up so at least you know running at stock speeds you are covered by the manufacturer warranty.

Some of the motherboard manufacturers also say that if a bios flash goes wrong you will void the warranty also. Which is kinda crap but it does put it all down to the user, kind of a do at your own risk but don't come running to us when it goes awry.

[peterb]

There are two aspects to warranty anyway. When Intel sell you a Q6600 at a certain speed, they gurantee that it will run at that speed at the rated voltage - and if it doesn't, they will replace it, but you can't return it on the grounds that you tried to run it faster, but it wouldn't run at that speed. As for damage, they are saying that if you do run it outside the guranteed parameters, they won't gurantee that you won't cause damage and if it does, it is your fault.

How could they tell? Well it wouldn't be difficult to have an arae of non-volatile RAM (or ROM) on the chip that records the maximum voltage, clock speed and temperatures on the chip, in an area only accessible by non published instructions, or via the test pins. I don't know if Intel do do that, but it wouldn't surprise me if that was the case.

In the case of retailers offering "pre-overclocked" computers, they would then be taking the warranty aspects themselves. If the CPU failed, they would (presumably) replace it under the terms of ther warranty, but would have no onwards recourse to Intel.

[chuckskull]

How could they tell? Well it wouldn't be difficult to have an arae of non-volatile RAM (or ROM) on the chip that records the maximum voltage, clock speed and temperatures on the chip, in an area only accessible by non published instructions, or via the test pins. I don't know if Intel do do that, but it wouldn't surprise me if that was the case.

There were rumours of something similar a while back; http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...d=632&Itemid=1

Not sure how reliable the info is, but given the simplicity of doing so from a technical standpoint, it wouldn't be suprising. It would only take a tiny bit of rom space to store 2 or 3 values; max freq/temp/voltage, last freq/temp/voltage etc. Any combo of those would probably be enough to judge if a chip was OC'ed.

[Powderhound]

How can Intel justify non-stock cooling voiding a warranty when they sell OEM chips with (albeit limited) warranties and no HSF?

[Clunk]

http://forums.hexus.net/1328390-post35.html

[Saracen]

How can Intel justify non-stock cooling voiding a warranty when they sell OEM chips with (albeit limited) warranties and no HSF?

Because OEM chips are supposed to go to OEMs, why build systems with them and assume the responsibility for support. That's why they're cheaper.