this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2023
228 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

59666 readers
2743 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

AMD says overclocking blows a hidden fuse on Ryzen Threadripper 7000 to show if you've overclocked the chip, but it doesn't automatically void your CPU's warranty::AMD explains the hidden fuses behind Ryzen Threadripper 7000 processors and how it will handle warranty claims.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] cybervseas@lemmy.world 81 points 11 months ago (2 children)

the warranty excludes any damage that results from overclocking/overvolting the processor. However, other unrelated issues could still qualify for warranty repair/replacement

So they'll arbitrarily decide what to cover and always have a reason for denying coverage, got it.

[–] Brkdncr@sh.itjust.works 59 points 11 months ago (3 children)

They only have that option if you run the cpu outside of design spec. Rambunctious o/c’ers no longer get a free replacement at AMD’s expense, and helps amd figure out if there’s a problem with cpus if they are failing and are not o/c’d.

[–] themoken@startrek.website 16 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Yeah, I don't really see much of an issue here. If you get a defective chip back, it's probably a good data point to know if it was "abused". Even if it's just so you can ask more questions, or prioritize problems that show up on non-OC'd chips rather than flat rejecting an RMA.

[–] JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The design spec of a CPU is the clock speed it runs at coming from the factory, overclocking by definition means going above it - that's why it's called overclocking.

[–] downhomechunk@midwest.social 2 points 11 months ago

I don't o/c my 7700x. I have no need to and I want longevity. I'd have even less of a need to o/c a thread ripper!

[–] Nawor3565@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 11 months ago

No, only if you've overclocked and the fault is one that could be caused by overclocking. Honestly, I think it's absolutely fair for them to not replace a CPU if you killed it yourself by running it outside of spec. Most manufacturers would just say you're SOL if your CPU dies and it's ever been overclocked, even if the issue is unrelated, so I think this is a pretty good policy for them to have.

Granted, it's possible that they could always say that it was the overclocking that killed it whenever the fuse is blown, but considering how heavily AMD leans into customer good-will and positive sentiment about the company, they will probably try their best to honor any legitimate warranty claims.

[–] Betch@lemmy.world 62 points 11 months ago (7 children)

That's a bit shitty but hopefully they don't just use it as a trap to deny any warranty coverage on an overclocked CPU.

Meanwhile Intel will void your warranty if you've enabled XMP. I don't know if they have a way of telling if you did so or not but they will try to trick you into admitting it when you're asking for an RMA.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 66 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Reviewers really should say "ok, well if it's not covered by warranty then we'll just do CPU benchmarks at the minimum JDEC speeds, as the manufacturer recommends"

[–] Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world 20 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Any good reviewer should already be doing a typical non-OC’d benchmark and an OC’d benchmark anyway.

The majority of people don’t overclock so would only care about the stock performance anyway. And overclockers should recognize that if you damage the chip by pushing it too far, it shouldn’t be covered.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago (9 children)

Most people don't consider enabling the advertised memory clock speeds as an overclock.

We aren't talking about taking your CPU and overclocking it. We're talking about a simple UEFI checkbox that everyone is told to do.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Betch@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Well what we're talking about here is just memory speeds, not core overclocking. If you're building a computer and you're paying for RAM that is rated at a certain speed, you need to enable XMP to have it run at that speed. Since the memory controller is now integrated into CPUs, intel considers that overclocking so it voids your warranty. I think most people who are buying CPUs to build their own PCs know this and will not run at base JEDEC speeds.

[–] EatYouWell@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago (3 children)

That's definitely not common knowledge for people who build their own PC.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

It definitely is.

Every single review and YouTube video, even from channels with broad appeal like LTT and the like always talk about the need to enable XMP and talk about it having to be enabled to get the advertised performance.

It gets advertised on memory kits and motherboards and they provide easy instructions on how to do it.

It's common knowledge to enable it.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Betch@lemmy.world 16 points 11 months ago

Hah yeah actually, that should become the standard for Intel CPU reviews.

[–] pathief@lemmy.world 29 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

It's not shitty, it's fair. If damage is caused by the overclock why should the manufacturer foot the bill? You modified the product to run outside the specs!

[–] AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world 21 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The "shitty" part of it is it's a binary one time feedback. If the fuse blows that's it. It doesn't matter if the CPU failed for something else the fuse can't unblow. I don't know what type of fuse they're using, would it blow with any level of over clocking, or with an extreme amount, is it a time delayed fuse that requires a bunch of time over clocked or is it instant? If i want to over clock just a bit but test it at a higher clock rate before setting my desired speed will that blow the fuse? The only point of the fuse is to determine if the user "missused" their cpu at any point.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's probably a collection of fuses instead of just a single one. One for xmp, one for each of the pbo options, various ones for manual OCs. I'd guess there's tiers of how aggressive the OC is, maybe a counter for how many times it was booted with that OC enabled.

[–] AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I wonder how much extra cost that would add to CPU production. There's probably some cost benefit analysis looking at the saving from denying warranties to the cost of extra components on the chip.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

I think they'd scale well so it wouldn't have that big of an impact. Like it could be one set of fuses for the entire chip. Even a KB of those fuses wouldn't take up much area on modern chips. That's if they are detecting settings or overall chip power.

If they are detecting OC damage to circuitry, that might involve a lot more fuses throughout the chip along with circuitry to read them (or at least detect their state), which could be more involved. Though there is already circuitry to test the functionality of the chip at a fine level for binning and QC, and it might be trivial to add some fuses to that.

[–] Betch@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

It's a bit shitty because we then have to trust that they won't use this as an excuse to void the warranty on chips that had a fatal defect to begin with. Overclocking is pretty safe unless you're doing extreme overclocking and they won't say how they determine if a failure was caused by an overclock or not.

It's definitely "more fair" for AMD than Intel to do it since they don't charge a premium for unlocked processors but I still don't like it. They developed PBO, it's a feature included with the CPU I bought, I want to be able to use it without fear of losing my warranty, but even just enabling that will trip that fuse.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] realharo@lemm.ee 38 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

It's just like a car having an odometer. This would come in handy when buying second-hand, remember all the uncertainty about the condition of used GPUs?

(That is assuming they make the state user-readable though.)

[–] Rubanski@lemm.ee 14 points 11 months ago

That's actually a nice idea, if it's, as you said, user readable in eg. CPU-Z

[–] MaxVoltage@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

this should be industry norm there is way too many bad users

[–] SSUPII@sopuli.xyz 14 points 11 months ago (2 children)

A lot of people in the comments seem to not understand that overclocking IS running the hardware outside the specs, unless that hardware was specifically meant to do that.

It's exactly like overclocking GPUs in the late 90's, for them to fry themself after a month. You went outside ther specs for doing that. Even if I replace the speaker from a telephone, and the keypad stops working a month later, I have voided the warranty already by doing the speaker change as they can't know if the now not working keypad was done because of you or a failing unit.

[–] pishadoot@sh.itjust.works 20 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Even if I replace the speaker from a telephone, and the keypad stops working a month later, I have voided the warranty already by doing the speaker change as they can't know if the now not working keypad was done because of you or a failing unit.

This is false. They have to PROVE that the repair that you made caused the keypad to fail in other to void your warranty, at least in the USA. Most people are misinformed as you are however, and they'll TELL you that's the case to make you go away, despite it being illegal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson-Moss_Warranty_Act

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

eating a piece of bread after the best by date is also using hardware outside the specs

[–] sploosh@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The bakery does not know when the bread will mold, but they know it probably won't start to for a certain number of days. The best by date is that day minus four to seven.

[–] affiliate@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago
[–] Psiczar@aussie.zone 9 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Do you even need to overclock a Threadripper?

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Why not if you've got thermal space to use? Overclocking will help with single-core applications where it would struggle more otherwise. It's also just a general boost to performance for free.

[–] Adalast@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

I kinda wish it were possible to overclock a single core and be able to direct single-threaded processes to it. I understand how CPUs and clock speed works, I'm just saying it would be cool.

That said, as I sit here thinking about it, it might he possible to have a core that uses a higher-frequency harmonic as part of the architecture of the chip. It might need a larger L1 and some special transport architecture to step the processed data back to the lower clock speed, but I don't think there are any physical or computational reasons it shouldn't be possible.

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago

Man the Intel Core Duo 2 was a snapshot in time where overclocking was acceptable.

Those chips could go, and that rerelease just kept that train going.

[–] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Is the Auto OC covered by this or are they talking manual OC?

[–] OADINC@feddit.nl 3 points 11 months ago

I hope they don't screw the auto OC. I have never OCed but my motherboard did decide once that my normal default core frequency of 3.2GHz was too low, and did an automatic unstable OC which resulted in a nice and high 1,2 GHz -__-. I had to switch it to a manual OC, and then back to automatic and it was fixed.

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 3 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Mmm. Raising prices. Implementing anti-consumer tactics. Where have I seen this before....?

Oh, I know. When a company becomes the bad guy. Just like the Intel monopoly from 2011-2018. Or Nvidia. Or microsoft in the 90s. Or Google or Amazon now.

Remember when checked bags were free on airlines and they didn't nickel and dime you to death? When seats had room? When exit rows were free? This happens all the time, and it's never a good change.

[–] Tangent5280@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Your airline example fails when you account for ticket price trends and access to flights for the poor.

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 2 points 11 months ago

Is it really that equitable, though? Some airlines hold a monopoly on certain routes, and people fly much more often now, to the tune of a couple hundred dollars round trip. Cars and planes doomed our already-faltering rail lines, which were our best shot at low cost, low carbon transportation. We can still do it, but we've coughed up a ton of money to a few air carriers when we used to have a booming consumer rail network.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›