If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Nvidia plays the meltdown blame game
The difference is that the automotive industry actually test their
prototypes. :-) Consequently the blame lies squarely with Dell and HP for failing to do proper component integration. It isn't difficult or expensive to do thermal shock and cycling tests on laptops. -- "War is the continuation of politics by other means. It can therefore be said that politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed." "Mr.E Solved!" wrote in message ... So far, every RoHS disadvantage has been demonstrated: cracks, brittleness, susceptibility to thermal cycling. All we need is some Tin Whiskers and the worst case scenario has come to pass. Don't blame RoHS however, as other industries besides the Computer Manufacturing Industry has used RoHS to advantage, such as the automotive industry. I'm guessing TMSC or whatever foundry made these chips simply had bad materials and/or technique from lack of experience, assuming no malice was involved, who can say at this point. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Nvidia plays the meltdown blame game
First of One wrote:
The difference is that the automotive industry actually test their prototypes. :-) Consequently the blame lies squarely with Dell and HP for failing to do proper component integration. It isn't difficult or expensive to do thermal shock and cycling tests on laptops. Wow, you want to lay the blame on Dell and HP? Why not Clevo and Compal and Quanta (who actually make HP and Dell notebooks) or even Mitac, Asus, Acer, Arima, ECS/Uniwill. No, you can't blame the laptop maker for a bad video chip package that they in good faith installed. Of course, if they knew the chips were faulty and installed them anyway...that's a whole different concept of culpability. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Nvidia plays the meltdown blame game
"Faulty" isn't as cut and dry as you may think. nVidia doesn't necessarily
design the cooler in a laptop. Moreover, the GPU isn't the only heat-producing component in the system. The company that designs the whole laptop is ultimately responsible to ensure all the parts they've selected can survive the laptop's internal temperatures. I imagine Dell and HP still design their laptops, then contract out the manufacturing. Thermal cycle testing is easy to do. Take for example the Dell XPS M1530, it's advertised to operate in ambient temps of 0 to 35C. http://support.dell.com/support/edoc....htm#wp1104221 It's easy enough to get a small chamber to alternate between 0C and 35C in 5-minute intervals, then script a couple of burn-in apps such as Toast and ATiTool to put the CPU and GPU under load when the chamber cycles to 35C. In two weeks they can accumulate over 2000 extreme thermal cycles and validate the product. If Dell and HP "trusted" their contractor manufacturers to cobble together laptops from a paper design, without any qualification testing of prototypes, then yes it's Dell and HP's own damn fault. -- "War is the continuation of politics by other means. It can therefore be said that politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed." "Mr.E Solved!" wrote in message . .. First of One wrote: The difference is that the automotive industry actually test their prototypes. :-) Consequently the blame lies squarely with Dell and HP for failing to do proper component integration. It isn't difficult or expensive to do thermal shock and cycling tests on laptops. Wow, you want to lay the blame on Dell and HP? Why not Clevo and Compal and Quanta (who actually make HP and Dell notebooks) or even Mitac, Asus, Acer, Arima, ECS/Uniwill. No, you can't blame the laptop maker for a bad video chip package that they in good faith installed. Of course, if they knew the chips were faulty and installed them anyway...that's a whole different concept of culpability. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Nvidia plays the meltdown blame game
First of One wrote:
"Faulty" isn't as cut and dry as you may think. nVidia doesn't necessarily design the cooler in a laptop. Moreover, the GPU isn't the only heat-producing component in the system. The company that designs the whole laptop is ultimately responsible to ensure all the parts they've selected can survive the laptop's internal temperatures. I imagine Dell and HP still design their laptops, then contract out the manufacturing. Thermal cycle testing is easy to do. Take for example the Dell XPS M1530, it's advertised to operate in ambient temps of 0 to 35C. http://support.dell.com/support/edoc....htm#wp1104221 It's easy enough to get a small chamber to alternate between 0C and 35C in 5-minute intervals, then script a couple of burn-in apps such as Toast and ATiTool to put the CPU and GPU under load when the chamber cycles to 35C. In two weeks they can accumulate over 2000 extreme thermal cycles and validate the product. If Dell and HP "trusted" their contractor manufacturers to cobble together laptops from a paper design, without any qualification testing of prototypes, then yes it's Dell and HP's own damn fault. Holy cow, you are hell bent on defending nvidia and part of that defense is your imagination? "Imagining" Dell and HP still design their laptops? I expect better from you, at least say: "I don't know which engineers are responsible for which part of the process". I know quite a deal about this process and I don't know which engineers assemble/design precisely which parts, as they are very complex and take place over multiple locations. But I do know that the bulk of the entire process takes place in Asia, not stateside at Dell or HP with Dell or HP personnel. It's probably that type of non-rigorous thinking that caused the release of the faulty substrate in the wild to begin with. As in: but for the faulty substrate, the chips, video subsystem and laptop would work normally with the components that are in them with their existing cooling solutions. Since I did not read the supplied thermal or electrical specifications, I do not know if the manufacturers were told: "By the way, this stuff has a worse performance envelope than all the stuff before it" or "No changes needed." Either way, the supplier is usually contracted in writing to certain specifications and other implied warranties are in force depending upon geographic location and mutual agreement. So they (Nvidia) can't take the attitude you are seemingly taking: Haha, we gave you junk and you didn't test it thoroughly enough to find our hidden flaws, eat it. I'm sorry if your nvidia stock is weaker, but so far all reports point to a persistent state of knowledge of a faulty product by nvidia. So much so that nvidia partners and co-dependents are clamoring for a recall by nvidia so they don't go bankrupt trying to fix the growing problem. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Nvidia plays the meltdown blame game
"Mr.E Solved!" wrote:
I'm sorry if your nvidia stock is weaker, ... Could get weaker yet. Fuddy is speculating: "Nvidia M84 & M86 problems to cost more" http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php? option=com_content&task=view&id=8782 "Monies set aside will not be enough to cover cost ...." And it's not just the parts, labor, S&H. If that story of the laptop graphics being excluded from some laptop warranty is true, class actions are a certainty. Any number of lawyers will be found to own affected LTs. Fud closes with: "All of these issues could be a very big advantage for AMD ..." Only if the back-alley Chinese fab at the root cause didn't build stuff the same way for other clients. -- Regards, Bob Niland http://www.access-one.com/rjn email4rjn AT yahoo DOT com NOT speaking for any employer, client or Internet Service Provider. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Nvidia plays the meltdown blame game
"rjn" wrote in message
[...] Fud closes with: "All of these issues could be a very big advantage for AMD ..." Only if the back-alley Chinese fab at the root cause didn't build stuff the same way for other clients. TSMC ain't no back-alley operation! Which makes their side of the story all the more interesting. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Nvidia plays the meltdown blame game
"Mr.E Solved!" wrote in message
. .. Holy cow, you are hell bent on defending nvidia and part of that defense is your imagination? "Imagining" Dell and HP still design their laptops? I expect better from you, at least say: "I don't know which engineers are responsible for which part of the process". Ultimately Dell or HP's logo appears on the laptop. They are the final system integrators. They may choose to delegate a portion of the integration to a third party to cut costs, but they are still liable to ensure the end product works. It's probably that type of non-rigorous thinking that caused the release of the faulty substrate in the wild to begin with. As in: but for the faulty substrate, the chips, video subsystem and laptop would work normally with the components that are in them with their existing cooling solutions. The truly non-rigorous thinking exists where the system builder no longer tests its own products in an attempt to rush to market. Since I did not read the supplied thermal or electrical specifications, I do not know if the manufacturers were told: "By the way, this stuff has a worse performance envelope than all the stuff before it" or "No changes needed." The latter is a pretty bold statement to make, since nVidia doesn't have direct control over the cooling solution. Different laptop chassis will have vents in different places. The heatpipes may run through both the CPU and GPU plates, etc. In fact, if nVidia were to make a statement like "no cooling changes needed", it would be poor engineering judgement for system builder to not validate it for themselves. The system builders are not innocent victims in this case. Either way, the supplier is usually contracted in writing to certain specifications and other implied warranties are in force depending upon geographic location and mutual agreement. Specifications won't cover every possible failure mode. And you can be sure things like thermal fatigue cycles don't make their way into contracts. As for implied warranties, don't confuse consumer protection laws with supplier/integrator relationships. In fact, for new products or design changes, the integrator often defines the [re]qualification tests that the supplier has to do. So they (Nvidia) can't take the attitude you are seemingly taking: Haha, we gave you junk and you didn't test it thoroughly enough to find our hidden flaws, eat it. No, it's more like: My GPU technically meets my published specs, but since I didn't design your laptop, you are responsible for making sure it works in your particular application. This is true even in automotive industry, where suppliers handle much of the design and subsystem testing. Yet the automaker still puts the prototypes in the desert, in the arctic, on the Nurburgring... I'm sorry if your nvidia stock is weaker, Don't assume. I shuffle my money between oil and gold, and leave the tech stocks alone. As "Mr. Tony" would say, I don't **** where I eat. but so far all reports point to a persistent state of knowledge of a faulty product by nvidia. So much so that nvidia partners and co-dependents are clamoring for a recall by nvidia so they don't go bankrupt trying to fix the growing problem. So Dell and HP bitch loudly and pass the buck. The "journalists" at the Inq then take little bits of information and spin them into FUD. And all of a sudden it becomes a "persistent state of knowledge"? -- "War is the continuation of politics by other means. It can therefore be said that politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed." |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Nvidia plays the meltdown blame game
First of One wrote:
So Dell and HP bitch loudly and pass the buck. The "journalists" at the Inq then take little bits of information and spin them into FUD. And all of a sudden it becomes a "persistent state of knowledge"? All interesting points but I don't think that they apply. I think your position "here are our chips, we wash our hands of them" is not going to hold up either in the boardroom or courtroom and based on recent events it has not. Supplier-Integrator responsibilities go far beyond the "consumer protections" end-user requirements you think I'm confusing with the 'fitness of purpose' requirements that are usually negotiated, I haven't seen the contract so I can't comment on specifics, but I've seen enough of them to know what is typical and manufacturing defects such as this are typically covered. Especially when the problem encompasses many vendors in many different designs and best practice cooling solutions do not result in other chips failing. But for the bad chip packaging, there would be no fault. No problems. Especially when this was discovered in early 2007, a year and a half ago and reported in April of 2007. Plenty of time to fix things, but nothing was fixed. This didn't happen over a week or a day, it took months and months. http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...-g846-problems Oh, you don't think the Inq can report the truth? why not take it from nVidia themselves: NVIDIA president and CEO Jen-Hsun Huang stated: "Although the failure appears related to the combination of the interaction between the chip material set and system design, we have a responsibility to our customers and will take our part in resolving this problem. The GPU has become an increasingly important part of the computing experience and we are seeing more interest by PC OEMs to adopt GPUs in more platforms. Recognizing that the GPU is one of the most complex processors in the system, it is critical that we now work more closely with notebook system designers and our chip foundries to ensure that the GPU and the system are designed collaboratively for the best performance and robustness." Again, if nvidia knew about the chip material sets different performance characteristics and did not tell anyone, that is their fault. If they did and the makers ignored their warnings, then it's the makers fault...for building a broken machine and using a broken component. HP has split the difference in cost with nvidia, but no one else has...the rest are demanding recall and restitution and are jumping ship. Hard to say why, but HP can afford the $150 out of $300 liability each repair is estimated to cost. Are you saying HP knew the chip was faulty as well and crossed their fingers? So far it looks like nVidia left everyone swinging in the breeze and nothing you have said indicates otherwise, are you SURE you don't have any nvidia stock?! |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Nvidia plays the meltdown blame game
On Aug 8, 11:21*am, "Mr.E Solved!" wrote:
First of One wrote: So Dell and HP bitch loudly and pass the buck. The "journalists" at the Inq then take little bits of information and spin them into FUD. And all of a sudden it becomes a "persistent state of knowledge"? All interesting points but I don't think that they apply. I think your position "here are our chips, we wash our hands of them" is not going to hold up either in the boardroom or courtroom and based on recent events it has not. Supplier-Integrator responsibilities go far beyond the "consumer protections" end-user requirements you think I'm confusing with the 'fitness of purpose' requirements that are usually negotiated, I haven't seen the contract so I can't comment on specifics, but I've seen enough of them to know what is typical and manufacturing defects such as this are typically covered. Especially when the problem encompasses many vendors in many different designs and best practice cooling solutions do not result in other chips failing. But for the bad chip packaging, there would be no fault. No problems. Especially when this was discovered in early 2007, a year and a half ago and reported in April of 2007. Plenty of time to fix things, but nothing was fixed. This didn't happen over a week or a day, it took months and months. http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...there-are-no-m... Oh, you don't think the Inq can report the truth? why not take it from nVidia themselves: NVIDIA president and CEO Jen-Hsun Huang stated: "Although the failure appears related to the combination of the interaction between the chip material set and system design, we have a responsibility to our customers and will take our part in resolving this problem. The GPU has become an increasingly important part of the computing experience and we are seeing more interest by PC OEMs to adopt GPUs in more platforms. Recognizing that the GPU is one of the most complex processors in the system, it is critical that we now work more closely with notebook system designers and our chip foundries to ensure that the GPU and the system are designed collaboratively for the best performance and robustness." Again, if nvidia knew about the chip material sets different performance characteristics and did not tell anyone, that is their fault. If they did and the makers ignored their warnings, then it's the makers fault...for building a broken machine and using a broken component. HP has split the difference in cost with nvidia, but no one else has...the rest are demanding recall and restitution and are jumping ship. Hard to say why, but HP can afford the $150 out of $300 liability each repair is estimated to cost. Are you saying HP knew the chip was faulty as well and crossed their fingers? So far it looks like nVidia left everyone swinging in the breeze and nothing you have said indicates otherwise, are you SURE you don't have any nvidia stock?! My 780i still has vc after 4 bios updates. Failure is nvidia's main product |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Nvidia plays the meltdown blame game
|
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
nVidia Game Profiles | RHinNC | Nvidia Videocards | 4 | October 27th 06 06:00 PM |
Overclocking may cause nuclear meltdown in your PC !!! | Dan Simper | Overclocking | 3 | March 10th 05 07:28 AM |
Please help with strange meltdown | Jake | General | 3 | January 28th 05 01:33 PM |
epson c82 meltdown | Jaron | Printers | 1 | May 2nd 04 02:02 PM |
Intel plays change the socket game again | steve | Asus Motherboards | 0 | July 11th 03 04:13 PM |