News AMD says overclocking blows hidden fuses on Ryzen Threadripper 7000 to show if you've overclocked the chip, but it won't automatically void your CP...

[Admin]

AMD explains the hidden fuses behind Ryzen Threadripper 7000 processors and how it will handle warranty claims.

AMD says overclocking blows hidden fuses on Ryzen Threadripper 7000 to show if you've overclocked the chip, but it won't automatically void your CP... : Read more

 

[hotaru251]

tbh I don't actually mind this type of detection.

It doesnt harm anyone who doesn't OC (and thus doesnt matter) & those who do OC can't just say "ya no i kept it stock" when their cpu dies after accidentally setting the voltage too high & have to accept the risk that comes with OCing a bit more.

 

[txfeinbergs]

tbh I don't actually mind this type of detection.

It doesnt harm anyone who doesn't OC (and thus doesnt matter) & those who do OC can't just say "ya no i kept it stock" when their cpu dies after accidentally setting the voltage too high & have to accept the risk that comes with OCing a bit more.

Sounds good to me as well. Play with fire, accept the risk if you are burnt.

 

[Amdlova]

what now! vendor lock, fuse, what amd need more to put on these cpu?
next move is subscription for some instruction do wanna avx 512 need to pay

 

[-Fran-]

The why allow "out of the box" overclocking and advertising it in your friggen marketing material, AMD?

WHY?

_JackieChanhandsmeme.jpg_

Regards.

 

[ivan_vy]

what now! vendor lock, fuse, what amd need more to put on these cpu?
next move is subscription for some instruction do wanna avx 512 need to pay

what's next? software defined silicon (sdsi)?

 

[TerryLaze]

AMD explains the hidden fuses behind Ryzen Threadripper 7000 processors and how it will handle warranty claims.

AMD says overclocking blows hidden fuses on Ryzen Threadripper 7000 to show if you've overclocked the chip, but it won't automatically void your CP... : Read more

Just saying, but a fuse blown by overclocking is damage done by overclocking...
It's a catch 22, or a catch all, whichever. If they get more RMAs than they can afford then they will be strickt about it and a blown fuse will equal no warranty.
All AMD has to prove is that the fuse only blows at voltages above the safety margin of the CPU.
If the fuse blows because of a flag the bios sets then ok not so much.

Enabling overclocking will permanently blow the fuse, meaning AMD will know that, at some point, the user has overclocked the processor. As usual, AMD’s warranty only excludes damage from overclocking. If your chip wasn’t damaged due to overclocking, AMD would cover it. Of course, AMD won’t detail how the chipmaker determines if the processor’s death resulted from a bad overclock.

 

[gggplaya]

what now! vendor lock, fuse, what amd need more to put on these cpu?
next move is subscription for some instruction do wanna avx 512 need to pay

I don't see the problem. The fuse is just an indicator to let them know you've overclocked. It doesn't void your whole warranty.

If the failure is a direct result of overclocking, then it's your fault and not covered under warranty. Overclocking has never been covered under warranty, you do so at your own risk. It's been like that in 25 years I've been overclocking.

 

[hotaru251]

what now! vendor lock, fuse, what amd need more to put on these cpu?

You realize this only defends their warrenty claim system right?

its so ppl cant OC, kill cpu, then claim they didn't oc.

it does no harm to the chip itself(performance wise) its just basically a [warranty void if removed] sticker inside the chip.

The why allow "out of the box" overclocking and advertising it in your friggen marketing material, AMD?

because you are free to do w/e you want with it. Allowing and encouraging are not same. Even their own software (PBO/Ryzen Master or w/e its called) notifies you of the risk.
A CPU is rated by AMD for stock parameters.

This is only covering their end if a user damaged it during said OC. (as anyone who damages cpu will claim they never oc'd it even if they have as that voids warranty clause)


about only way you are killing your CPU by OCing is either pumping too much voltage into it (quick damage done) or you arent cooling it and its cooking itself (slower damage).


The only thing this is doing is giving them a physical way to detect if they are telling truth or not.

 

[Amdlova]

If your motherbord come with default OC actived ? you will have a detoned fuse without know it?
The last gens of motherboards all comes with the Settings pre actived for the max score possible on Cinebench.

AMD will warranty something when have some cpus for RMA when have lots of them will say "Sorry your warranty expired because you blow a fuse" It's what I think

 

[PEnns]

Not sure what people are complaining about.

Many cars can reach 200+ mph velocity. And the car makers gladly advertise that their cars can go from 0 to whatever in X seconds.

Now, if somebody drives said car at really high speed that it that they lose control, and crashes their fancy car, who is to blame? Definitely not the car manufacturer!

 

[-Fran-]

Not sure what people are complaining about.

Many cars can reach 200+ mph velocity. And the car makers gladly advertise that their cars can go from 0 to whatever in X seconds.

Now, if somebody drives said car at really high speed that it that they lose control, and crashes their fancy car, who is to blame? Definitely not the car manufacturer!

Cars come electronically limited now and it is, from what I remember, illegal to advertise your car going over the maxmimum allowed speed limit as part of the normal advertising campaign. There's some asterisks to that, but I do remember reading about it. Something around "irresponsible advertising".

Regards.

 

[-Fran-]

because you are free to do w/e you want with it. Allowing and encouraging are not same. Even their own software (PBO/Ryzen Master or w/e its called) notifies you of the risk.
A CPU is rated by AMD for stock parameters.

This is only covering their end if a user damaged it during said OC. (as anyone who damages cpu will claim they never oc'd it even if they have as that voids warranty clause)


about only way you are killing your CPU by OCing is either pumping too much voltage into it (quick damage done) or you arent cooling it and its cooking itself (slower damage).


The only thing this is doing is giving them a physical way to detect if they are telling truth or not.

Well, "irresponsible advertising" does exist, but I doubt it applies to CPUs, unless you could demonstrate danger around its power usage and, say, burning your house down.

My problem with this is the "just the tip" mentality everyone is easy to accept and not read between the lines.

Regards.

 

[umeng2002_2]

I applaud AMD actually reading US law. Taking apart, repairing, or using a device out of its intended use can only void the warranty if it ACTUALLY damages the device.

You hear that Asus, Gigabyte, etc.? Warranty void if removed sticks are illegal in the US. Tampering with an anti-tamper stickers doesn't automatically void the warranty even if the device is broken. You must show that the users improper repair damaged the device.

 

[TJ Hooker]

Is there any indication that this applies to regular Ryzen, or just Threadripper? AFAIK they use the same compute dies, but I'm not sure about the IO die, and I have no idea which die(s) the fuse would be on.

 

[Gillerer]

Just saying, but a fuse blown by overclocking is damage done by overclocking...
It's a catch 22, or a catch all, whichever. If they get more RMAs than they can afford then they will be strickt about it and a blown fuse will equal no warranty.

I don't think you understand what kind of "fuse" this is. They're just a method of permanently branding a piece of silicon for data storage purposes - making bits permanently 0's or 1's.

For instance, these kinds of fuses are used to mark a generic piece of silicon off the production line as a specific SKU; when the motherboard reads the relevant bits, it knows what product it's dealing with.

 

[kjfatl]

what now! vendor lock, fuse, what amd need more to put on these cpu?
next move is subscription for some instruction do wanna avx 512 need to pay

I assume your response is sarcasm, but I'm not sure.
Using fuses to configure products has been common practice since the 1980's if not before. The first place I saw this was in DRAM chips with the same die being sold as 32kbit or 64kbit based on the fuse. Often, the side fused off failed test.
With modern CPUs there are many hidden, private instructions enabled and disabled using fuses and microcode. If you are unwilling to pay $3000 for that special instruction set add-on that makes you databases run faster, you don't have to. If you are running a database farm, it's well worth the cost.
In some cases the instructions work, but are not fully flushed out. As a developer, you might get access to an instruction 2 or 3 years before it is made available to consumers.
It is very common to fuse off defective cores and sell the otherwise defective parts on a different SKU at a lower cost.

 

[My Friend Chad]

Hey it's like when Comcast said several years back, "Hey we're gonna provide you with this handy meter to see how much data you use. Don't worry, we're not capping your data, it'll always be unlimited."
A year later...
"Hey so we're gonna be capping your data... but don't worry! 99% of people don't get anywhere near 100 GB a month."

 

[waltc3]

Last thing I read is that if you blow a fuse, it does not void your warranty. Obviously, the fuse isn't a completely reliable barometer, and it could blow for other reasons/causes. So, not voiding the warranty makes plenty of sense.

 

[Order 66]

Hey it's like when Comcast said several years back, "Hey we're gonna provide you with this handy meter to see how much data you use. Don't worry, we're not capping your data, it'll always be unlimited."
A year later...
"Hey so we're gonna be capping your data... but don't worry! 99% of people don't get anywhere near 100 GB a month."

I'm part of that .1% of people that use 100GB on one device. I am also part of the .1% of people that overclock modern CPUs and GPUs.

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

Sounds like something that could be defeated in court unless AMD can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the "hidden fuses" can only be blown if manual overclocking is enabled and not any other way, and I doubt they can. If I remember right Intel for years had denied warranty coverage to anyone who overclocked their processor unless they bought their special insurance, but I can't remember any stories about people being denied coverage.

 

[thestryker]

I'm assuming this is to make their RMA process cheaper and not much else. The problematic part is that we have to basically trust that AMD isn't lying. I don't particularly see this as any sort of slippery slope, but they should have disclosed it just the same.

 

[hotaru251]

or just Threadripper?

only the 2 Threadripper 7000's (at least for now)

 

[TerryLaze]

If I remember right Intel for years had denied warranty coverage to anyone who overclocked their processor unless they bought their special insurance, but I can't remember any stories about people being denied coverage.

It's a standard legal clause, every CPU company has this in their warranty, any damage from overclocking would be considered bad handling/user damage and is never covered under warranty.

Gamersnexus has tried to get their warranty refused by telling the call center operator that they used overclocking.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I2gQ_bOnDx8

 

[helper800]

Sounds like something that could be defeated in court unless AMD can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the "hidden fuses" can only be blown if manual overclocking is enabled and not any other way, and I doubt they can. If I remember right Intel for years had denied warranty coverage to anyone who overclocked their processor unless they bought their special insurance, but I can't remember any stories about people being denied coverage.

Very unlikely. Also, this would be a civil case where the burden of proof is only "a preponderance of the evidence," which means you only have to prove that "there is a greater likelihood than not," that the defendant did something wrong. The Intel insurance you speak of was also a small fee that would over damage caused by overclocking on their Extreme processors for the first year after purchase. I believe it was also only like 25 dollars. This is a lot of "remembering" from me, so take what I said with a grain of salt.