TR Forums

auxy · Fri Apr 01, 2016 1:36 am

I've done a lot of RMAs in the past for an individual; two dozen motherboards, various input devices (you go to hell and you die, Razer), multiple CPUs from both AMD and Intel, scads of RAM (I love G.SKILL and their support dept is amazing but wow does their stuff break), and a whole bunch of drives. What I HAVEN'T RMA'd all that much are expansion cards. Only one with ATI (way back when) and one with eVGA, and now with Sapphire.

Typically when I do an RMA I expect to get a retail boxed product back. That's been the case with most of my RMAs that I have done, including both of the previous GPU RMAs. Sapphire did not send me a retail boxed product. In fact, they didn't even send me a new product; it's refurbished.

I really don't mind getting refurbished product for an RMA, but is this typical? Should I be surprised? My first return was because the GPU failed in a very obvious and specific way, and the replacement failed within two weeks. Now, the third one (second replacement) seems to work well, but the cooler is all scratched up and discolored and two of the lugs on the back are stripped out and/or cross-threaded. Like, what is this? Is this really okay?

I like my R9 290X Tri-X OC but dang, I'm not impressed with Sapphire's RMAs. They don't even do them themselves; they tell you contact a company in California called "Althon Micro" about whom I was able to find distressingly little information. They didn't seem interested in troubleshooting at all -- admittedly this may have been because I had already done it all myself -- and the packaging of the two RMA GPUs I received was inconsistent and very amateurish. Again, I really don't care about the amateurish and unprofessional nature of the whole experience; I'm not someone to get hung up on that kind of thing. It's just weird to me.

Anyone else had any questionable RMA experiences lately? It seems like things have gottten worse on this front. Most of my RMAs happened in 2008-2013 or so and I haven't done a lot lately. Do y'all think I should request another RMA for the busted lugs on the DVI ports?

TwistedKestrel · Fri Apr 01, 2016 2:04 am

I've had refurbished stuff sent as RMA replacements, but they never had anything but the slightest cosmetic hints that it wasn't the item I sent out originally. Certainly not damage.

While I can understand how the previous owner could damage the card in that way (those screw-in studs can come loose and easily get backed out when you remove the cable), the damage should have been either repaired or the card deemed unfit for refurbishing. Not passed on to you.

MDBT · Fri Apr 01, 2016 2:53 am

I've never NOT gotten refurbished back on RMA for video cards.

Kougar · Fri Apr 01, 2016 7:15 am

I expect most RMA's to be refurbs, and especially so with video cards.

The Egg · Fri Apr 01, 2016 9:06 am

auxy wrote:
I've done a lot of RMAs in the past for an individual; two dozen motherboards, various input devices (you go to hell and you die, Razer), multiple CPUs from both AMD and Intel, scads of RAM (I love G.SKILL and their support dept is amazing but wow does their stuff break), and a whole bunch of drives. What I HAVEN'T RMA'd all that much are expansion cards. Only one with ATI (way back when) and one with eVGA, and now with Sapphire.

Wow. Sounds like user-abuse to me. So you're the one driving up the cost of PC parts, eh? :evil:

Note: I'm mostly just poking fun. Mostly.

auxy · Fri Apr 01, 2016 5:24 pm

The Egg wrote:
Wow. Sounds like user-abuse to me. So you're the one driving up the cost of PC parts, eh? :evil:

Ahaha! (*´∀｀*)

No, no - very little of that was my own hardware. I used to run a home business building and repairing computers for the locals down here in BFE, TX. Hehe.

Anyway, interesting stuff. I can't decide if I want to make a fuss about the broken bits on the back, or not...

biffzinker · Fri Apr 01, 2016 5:38 pm

TwistedKestrel wrote:
I've had refurbished stuff sent as RMA replacements, but they never had anything but the slightest cosmetic hints that it wasn't the item I sent out originally. Certainly not damage.

While I can understand how the previous owner could damage the card in that way (those screw-in studs can come loose and easily get backed out when you remove the cable), the damage should have been either repaired or the card deemed unfit for refurbishing. Not passed on to you.

Have to agree with TwistedKestrel's response, which means you should unfortunately send the refurbished card back I wouldn't accept a card with any damage, cosmetic scratches/scuffs/blemishes isn't anything to be bothered by however.

Chrispy_ · Tue Apr 05, 2016 10:55 am

Refurb is not uncommon, especially with GPUs where the product cycles change far faster than the warranty length.

Nonetheless, if you get one that's damaged in any way other than cosmetically, it's damaged. Your warranty entitles you to an undamaged part. You could even argue that cosmetic damage is outside of the warranty terms, but if you were going to argue that you probably would need to prove that the card you sent in for RMA was not cosmetically damaged at all.

A stripped connector lug is minor/trivial but it's still damage. If you were mounting the PC in an orientation where the cables hung down, it would disconnect. You're probably not doing this, but that's your decision to make, not Sapphire's.

auxy · Tue Apr 05, 2016 10:58 am

Yah, you guys are right. But this one works and I am unwilling to spend another 3 weeks without my GPU over some stripped lugs. lol...（；￣ェ￣）

nerdrage · Tue Apr 05, 2016 11:17 am

auxy wrote:
I've done a lot of RMAs in the past for an individual... [snip] ...multiple CPUs from both AMD and Intel

What in the world is this individual doing to CPUs that they need to be RMA'd? I've built literally thousands of PCs, and fixed many times that many, and in only one circumstance was the CPU at fault - and that was for a grossly overclocked, over-volted and under-cooled AMD K6.

auxy · Tue Apr 05, 2016 12:11 pm

auxy wrote:
No, no - very little of that was my own hardware. I used to run a home business building and repairing computers for the locals down here in BFE, TX. Hehe.

The Egg · Tue Apr 05, 2016 12:59 pm

nerdrage wrote:
auxy wrote:
I've done a lot of RMAs in the past for an individual... [snip] ...multiple CPUs from both AMD and Intel

What in the world is this individual doing to CPUs that they need to be RMA'd? I've built literally thousands of PCs, and fixed many times that many, and in only one circumstance was the CPU at fault - and that was for a grossly overclocked, over-volted and under-cooled AMD K6.

That's what tipped me off as well. It takes a great deal of effort to kill a CPU, so multiple failures are a sign that something is wrong, regardless of the user. Did you build the rigs with the CPU failures, or were they OEM prebuilt?

auxy · Tue Apr 05, 2016 9:22 pm

Geez, what's with the inquisition in this thread?! (；￣Д￣）

This isn't even related to the thread, but if you must know it was one AMD CPU, two APUs, and five Intel CPUs that I returned. The AMD CPU simply failed under a very mild OC with no overvolting, free and clear. That was an Athlon X2 7750.

One of the Intel chips lost its second memory channel somehow. This was particularly maddening because I assumed it was the motherboard and replaced that twice before I tested the CPU. Never heard of that failure being the CPU before or since.

Another Intel chip got returned because no matter what it would thermal shutdown almost immediately when you started Prime95. I'm not a stupid noob; I re-mounted and then replaced the cooler, to no avail. Dunno what that was about.

The two APUs and the rest of the Intel chips were all returned due to physical damage mostly related to de-lidding. I've popped the top on a whole lot of chips since my Opteron 185, and I generally don't have a problem doing so, but sometimes heatsinks get shifted or CPUs get dropped or other circumstances intervene. Those five chips are overwhelmingly in the minority of processors I have delidded. Only one of those was mine, a 3570K.

And before you get all moralistic on me, remember that those companies elected to replace the processors for me. I'm just a poor person out here in the sticks trying to enjoy and help others enjoy my hobby, so it's not as if I'm some devious villain out to scam Intel and AMD out of money. People down here can't afford to replace this stuff as easily as those companies can and ultimately doing so makes for happy, loyal customers. In fact, Intel and AMD both have been among the best customer service experiences I have had.

ANYWAY, getting back on topic, my Radeon has failed to resume from monitor suspend (not even sleep or system suspend, just dpms power down) twice now, prompting a restart. AMD driver issue or failing GPU? I didn't have this problem before, but I wasn't using 16.3.2 either. Torture test passes fine.

Topinio · Wed Apr 06, 2016 6:24 am

auxy wrote:
Geez, what's with the inquisition in this thread?! (；￣Д￣）

I guess you piqued some interest with having RMA'd several CPUs

as a lot of people with a lot of experience have very infrequently done so. I think I've had 2 failed CPUs out of thousands over nearly 20 years.

auxy wrote:
The two APUs and the rest of the Intel chips were all returned due to physical damage mostly related to de-lidding. I've popped the top on a whole lot of chips since my Opteron 185, and I generally don't have a problem doing so, but sometimes heatsinks get shifted or CPUs get dropped or other circumstances intervene. Those five chips are overwhelmingly in the minority of processors I have delidded. Only one of those was mine, a 3570K.

And before you get all moralistic on me, remember that those companies elected to replace the processors for me. I'm just a poor person out here in the sticks trying to enjoy and help others enjoy my hobby, so it's not as if I'm some devious villain out to scam Intel and AMD out of money. People down here can't afford to replace this stuff as easily as those companies can and ultimately doing so makes for happy, loyal customers. In fact, Intel and AMD both have been among the best customer service experiences I have had.

You killed 5 CPUs by pulling off the IHS's and the manufacturers just gave you new ones when you called it in?? Did you admit to the delidding?

auxy wrote:
ANYWAY, getting back on topic, my Radeon has failed to resume from monitor suspend (not even sleep or system suspend, just dpms power down) twice now, prompting a restart. AMD driver issue or failing GPU? I didn't have this problem before, but I wasn't using 16.3.2 either. Torture test passes fine.

I don't think you can tell if it's a AMD driver issue or a failing GPU yet, I'd at least try the driver version you were using and the latest beta, 16.4.1

auxy · Wed Apr 06, 2016 6:30 am

Topinio wrote:
:o You killed 5 CPUs by pulling off the IHS's and the manufacturers just gave you new ones when you called it in?? Did you admit to the delidding?

I didn't lie about it. I didn't bring it up, but they didn't ask. Reason for return: CPU will not POST. It's true! (*・艸・)

Topinio wrote:
I don't think you can tell if it's a AMD driver issue or a failing GPU yet, I'd at least try the driver version you were using and the latest beta, 16.4.1

Latest beta has some problems on Hawaii according to reddit's /r/AMD, so maybe I'll revert to what I was using, which I think was actually ... 15.12. That's an old driver though... hmh.

Deanjo · Wed Apr 06, 2016 7:38 am

The AMD CPU simply failed under a very mild OC with no overvolting, free and clear.

Should not have been an RMA at all. If it operated at it's specified spec, it is not defective

The two APUs and the rest of the Intel chips were all returned due to physical damage mostly related to de-lidding.

And before you get all moralistic on me, remember that those companies elected to replace the processors for me. I'm just a poor person out here in the sticks trying to enjoy and help others enjoy my hobby, so it's not as if I'm some devious villain out to scam Intel and AMD out of money.

That is EXACTLY what you are doing. You are scamming the system. The fact that you are starting off with "get all moralistic" with your reply means you know that it is wrong to begin with. Poor or not, you are simply a thief. No if's, and's, or but's about it. That is probably why you recommend everyone to use a pirated copy of Windows 10 Enterprise.

auxy wrote:
Topinio wrote:
You killed 5 CPUs by pulling off the IHS's and the manufacturers just gave you new ones when you called it in?? Did you admit to the delidding?
I didn't lie about it. I didn't bring it up, but they didn't ask. Reason for return: CPU will not POST. It's true! (*・艸・)

You are still scamming the system and it is dishonest. You are taking advantage of the fact that the manufacturers are not inspecting the RMA'd product before shipping the replacement.

auxy · Wed Apr 06, 2016 7:41 am

Deanjo wrote:
a bunch of stuff

┐(‘～`；)┌

Dunno what you want me to say. Sorry?

Deanjo · Wed Apr 06, 2016 7:49 am

auxy wrote:
Deanjo wrote:
a bunch of stuff
┐(‘～`；)┌

Dunno what you want me to say. Sorry?

Quit trying to justify being a scam artist. A few months back you were screaming about your dealership how dishonest and what a scam your dealership was when they refused to replace your tires for normal wear. They are infinitely more honest than you are. You are by very definition a hypocrite.

I hope one day one of the manufactures processing your RMA's nail you with mail fraud.

auxy · Wed Apr 06, 2016 7:54 am

Deanjo wrote:
Quit trying to justify being a scam artist. A few months back you were screaming about your dealership how dishonest and what a scam your dealership was when they refused to replace your tires for normal wear. They are infinitely more honest than you are. You are by very definition a hypocrite.

Geez Deanjo, I'm sorry 2016 still isn't the year of the Linux desktop, but you don't have to take it out on me.

Anyway, you're grossly mischaracterizing me for no purpose other than to defame me so I think you probably should take a step back.

There's a distinct difference between withholding information and lying, and there's no reason for me to incriminate myself. Obviously if they'd said "we're denying your RMA because the warranty is voided" I wouldn't have complained. But they didn't. I didn't even glue the heatspreaders back on or anything like that -- although the thought crossed my mind -- because I felt that would be too fraudulent.

If you hate me that much, you probably should just add me as a 'foe' on the forum software so you don't see my posts. Sorry you had to go and make it personal.

Wed Apr 06, 2016 7:59 am

Topinio wrote:
auxy wrote:
Geez, what's with the inquisition in this thread?! (；￣Д￣）

I guess you piqued some interest with having RMA'd several CPUs as a lot of people with a lot of experience have very infrequently done so. I think I've had 2 failed CPUs out of thousands over nearly 20 years.

Yeah, pretty much. Failed CPUs are normally quite rare.

auxy wrote:
And before you get all moralistic on me, remember that those companies elected to replace the processors for me. I'm just a poor person out here in the sticks trying to enjoy and help others enjoy my hobby, so it's not as if I'm some devious villain out to scam Intel and AMD out of money. People down here can't afford to replace this stuff as easily as those companies can and ultimately doing so makes for happy, loyal customers. In fact, Intel and AMD both have been among the best customer service experiences I have had.

Well... I do have an issue with the "we're entitled because we can't afford it otherwise" mindset; IMO this is little more than a rationalization (and a lame one at that). OTOH, I also agree that if Intel/AMD are willing to take back obviously modded/damaged CPUs no questions asked, that does relieve some of the moral burden; how they handle RMAs is their business.

Moralizing aside, I'm amazed that Intel or AMD would accept an RMA on a de-lidded CPU in the first place. Either the people processing the RMAs are clueless (and yes, hiring clueless people and failing to train them is also a business decision...), or (as you imply) they figure the percentage of CPUs that get damaged in this way is small enough that replacing them gains them more in brand loyalty and goodwill than they lose on the replaced parts.

Deanjo · Wed Apr 06, 2016 8:00 am

auxy wrote:
There's a distinct difference between withholding information and lying, and there's no reason for me to incriminate myself. Obviously if they'd said "we're denying your RMA because the warranty is voided" I wouldn't have complained. But they didn't. I didn't even glue the heatspreaders back on or anything like that -- although the thought crossed my mind -- because I felt that would be too fraudulent.

There is no difference. That is where you are flat out wrong. A drunk that commits a hit and run, doesn't get caught is still breaking the law. Withholding of something that you know would void your warranty is lying, plain and simple.

Wed Apr 06, 2016 8:20 am

Deanjo wrote:
auxy wrote:
There's a distinct difference between withholding information and lying, and there's no reason for me to incriminate myself. Obviously if they'd said "we're denying your RMA because the warranty is voided" I wouldn't have complained. But they didn't. I didn't even glue the heatspreaders back on or anything like that -- although the thought crossed my mind -- because I felt that would be too fraudulent.

There is no difference. That is where you are flat out wrong. A drunk that commits a hit and run, doesn't get caught is still breaking the law. Withholding of something that you know would void your warranty is lying, plain and simple.

Ehh... I think it is more of a grey area, given that no attempt was made to disguise the fact that the CPUs were de-lidded. TBH I have more of a problem with the attempt to rationalize the act than with the act itself.

Chrispy_ · Wed Apr 06, 2016 8:45 am

Auxy may be cheesing the system, but if they replace a de-lidded chip without any qualms, that's their decision.

The K-series carry a premium anyway, so perhaps part of that premium is insurance for increased likelyhood of abuse. Abuse that (some would argue) would be unnecessary if Intel themselves didn't ruin a $300 part by using ridiculously cheap TIM to save a couple of cents.... :roll:

Deanjo · Wed Apr 06, 2016 8:56 am

Chrispy_ wrote:
Auxy may be cheesing the system, but if they replace a de-lidded chip without any qualms, that's their decision.

Had they known they were delidded, guaranteed they would have had qualms and rejected the RMA. It is plain old fraud that is taking advantage of how the RMA's are processed.

The K-series carry a premium anyway, so perhaps part of that premium is insurance for increased likelyhood of abuse. Abuse that (some would argue) would be unnecessary if Intel themselves didn't ruin a $300 part by using ridiculously cheap TIM to save a couple of cents....

That is not at all what the "premium" is for. If you do not believe me, read the terms of warranty.

Deanjo · Wed Apr 06, 2016 8:58 am

just brew it! wrote:
Deanjo wrote:
auxy wrote:
There's a distinct difference between withholding information and lying, and there's no reason for me to incriminate myself. Obviously if they'd said "we're denying your RMA because the warranty is voided" I wouldn't have complained. But they didn't. I didn't even glue the heatspreaders back on or anything like that -- although the thought crossed my mind -- because I felt that would be too fraudulent.

There is no difference. That is where you are flat out wrong. A drunk that commits a hit and run, doesn't get caught is still breaking the law. Withholding of something that you know would void your warranty is lying, plain and simple.

Ehh... I think it is more of a grey area, given that no attempt was made to disguise the fact that the CPUs were de-lidded. TBH I have more of a problem with the attempt to rationalize the act than with the act itself.

There is no grey area, it is straight out fraud. If you bought a house and it was not disclosed that it had fire damage the realtor and/or seller would be in some hot water.

Extent of Limited Warranty

AMD does not warrant that your AMD processor will be free from design defects or errors known as "errata". A description of the current characterized errata may be found at www.amd.com or is available upon request.

This limited warranty does not cover any costs relating to removal or replacement of any AMD processor or any other cost associated with replacement for the AMD processor.

This limited warranty does not cover damages due to external causes, including improper use, problems with electrical power, accident, neglect, alteration, repair, improper installation, or improper testing.

This Limited Warranty shall be null and void if the AMD microprocessor which is the subject of this Limited Warranty is used with any heatsink/fan other than the one provided herewith.

Wed Apr 06, 2016 9:56 am

Deanjo wrote:
There is no grey area, it is straight out fraud. If you bought a house and it was not disclosed that it had fire damage the realtor and/or seller would be in some hot water.

Except that in this case, it's more like the house had clearly visible burn marks all over the place, but you still bought it anyway.

The Egg · Wed Apr 06, 2016 10:06 am

Topinio wrote:
auxy wrote:
Geez, what's with the inquisition in this thread?! (；￣Д￣）

I guess you piqued some interest with having RMA'd several CPUs as a lot of people with a lot of experience have very infrequently done so.

That's exactly what happened with me. I had a feeling there was more to the story, and pretty much called it exactly.

Deanjo wrote:
just brew it! wrote:
auxy wrote:
There's a distinct difference between withholding information and lying, and there's no reason for me to incriminate myself. Obviously if they'd said "we're denying your RMA because the warranty is voided" I wouldn't have complained. But they didn't. I didn't even glue the heatspreaders back on or anything like that -- although the thought crossed my mind -- because I felt that would be too fraudulent.

Ehh... I think it is more of a grey area, given that no attempt was made to disguise the fact that the CPUs were de-lidded. TBH I have more of a problem with the attempt to rationalize the act than with the act itself.

There is no grey area, it is straight out fraud. If you bought a house and it was not disclosed that it had fire damage the realtor and/or seller would be in some hot water.

Fraud would be if she attempted to conceal what was done to the chip, which she claims she did not. If Intel/AMD accepted RMAs on clearly user-damaged products, that's on them for the most part. Is it unethical? Yeah, a little. If everyone did this, we'd all be paying more for CPUs (which is why I was originally poking fun), but I think they'd tighten-up their RMA procedures before that happened. While I don't approve of what was done, I'd dial it back just a bit.

Topinio · Wed Apr 06, 2016 12:59 pm

Deanjo wrote:
There is no grey area, it is straight out fraud.[...]

Extent of Limited Warranty

[...]

This Limited Warranty shall be null and void if the AMD microprocessor which is the subject of this Limited Warranty is used with any heatsink/fan other than the one provided herewith.

Based on what you quoted, RMA'ing an AMD CPU that was ever used with a non-crappy HSF is an equivalent in effect breach of those warranty terms, so it's likely that a substantial percentage of AMD CPU owners have voided their warranty and therefore a good percentage of RMA's would be crossing the line. /devil's advocate

Deanjo · Wed Apr 06, 2016 1:07 pm

The Egg wrote:
Fraud would be if she attempted to conceal what was done to the chip, which she claims she did not.

By omitting how the damage was done that is concealment.

Topinio · Wed Apr 06, 2016 1:25 pm

I've read the full terms, and they do not state that the user agrees by the act of RMA'ing that they have not sent in a CPU with "damages due to external causes, including improper use, problems with electrical power, accident, neglect, alteration, repair, improper installation, or improper testing"

What the RMAíng user agrees to are terms that say

"[t]his limited warranty does not cover" such damages;
AMD will replace a processor covered by the warranty;
AMD will not replace a processor "if AMD determines the processor is not covered by the limited warranty".

It's pathetically written T&C's, and I'd be astounded if auxy could be considered to have committed any fraud based on them; she'd've not actually been entitled to a replacement under them, but not being entitled to a replacement apparently doesn't stop them giving her one.

Deanjo wrote:
By omitting how the damage was done that is concealment.

Doesn't matter for the 2 AMD APU's, by my reading.

Intel, I don't know the score there...

TR Forums

Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Re: Sapphire RMA experience; typical?

Who is online