Download the Tom's Hardware App from the App Store
The reference for current tech news
Yes No
Ads

The Hidden Cost Of Intel's $700 Million SB Recall

by - source: Tom's Hardware US

Perhaps it is just me, but something about Intel's Sandy Bridge chipset recall just does not add up. Nvidia may have a few words to add to the story.

I don't want to dive into conspiracy theories and assume the worst, but I just don't think we have heard everything from Intel yet and I doubt that we will get to hear much more than the company revealed yesterday. The bottom line: 5-15% of Cougar Point chipsets, which are tied to Sandy Bridge chipsets can ultimately fail to recognize connected SATA devices -- under extreme conditions and down the road, in about 2 to 3 years.
    
I had to scratch my head when Intel announced the issue yesterday. Intel claims it shipped roughly 8 million chipsets when it discovered the issue and that a new revision of the chipset that fixes the issue is already in the works. But then you look at the expected $700 million charge, which could turn out to be twice the (absolute) cost of the famous FDIV bug in 1993. When you break it down, this number values each chip and processor at $80 and change, which would include the cost to find the boards that carry the chip, ship them to Intel and provide replacements and labor reimbursements as well as some extra cash for damage control and lost revenues.  

Is it just me or is that high for a $5-or-so chipset?

If you think about it, it may actually be a realistic number that is most likely, too low. And I would argue that the reason for the replacement is not because Intel wants to be nice to you, the consumer, but the stock market and our creative lawyers.

Almost three years ago, Nvidia revealed that it has found material defects in some of its GPUs (it turned out that up to 75 million GPUs were affected) and decided to replace the GPUs, supported by a $196 million fund. However, the company spent (FY2010 PDF file) $189.3 million as part of the warranty program in FY2009, 95.8 million in FY2010 and recorded an extra charge of about $164.4 million in "related" cost. The cost so far? $449.5 million. And Nvidia isn't done yet. Most notably, there are three related punitive class-action suits pending against Nvidia at this time. This could get rather expensive. Lesson learned. Take class-action suit lawyers seriously. A little birdie told us that the usual suspects are already in talks with the usual tech consultants to evaluate how a class action lawsuit could work against Intel and break down Sandy Bridge. Expect a suit to be pitched within two or three weeks.

So, in all common sense, Intel's Sandy Bridge chipset issue could be a minor issue as the company claims and common sense suggests that Intel should have just placed the issue under an errata, put a warranty program into place for those rare cases when the chipsets in fact fail. Even if the possible replacement of at least 400,000 boards could have turned into a logistic nightmare. Like it or not, that's just business. However, Intel would be extremely vulnerable from a legal perspective in such a scenario and taking care of the problem right now is painful PR, but it defends the company from greedy lawyers. The coming lawsuit could end up in court, but I guess it will be settled out of court so both the lawyers and Intel are happy and close the matter. But is that cost is already included in the $700 million estimate? 

I spent some time with Intel on the phone yesterday and noticed that the company is focusing very much on the fact that it really isn't a big deal and that it has caught the issue early on and is taking care of the issue right now. However, the answers get somewhat thin when the company is asked about the validation process, which involves more than 3000 Intel engineers globally.

They take new silicon through a grueling testing process for several months and into environments the typical user will never see. Kinda like a new convertible that is stress-tested in the very north of Finland. If it is a minor issue, and if it is a failure of a trivial component like an SATA port, which is somewhat a carryover from a previous-generation device, why didn't Intel's validation team catch this problem? I was told by Intel that the issue was discovered by partners, when many more platforms are put under stress tests. That may be true, but it may also point, if true, to a problem with Intel's validation process. Imagine the same problem in cell phones or smart TVs. If you think $700 million is a lot, think again.   

Intel may not be revealing everything it knows about this issue. Either that, or Intel is conservative in its estimates.

The good news, of course, is that it seems that Intel is taking care of the issue thoroughly and that ends up to be a good thing for the consumer. It is tough finding any Sandy Bridge boards on the market one day after the recall was announced. For example, NewEgg has pulled all boards and even Sandy Bridge CPUs from its website already.

Editor's note and correction: A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that the replacement cost of each affected chip was $880. We apologize that the extra zero accidentally slipped in. 

Share:
61
Comments
X
Submit

Comments
Add your comment
Kaori Cpu 02/01/2011 9:44 PM
Hide
-3+

I was actually planning to Purchase an i5 2500k and everything else with it off of newegg with in the next 2 weeks...this kind of pisses me off

bison88 02/01/2011 9:47 PM
Hide
-3+

Good to see reputable sites like Newegg taking good action even if it's drastic to save customers the time and money of accidentally purchasing one of these faulty boards even if it cuts some of their sales. It'll probably make up far more in the long run. Long live NewEgg :D

one-shot 02/01/2011 9:49 PM
Hide
-1+

"why didn't Intel's validation team catch this problem?"

It is because of different revisions. On A Revision the faulty transistor isn't present. However, it is present on the B revision which is the one that has the issues. This is why. That information is widely available all over the web.

_Pez_ 02/01/2011 9:56 PM
Hide
-1+

Intel and it's errors Buuu !!! AMD is taking too long !!! BUUUU !!!

Anonymous 02/01/2011 9:58 PM
Hide
-9+

FAIL in math ... $700,000,000 divided by 8,000,000 shipped = $87.50 each, not $880

geekapproved 02/01/2011 10:05 PM
Hide
-1+

I think it's going to be a LOT more than $700 million.

gti88 02/01/2011 10:08 PM
Hide
-2+

jeterder :
FAIL in math ... $700,000,000 divided by 8,000,000 shipped = $87.50 each, not $880


Yes, I've noticed that too.

tf2287 02/01/2011 10:11 PM
Hide
-1+

Since its actually $87.50 per, the likely final cost will be much much higher

Yuka 02/01/2011 10:12 PM
Hide
-0+

Well, if the error is found when they, let's say, have sold nearly the 8M units, think about lawsuits when some data was actually lost.

I think 700M now is way cheaper than a big lawsuit from a lot of people sown the road. Way cheaper.

Cheers!

jtt283 02/01/2011 10:18 PM
Hide
-1+

Here's one remark from the supporting link I found relevant:

"The scenario where Intel got 492 specific, repeatable, and very emblematic problem reports on the same day late last week that allowed the engineers to pinpoint the error in record time seems impossibly silly. Intel has some of the best silicon engineers in the world, bar none, backed by the best tools in the world, but this is too much of a stretch..."
I'm not supporting Intel here, and the article raises some questions, but:
1. Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. If Intel's engineers and their tools are that good (I have no reason to believe otherwise), then I can accept that they accomplished discovering and implementing a fix in record time. Consider the impact of satellite technology on the first phase of the Gulf War; Saddam had no clue then, and those outside Intel may not either now.
2. Who knew what, and when, may be of considerable interest, and more details may come out that point to dishonesty or other wrongdoing. As the article points out, the costs to Intel of this kind of nonsense would be huge; hopefully knowing that, they had enough sense not to have pulled any of that sort of nonsense.
We'll just have to see what happens!

virtualmatrix258 02/01/2011 10:20 PM
Hide
-0+

What's funny is I just bought a new Core i7 2600k and an Asus P8P67 Pro mobo along with it lmao...

It's all good though, just use your SATA 6Gbps instead of the 3 and wait to hear something from Intel regarding an RMA process.

wawa sxm 02/01/2011 10:21 PM
Hide
-2+

i'm pissed too, i can't beleive we're gonna have to wait till april for sandy bridge just because of a faulty sata3gb connection..really?? thats over kill

g00fysmiley 02/01/2011 10:22 PM
Hide
-0+

this is going to delay am3 price drops >_< growl i was hopign to pick up a chaepish 1090t

tpi2007 02/01/2011 10:23 PM
Hide
-1+

Well, actually, I think they didn't do their math very well.

If you read in here - http://www.anandtech.com/show/4143 [...] t-sata-bug on Anand's analysis (The "It’s Notta Recall" paragraph), you'll see that the cost Intel estimates comes down to more or less full motherboards - $87.50 per chipset, which kind of makes sense, even if they don't have to make a whole new motherboard, it still costs to desolder the old chipset, labour, and testing, packaging, etc.

The thing is, all the stores and the distributors also have a stock of Core i5's an i7's they can't sell. Well, they can, but nobody will buy a CPU without being able to buy a Motherboard until March or April.

So, the stores will want to receive Nehalem based CPU's for free and only pay for them once they can restart selling SB CPU's. Or they will want to return the SB CPU's and get Nehalems in exchange. Either way, Intel must account for the CPU cost part of the equation, which I think they haven't (at least publicly).

It's unclear how they are going to handle the situation, but this is not going to be easy for them in the next two months.

And even consumers are left in an awkward situation. They can't return the motherboard now, because there is no fixed motherboard available to exchange with, unless they can also return the CPU (but what if they bought it from a different store ? - how is Intel going to handle this ?), and chose to get the money back or exchange with a Nehalem based system instead.

And what about consumers that use more than 2 Sata ports ? It's actually quite easy to happen: 1 main HDD + 1 DVD RW/Blu-Ray already fill both Sata 3 ports. With more and more people buying a second HDD to store videos and photos (or a low capacity SSD to boot from, putting the HDD as the "documents disk"), you're walking into trouble already.

How does the store solve this problem, especially if you bought the CPU and motherboard from different shops ? Does the motherboard seller give you a PCIe sata add-on card for free so you can solve the problem ?

This is a PR nightmare.

blibba 02/01/2011 10:30 PM
Hide
-0+

You based the entire story on some flawed maths. So, now you can either edit the maths so that the story doesn't make sense, or you can just delete the story. Nice one Toms.

Protip: Proof read next time.

pacioli 02/01/2011 10:33 PM
Hide
-0+

$87.50 each chipset... hmmm... My Asus p8p67 Pro mobo cost $190 plus tax. They have to pay to have it shipped back and forth and replace with an entirely new mobo. Plus they better give me some sort of upgrade 'cause I am kinda pissed over the inconvenience... I think it will definitely be more expensive.

jtt283 02/01/2011 10:35 PM
Hide
-1+

The elephant in the room is AMD. That won't matter the least bit if Bulldozer sucks. If it doesn't, then two additional but unrelated possibilities come to mind:
1. If Sandy Bridge really wasn't ready, can AMD's lawyers convince a [non-techie] court that Intel released it early anyway just so people wouldn't buy AMD?
2. If Bulldozer is "decent," how many people left with a sour taste in their mouth by this mess might decide to give AMD a shot?

The plot thickens.

Thomaseron 02/01/2011 10:44 PM
Hide
-0+

Bulldozer FTW!

woshitudou 02/01/2011 10:53 PM
Hide
-3+

Cyrix 6x86 ftw!

EnderWiggin 02/01/2011 10:56 PM
Hide
--1+

virtualmatrix258 :
What's funny is I just bought a new Core i7 2600k and an Asus P8P67 Pro mobo along with it lmao...It's all good though, just use your SATA 6Gbps instead of the 3 and wait to hear something from Intel regarding an RMA process.



Exactly. I just swapped my HDD and DVD to the 6G ports... problem solved.

CyberAngel 02/01/2011 10:59 PM
Hide
-1+

1) Intel has one of the best chip technologies in the world. I think they rushed it.
2) Not enough SATA3 ports is a problem. Why buy the latest technology if you can't fully use. I mean even a fixed chipset is broken (for me).
3)
My estimate on total cost is more than three and half billion USD.
That includes total motherboards shipped back with SB + other costs.
4)
Buy Intel stock now, it's cheap...or wait for the better cost estimates to kick in...or wait for Bulldozer...anyway: buy Intel, it's cheap now. That juggernaut will be more expensive when Ivy Bridge arrives. Then you either sell or just profit.

nagrajan 02/01/2011 11:16 PM
Hide
-0+

jeterder :

FAIL in math ... $700,000,000 divided by 8,000,000 shipped = $87.50 each, not $880

Not actually a FAIL. $700M divided by 5-15% of 8M ~ 800K, ~ 875$ per chip.

cangelini 02/01/2011 11:27 PM
Hide
-0+

jeterder :
FAIL in math ... $700,000,000 divided by 8,000,000 shipped = $87.50 each, not $880



Hey guys, thanks for the eyes on this. Just chatted with Wolfgang and he passed along the following clarification:

"Wolfgang Gruener: Yes, I am guilty. In the original version of this article, the replacement cost per chip was said to be $880, which was obviously wrong, if $700 million relate to 8 million chips. This was a prime example of fingers being faster than the brain and I am gratefully that some eagle-eyed readers stepped on my toes. That said, the argument of the article remains the same. I don't think that Intel has said everything that is involved, especially since CPUs are pulled as well and that we know that these recalls are traditionally more expensive than the initially estimated cost - including rather blurry revenue impact such as consumer confidence."

wunderkinder 02/01/2011 11:59 PM
Hide
-0+

CyberAngel :
1) Intel has one of the best chip technologies in the world. I think they rushed it.2) Not enough SATA3 ports is a problem. Why buy the latest technology if you can't fully use. I mean even a fixed chipset is broken (for me).3) My estimate on total cost is more than three and half billion USD.That includes total motherboards shipped back with SB + other costs.4) Buy Intel stock now, it's cheap...or wait for the better cost estimates to kick in...or wait for Bulldozer...anyway: buy Intel, it's cheap now. That juggernaut will be more expensive when Ivy Bridge arrives. Then you either sell or just profit.



do you guys just pull numbers out of your butt?

virtualmatrix258 02/02/2011 12:01 PM
Hide
-2+

Bring on the AMD fanboys...

otacon72 02/02/2011 1:08 AM
Hide
--2+

I wonder

virtualmatrix258 :
Bring on the AMD fanboys...



I wonder what's going to happen when Bulldozer actually makes it to market and it's far behind SandyBridge...

virtualmatrix258 02/02/2011 1:14 AM
Hide
--1+

otacon72 :
I wonderI wonder what's going to happen when Bulldozer actually makes it to market and it's far behind SandyBridge...



In all honesty, in my opinion I don't care lol. Fanboys are going to eat this up and use it to make them feel good for having an inferior CPU, it's what they always do. People like me who use Intel for gaming and AMD for office use just don't care you know? I think that people need to get a life and figure out that if it wasn't for Intel there wouldn't be an AMD market, and if you have no idea what I'm talking about take a 6-9 week business coarse in college.

adam873873 02/02/2011 1:14 AM
Hide
-0+

Kaori cpu :
I was actually planning to Purchase an i5 2500k and everything else with it off of newegg with in the next 2 weeks...this kind of pisses me off



So was I... I was planning on buying a 2500k and a sabertooth p67 .. But this happened two days before I was expecting to buy it. Looks like I'll have to buy my cpu off ncix and find a website which sells p67 mobos. :\

Taylor422 02/02/2011 2:02 AM
Hide
-3+

virtualmatrix258 wrote :

In all honesty, in my opinion I don't care lol. Fanboys are going to eat this up and use it to make them feel good for having an inferior CPU, it's what they always do. People like me who use Intel for gaming and AMD for office use just don't care you know? I think that people need to get a life and figure out that if it wasn't for Intel there wouldn't be an AMD market, and if you have no idea what I'm talking about take a 6-9 week business coarse in college.




You might try a 6-9 week English/grammar coarse course.

retirepresident 02/02/2011 2:05 AM
Hide
--1+

intel just blow off there feet off. Until May to correct motherboard desktop. Until Aug or Sept before anything is fix. Loss....more like 3-10 billion dollars.

virtualmatrix258 02/02/2011 2:06 AM
Hide
--2+

Taylor422 wrote :

You might try a 6-9 week English/grammar coarse course.




Oh wow! One misspelled word on my android!! Did I hit a nerve there buddy? I must have...he brought up grammar. That's a total sign of ignorance and the fact he has no ammunition but to troll. Have a good night.


Ads

Best offers

Newsletters


OK
Ads