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

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Wolfgang Gruener
Contributor

Wolfgang Gruener is an experienced professional in digital strategy and content, specializing in web strategy, content architecture, user experience, and applying AI in content operations within the insurtech industry. His previous roles include Director, Digital Strategy and Content Experience at American Eagle, Managing Editor at TG Daily, and contributing to publications like Tom's Guide and Tom's Hardware.

  • 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
    Reply
  • bison88
    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
    Reply
  • one-shot
    "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.
    Reply
  • _Pez_
    Intel and it's errors Buuu !!! AMD is taking too long !!! BUUUU !!!
    Reply
  • FAIL in math ... $700,000,000 divided by 8,000,000 shipped = $87.50 each, not $880
    Reply
  • geekapproved
    I think it's going to be a LOT more than $700 million.
    Reply
  • gti88
    jeterderFAIL in math ... $700,000,000 divided by 8,000,000 shipped = $87.50 each, not $880Yes, I've noticed that too.
    Reply
  • tf2287
    Since its actually $87.50 per, the likely final cost will be much much higher
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    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!
    Reply
  • Onus
    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!
    Reply