Slashdot Log In
Lawsuit Claims Nvidia Execs Concealed Serious Flaw
Posted by
CmdrTaco
on Wed Sep 10, 2008 11:58 AM
from the its-not-a-bug-if-you-say-its-on-purpose dept.
from the its-not-a-bug-if-you-say-its-on-purpose dept.
snydeq writes "A lawsuit filed in a California court on Tuesday alleges Nvidia concealed the existence of a serious defect in its graphics-chip line for at least eight months 'in a series of false and misleading statements made to the investing public.' The lawsuit contends that Nvidia CEO Jen-Hsun Huang and CFO Marvin Burkett knew as early as November 2007 about a flaw that exists in the packaging used with some of the company's graphics chips that caused them to fail at unusually high rates. Nvidia publicly acknowledged the flaw on July 2, when it announced plans to take a one-time charge of up to $200 million to cover warranty costs related to the problem. That announcement caused Nvidia's stock price to fall by 31 percent to $12.98 and reduced the company's market capitalization by $3 billion, the lawsuit said. The lawsuit seeks class-action status against Nvidia and unspecified damages."
Related Stories
[+]
Mobile: Laptops With Certain NVidia Chips Failing 310 comments
Eukariote writes "An estimated 18 million laptops with NVidia G84 and G86 graphics chips sold in the past one and a half years are experiencing high failure rates. Various laptop models from multiple manufacturers (Apple, Dell, HP, Lenovo, and others) are affected. NVidia blames it on bad chip packaging causing thermal failure. BIOS updates that turn the laptop fan on more frequently or permanently have been released by Dell and HP. The cynical interpretation is that this is likely to only delay the problem until the warranty has expired."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Curious to see where this one goes... (Score:3, Insightful)
I had an nVidia 8800GT card fail prematurely early this summer. I was pleased with its performance, other than the failure, so I picked up the newer version of the same card, from a different manufacturer. Unfortunately that was the middle of June :(
So odds are high that this card is going to die early too. And of course I don't have receipts for either card at this point, but if there's a chance at recouping some of my investment, I'd sign up.
-Rick
Re:Curious to see where this one goes... (Score:5, Insightful)
You should definitely sign up. They will most likely be providing a $20 coupon to all people who purchased nVidia products between a specified date range. I've heard the lawyers might get a small piece of the settlement too - like 50%.
Parent
Re:Curious to see where this one goes... (Score:5, Informative)
Past the joke, if it makes it past the warranty period you have little regress as a customer. While it's illegal to say "we're doing great" while knowing your main product line is failing from a security law point of view, unless the failing parts are in a safety critical application (e. g. child car seats) there is no law mandating a recall/replacement/settlement for selling a crappy product.
Parent
Re:Curious to see where this one goes... (Score:4, Informative)
The laptop is 3 months out of warranty so it's going to cost me around $1200 to get it fixed,
Apple has a flat-fee repair of like $300, fyi. Take it to a Genius Bar.
Parent
Re:Curious to see where this one goes... (Score:5, Informative)
I asked the "Genius" about the flat fee thing and he said it didnt exist. Which surprised me because a year and a half ago I had a different Macbook Pro die and the flat fee applied in this case..
So apparently it either
a) Doesnt exist anymore
b) There are obscure rules for when and where it applies
c) Some "Genius's" are douchebags
Parent
Re:Curious to see where this one goes... (Score:5, Informative)
$1200?
There is your price of "portability".
As a former mechanic, it always pissed me off when auto manufacturers tried to force customers to dealerships for repairs by making the components so difficult to repair that even independent mechanics could not fix them.
The dirty sekret is that the dealerships couldn't either. They simply resorted to part-swapping to confirm their half-assed diagnosis(manufacturer flow charts(Step 14: Replace with known good part), NOT actual testing).
The end result was that the independents were made to look like bumbling idiots("Your gunna have to take it to the Dealer...") after actually trying to find the problem, while the Dealership makes the money just by throwing parts at the problem (at customer expense).
I HIGHLY suspect that your a victim of that same process. One good reason to AUTOMATICALLY suspect your bill when there is more then one component replaced. If there was, more then likely, the first part didn't fix it, but the second did, and they want to get paid for the time it took to install the first part, so they simply tell you one part "took out" the other.
This is one of the reasons I am a FORMER mechanic. From a moral standpoint, I simply could not be a party to the deception that is all too prevalent in the business, and quit.
Parent
Re:Curious to see where this one goes... (Score:5, Interesting)
Did you buy a card with a lifetime warranty? Both EVGA [evga.com] and XFX [xfxforce.com] offer lifetime warranties on 8800GTs. Personally, I won't buy RAM or video cards from a company that doesn't offer a lifetime warranty, as there are more than enough manufacturers for both products offering these warranties. My current 8800GT is an EVGA, and it's nice knowing they're on the hook for this flaw if it happens to strike me. The card manufacturer has probably spent millions on Nvidia silicon, so they have clout to extract some compensation from Nvidia, whereas I do not.
Parent
Re:Curious to see where this one goes... (Score:5, Informative)
I had one from PNY. I called to have them make good on the lifetime warranty, and was told that "lifetime" meant the lifetime of that product line, and since they no longer make that card, it's no longer covered. I went back and read the fine print, and sure enough, that's exactly what the warranty said.
I hope they enjoy whatever profits they made off of me on the sale of that one card, because I am now an ex-PNY-customer. I now typically buy EVGA.
Parent
Seriously, what is the issue with Nvidia chips? (Score:3, Interesting)
These stories keep on referencing the packaging being at fault...
Now I'm no electrical engineer but when you take a working chip and put it in a machine it seems a little odd to blame the packaging it came out of for higher than normal failure rates if it works initially.
Maybe "packaging" refers to the way the actual chips are placed into the material around them? Although it seems like a very odd way of wording it as to me packaging implies something that is discarded.
If someone could explain in non-layman's terms what exactly the problem was I would much appreciate it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In short, it's the connection of the chip to the board. You have minute metal connections providing current and data transport from the physical chip to the rest of the computer. The choice of material for these connection was poor, and so was the choice of glue holding the chip and the substrate together (and ideally protecting the metal connects from undue stress).
The
Re:Seriously, what is the issue with Nvidia chips? (Score:5, Funny)
Nope, it seems that the cardboard box they were shipped in contain a high level of a rare Iridium isotope that causes molecular decay of the technology in the Nvidia chip. Nvidia runs on Logic diamonds and logic diamonds exposed to Iridium 237 causes rapid decay and failure.
If they would have had the packaging done in the USA instead of china things would have been ok.
NOTE: there is no danger to the consumer, the paint on the outside of the boxes has high amounts of lead in it, shielding you from the Iridium 237 radiation.
Cyrnfr hfr tbbtyr arkg gvzr gb trg na nafjre guvf fvzcyr dhrfgvba
Thanks!
Parent
Re:Seriously, what is the issue with Nvidia chips? (Score:5, Interesting)
An actual microchip is absolutely miniscule. The ceramic(or plastic, or meta) that holds it and contains the pins that get soldered to the board is called packaging.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Seriously, what is the issue with Nvidia chips? (Score:4, Funny)
"If someone could explain in non-layman's terms what exactly the problem was I would much appreciate it."
nobody else caught your request for 'non-layman's terms' so here goes:
Chip Scale Packaging (CSP) Technology
The information presented in this chapter has been collected from a number of sources describing CSP
activities, both nationally at IVF and reported elsewhere in the literature. The most important of the former
being the Chip Scale Packaging Task Force, an international multi-client programme carried out between
1996 and 1997 and a project work carried out by two students at Chalmers University of Technology..
D1. Introduction to CSP Technology
D1.1
Definition of CSP
Originally, CSP was the acronym for Chip Size Packaging but very few packages are of true chip size.
Therefore, the acronym is today usually used for Chip Scale Packaging. According to IPC's standard J-STD-
012, "Implementation of Flip Chip and Chip Scale Technology", a CSP shall have an area of
no more than 1.2X the area of the original die size and is direct surface mountable [D1].
D1.2
Description of various types of CSPs
In contrast to most other package types, the name of the package type, "Chip Scale Packaging", contains no
information about how the package is constructed, except for that it shall have approximately the same size
as the chip. Therefore, CSPs include component types with probably more dissimilar characteristics than
any two other IC package types clearly manifesting the inaccuracy to look at CSPs as a homogenous group.
Some packages look like miniaturised BGAs which names like miniBGA and BGA indicate. Others have
leads which give them properties similar to conventional leaded packages such as PLCCs. For this reason,
CSPs are often classified based on their structure. At least four major categories have been proposed [D2].
These are: flex circuit interposer, rigid substrate interposer, custom lead frame, and wafer-level assembly.
Examples of packages of these categories are given in Figure D1.
Chip
Sealing Resin
Lead Frame
Wire Bond
Tape
Protective
Layer
Custom Lead Frame
Package by Fujitsu
Rigid Substrate Interposer
Package by Matsushita
Chip
Sealing Resin
Land pad
Ceramic Substrate
Via
Stud Bump
Flex Circuit Interposer
Package by Tessera
Chip
Ring
Lead
Flex Tape
Bump Array
Elastomer
Wafer-Level Assembly
Package by ChipScale
Metal Cap
Epoxy
Metal Lead
Metal Plated Silicon Post
Silicon Circuit
Figure D1. Main CSP Categories
D1.3
Driving Forces for using CSPs
The main driving forces for using CSPs are:
Improvement in performance
Size and weight reduction
Easier assembly process (compared to bare die attach)
Lower overall production costs.
Of these, reduction of size and weight are probably the most important factors for initial adoption of CSP
technology. Consequently, consumer products like camcorders, mobile phones, and laptops are among the
products that have been first to utilise CSPs.
D1.4
Advantages and disadvantages using CSPs
Chip Scale Packaging combines the best of flip chip assembly and surface mount technology. It gives
almost the size and performance benefits as bare die chip assembly, at the same time as it offer the
advantages of a encapsulated package. CSPs can be standardised, tested, surface mounted, and reworked.
So far most CSPs have been produced for applications with rather low number of I/Os but many types of
CSPs can be produced with large number of interconnections. However, before CSPs with large number of
I/Os will find widespread use, techniques for producing reliable low-cost high-density printed boards must be
developed.
The advantages and disadvantages of CSPs depend on what one compare with, standard surface mount or
bare die assembly. Due to the large spread of characteristics for various CSPs, it also depend on the type of
Parent
Re:Again? (Score:5, Insightful)
IANAL, but different parties can sue, I think.
Manufacturers of machines can sue for damages to reputation, warranty costs, etc.
Investors can sue for lost of investment, since it wasn't, in any way, a market force that caused the loss of value.
Those who got the chips in machines can sue for damages too, I bet.
Frankly, this whole fiasco just strengthened my love for ATI. Their newer binary blobs are amazing.
Parent
Re:Again? (Score:4, Funny)
"Frankly, this whole fiasco just strengthened my love for ATI. Their newer binary blobs are amazing."
Quick! Someone frame the above. I never thought I'd see the day when someone said something nice about ATI drivers.
Parent
Re:Again? (Score:5, Informative)
You must be new, I've said that quite a few times.
Seriously, though, they're more stable now, and they get fairly frequent updates.
Parent
Re:Again? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Nvidia customer here (Score:5, Informative)
No one knows for sure, and Nvidia isn't telling. The Inquirer says practically [theinquirer.net] all [theinquirer.net] of them, but their author has a history with Nvidia so there's quite a potential for bias there. The running theory is that the problem is due to thermal properties of a substrate material. This substrate material supposedly expands and contracts at a different rate than surrounding material in the chip package. Over time, this stresses the silicon or solder points, eventually causing a failure of the part. Laptop parts are definitely affected, you only need to look in notebook manufacturers forums and you'll see an incredible number of posts from owner of notebooks with, for example, 8600 GT mobile parts.
Desktop parts may also be affected, since they're all based on the same core silicon with (supposedly) the same substrate materials. It's possible that the problems aren't as apparent (at least not yet) due to the different thermal conditions you'd see in a tower chassis compared to a notebook. The very popular 8800GTs out there may start failing en masse in three months, six months, a year's time, or maybe never. Because Nvidia won't specifically say which parts are affected, whether it's all the parts or only certain manufacturing runs, etc., we have only speculation and rumor to go on.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually their latest drivers are pretty dang good. Plus nVidia had a bunch of driver issues as well not long ago.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Without nVidia, what's going to put the coals to AMD/ATi's proverbial behind?
Customer demand for better service. If AMD/ATI doesn't provide it, then you have a huge demand that's unfulfilled. That provides a large incentive for a new or existing company to fill that demand. If they need money to make it happen, banks will see the demand and be willing to offer loans. If there is no demand, then what's the issue? If you think there should be a demand for better, then you should convince customers of that.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So we can buy more shit?
That's the problem there buddy. We shouldn't be supporting lying companies selling sub par products.
Often time the retailers pay for this more than anyone else. Bad business is bad for everyone and its not up to consumers to support BAD BUSINESS nor should we feel like we have.
Well, not really (Score:5, Informative)
1. A dirty little secret of all governments, the USA included, is that they _can't_ get rid of unemployment or inflation, and they're actually trying to keep both where they want them. There's this funny little hyperbolic-looking curve called the Phillips Curve [wikipedia.org], which ties inflation to unemployment. If you even tried to push one to zero, the other rises sky-high.
So the best any government can do is to keep both at a point they can live with. Exactly what that point is, that's a matter of political debate and position, but everyone tries to do that. A mean most used is the interest rate. That's what the federal reserve does in the USA, but other countries have their own similar institutions.
(The corolary being that any politician which harps on unemployment and inflation as proof that his opponents are evil, or worse yet, promises to really solve either or both, is himself a liar and has no scruples telling you lies to gain power.)
So, yes, a bunch of people without jobs _are_ what makes the economy work. (A capitalist economy included.) Because without those, you'd get a hyperinflation comparable to interwar Germany. (Just as a comparison point, not saying that that's the same cause.) And conversely, if anyone actually managed to eliminate inflation, like some idiots demand, most of you would be out of job.
2. Well, actually, the reluctance to make people change jobs was arguably one of the (several) reasons the Soviet economy colapsed. They were very reluctant to kick people out of a job, since the whole theory was that everyone should be given a job in communism. So if they made a hammer manufacturing company, and 20 years later there would be more of a need for wrenches, they'd still keep a bunch of people there making hammers, just so they don't kick them out and tell them to find another job. It's not the only factor, of course, but worth thinking about.
Or seen at another level, they wanted to eliminate both the unemployment _and_ inflation (via price controls) which had the same devastating results as when it had been attempted before. If both can't take their natural positions on that curve, something else has to give. In their case, productivity went down instead, and corruption went out of hand. Which effectively is another way to get inflation, only in a much more destructive way.
3. The whole thing about capitalism and the free market is that it's an optimization algorithm. It's really a genetic algorithm, based on semi-uninformed trial and error. The "genes" (processes, ideas, products) which are closer to optimal survive and are copied by others, and the process repeats, moving it all closer to the optimum. The genes which lost, and the companies which bet on them, die. Sometimes spectacularly, leaving a bunch of people temporarily unemployed.
That's how it's supposed to work. Bit wasteful, no doubt, and stressful for those who end up looking for a new job. Scott Adams of Dilbert fame (who, I might add, is actually trained as an economist, so he might understand these things) claimed in a blog post that it's "harnessing the power of stupidity" and that at any given moment, 80% of society's resources are pushed off a cliff by idiots. But somehow it seems to work better than anything else we've tried. Trying to prevent that optimization cycle from happening, deviates from optimum very quickly, and produces even worse results.
It _is_ what makes capitalism work.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
[stockholders are] being punished for investing in a company that lied about shit products.
Have you seen the markets the last couple weeks? There must some big crapload of companies out there who lie about shit products.
... oh wait.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The class is stockholders not consumers. Unless you hold/held stock in Nvidia in the timerange, you won't see anything.