Does Liquid Metal on Intel CPU IHS Void The Warranty

Edyolo on 04/05/2024 - 11:16
Last edited 04/05/2024 - 14:26 by 1 other user

I used Liquid Metal on the IHS of my i9 14900KF (I have not delid my CPU), the Liquid Metal seems to have eaten away the CPU printed text on the top of the IHS.

I’m experiencing issues where I literally cannot open “Any” games. For example Cyberpunk would instantly crash. I used to think it’s my motherboard issue and ram issue, until I finally had enough and got an i3, which worked with no crashes at all.

It’s until this moment I found the i9 instability issues:

It’s found 80% of the i9 have instability issue.

Intel said Intel baseline profile should fix this issue. But… I’m using Gigabyte Z690, which Gigabyte haven’t yet published a bios with this baseline profile.

I’m trying to claim warranty with Centrecom since 15th of April, but they send it to Intel and Intel reject the warranty claim. Centrecom said it will take another 2 weeks to send the CPU back to me (taking 5-6 weeks). This is getting so frustrating, I literally have a 4090 without a CPU.

Considering 5090 is going to be out soon, 4090 is depreciating fast. Can I sue them for depreciation cost?

Ultimately I want my CPU to be repaired. If Intel reject the warranty claim, Centrecom should be responsible since they are the retailer that sold it to me.

  1. The defect is not related to the use of Liquid Metal thermal paste and would have likely occurred regardless of the type of thermal paste used.
  2. The erosion of the printed text and serial number due to the use of Liquid Metal thermal paste is a separate issue that does not affect the CPU's functionality or the underlying manufacturing defect.

So under consumer law I should have right for a remedy or replacement.

Gaming Computer Component CPU Intel

Comments

  • CrispyChrispy on 04/05/2024 - 11:21
    +18

    Can I sue them for depreciation cost?

    🤣

    • mskeggs on 04/05/2024 - 12:25
      +6

      Of course you can sue! Go see a lawyer, explain the case and the loss you have suffered, pay their bill and they will lodge the claim.
      Very simple.

      Not a wise move, but simple.

      • bargaino on 04/05/2024 - 17:03

        I am sure OP has been using this machine for Very Important business purposes, and has suffered substantial loss of income.

  • Sye on 04/05/2024 - 11:23
    +9

    Can I sue OzBargain for the cost of popcorn 🍿?

  • boomramada on 04/05/2024 - 11:33

    Can I sue them for depreciation cost?

    Technically you can sue anyone.

    • GordonD on 04/05/2024 - 14:13
      +1

      Well, not quite, you can sue almost anyone.

      For example you can't sue the King. He has sovereign immunity. Which is a real nuisance for all the people who rent property off him, or do work for him, or buy and sell him things, because they have no legal recourse in disputes.

  • freefall101 on 04/05/2024 - 12:00
    +4

    Did Intel deny the claim because of the liquid metal or because they’re denying all claims and blaming it on motherboard manufacturers?

    Really unclear what the issue is.

    • mskeggs on 04/05/2024 - 12:27
      +1

      Is there even a fault, or just a post saying someone else found a fault?

      • Edyolo on 04/05/2024 - 14:03
        -2

        Well I can’t open “any” games without crashing. Games like Cyberpunk would instantly crash. I just want a working PC, now without a CPU.

        • freefall101 on 04/05/2024 - 15:52
          -1

          Did you stress test the CPU at all? Or do any testing on the GPU or RAM?

          Instant crashing of games sounds more like a GPU issue.

          • Edyolo on 04/05/2024 - 16:18
            +1

            @freefall101: Yeah cinebench straight up crashing in multi-core test (although single core passes). AIDA64 crashes also.

          • Edyolo on 04/05/2024 - 16:21

            @freefall101: To isolate the issue I have also bought an i3 12100F, and everything is fine. I can open applications that I couldn’t with the i9 14900KF.

      • smalltime0 on 05/05/2024 - 21:24

        Its a known problem, Intel gave motherboards a "recommended" spec to apply for voltage max wattage etc. and didn't go no-no its a limit.
        So Motherboard makers basically just tested that their profile worked, went yeap that's stable, and now these issues are cropping up

  • ode1online on 04/05/2024 - 12:37
    +1

    You haven't mentioned if you are suffering the problem.
    Intel is blaming the issue on the motherboard manufacturers anyway stating that they are overclocking the CPU's and basically, they need to do a bios fix.
    So, if the remedy is to replace the CPU under warranty, then you will be in the same situation as they don't plan to fix it.

  • AndyC1 on 04/05/2024 - 13:41
    +3

    What did your lawyer say after the initial meeting that cost you more than your depreciation is?

  • 7ekn00 on 04/05/2024 - 14:14
    +1

    LOL buys a 14900 as a gaming rig instead of room heater!

    ie, any gaming review site / forum would have advised against this purchase :/

    But sue all you like, you clearly have the money to burn and the right mindset ;)

    • Edyolo on 04/05/2024 - 16:23

      I needed the multi-core horsepower for machine learning. I train large language model for my personal research project.

      • OMGJL on 05/05/2024 - 12:19
        +3

        needed machine learning,

        why not buy an Intel CPU and worry about cheater E core scheduling and stability issue later.

        plus who does ML using CPU anyway?

    • smalltime0 on 05/05/2024 - 21:25

      OP certainly had a CPU to burn

  • SBOB on 04/05/2024 - 14:35

    But… I’m using Gigabyte Z690, which Gigabyte haven’t yet published a bios with this baseline profile.

    Sounds like a gigabyte problem…
    Buy a new verified working motherboard.

    • Edyolo on 04/05/2024 - 16:19

      Gigabyte listed i9 14900KF as supported and verified working for this motherboard.

      • Bruceflix on 04/05/2024 - 21:19

        So send the motherboard back. Not fit for purpose.

  • brendanm on 04/05/2024 - 17:26
    +8

    Considering 5090 is going to be out soon, 4090 is depreciating fast. Can I sue them for depreciation cost?

    Holy shit, lol, lmao, rofl!

    Not only is this simply an insane premise on its own, the fact that they have rejected warranty, and you still think you can do this, is utterly mind boggling.

    That's enough internet for today.

    • Edyolo on 04/05/2024 - 17:31
      -3

      There is no damage to the CPU, only the text on the IHS is unclear. The CPU is unstable, I don’t see why they would reject the warranty.

      Also the defect is in 80% of the i9 14900K, and not related to the thermal material I used.

    • Edyolo on 04/05/2024 - 17:33
      -1

      If they promised you 2-3 days, then turns out to be 5-6 weeks. Do you think it’s unreasonable?

  • Bruceflix on 04/05/2024 - 21:22

    Did the CPU ever work? Presumably not, then it's DOA and centrecom should refund. If it did work and now doesn't, what changed when it went from working to not working?

    • Edyolo on 04/05/2024 - 22:24

      It's being unstable since day 1. I just thought it's other issues like ram or even motherboard. I never suspected it's CPU faulty, until I saw the news: https://wccftech.com/only-5-out-of-10-core-i9-13900k-2-out-o…

      I always thought I probably messed something up like not cooling the CPU enough. That's why I went as far as getting the ROG Ryujin ii cooler, applied liquid metal and even tried contact frame.

      It was not until the news outbreak that I realised it's CPU unstable. I guess I'm being too much of an Intel fan, and never suspected it's intel's fault.

  • OMGJL on 05/05/2024 - 01:48
    +1

    well, problem is, RMA and getting another CPU is likely not going to fix the issue.

    Baseline profile is not going to fix everything, it essentially is a huge power limiter in place. There's about 10ms delay between power actually surpass the limit, to power limiter detects and slow the CPU down… if the sequence works out just right, it can still crash the CPU.

    instead of using the baseline profile which limits your CPU performance anyway, you should really just apply a static clock speed and underclock it. It is much more consistent, as in it won't underclock like crazy when power limited, and it won't boost all of the sudden and cause instability either. Less fluctuation (in voltage or frequency) = easier to stabilize. It'd also benefit frame time consistency in gaming too because your CPU frequency wont' go rogue.

    setting to apply:

    Load line calibration : Low (it is very important to set it to low)
    CPU voltage — static,

    set it to around 1.35v, with low LLC, it'll droop down to around 1.22v under full load. you can tune this up or down by a bit (not too much), as long as your CPU don't overheat.

    CPU frequency: 5.6Ghz.

    Download yCruncher, press 1,7,0 to stress test. I'd say at least 30mins+ no crash means pass

    if not stable, drop down frequency to 5.5 or even 5.3

    once you find a frequency that doesn't crash, dial backdown 0.1 again. like 5.6 stablized? then use 5.5 with previous voltage.

    • Edyolo on 05/05/2024 - 17:28

      Well then the advertised 6GHz is misleading.

      • OMGJL on 05/05/2024 - 20:25

        or go use that Intel baseline fail safe profile, more fluctuation, more throttle under heavy load, less actual performance, but occasionally boost to 6Ghz, if the digit is all you after.

  • aussieprepper on 05/05/2024 - 08:42
    +1

    Maybe some one will start a class action vs Intel, surely you can't sell a CPU based on certain characteristics like gaming performance to then have the CPU run into issues and release a fix that slows the CPU down.
    Intel was using benchmarks with uncapped power limit to sell the CPU and now they say its causing stability issues. Also how about all the CPU degradation that has happen since people bought the CPU, they ran the CPU at the stock power level only for this to happen.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join