Class action lawsuit alleges AMD’s Bulldozer CPUs aren’t really 8-core processors

9 Nov 2015 | Author: | No comments yet »

AMD hit with lawsuit overdeceptive Bulldozer chip core claims.

AMD is in the hot seat again. The lawsuit against the US chip giant notes “allegations of deceptive marketing” by overstating the number of cores contained in the chip, with the firm accused of claiming there is eight cores when in reality there is only four.The legal action has been started by Tony Dickey at the US District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose Division; the allegation is that the Bulldozer CPU is advertised as having 8 cores, but it effectively has just 4.

When released, the Bulldozer x86 processor was said to be the first ever eight-core desktop chip, having four modules, each with two cores, that are completely unlocked for easier overclocking – something designed to make it appeal to both PC builders and multimedia and gaming enthusiasts. The architecture of the chip is such that each of the cores is unable to operate independently meaning that it functions in the same way as a 4-core processor.

In late October, one disappointed AMD buyer filed a class action lawsuit arguing that AMD’s statements about Bulldozer supporting up to eight cores were false. AMD faces allegations under the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, California’s Unfair Competition Law, as well as false advertising, fraud, breach of express warrant, negligent misrepresentation and unjust enrichment.

The company promote that a certain processor comes with eight cores, but in reality it only had four — each core in AMD-speak was just 50% of a module, and couldn’t function autonomously. Dickey alleges that because the chips possess four cores, not eight, as advertised, they can only perform half the amount of calculations simultaneously. The suit alleges AMD built the Bulldozer processors by stripping away components from two cores and combining what was left to make a single module, and in doing so, the cores no longer work independently. AMD hasn’t remarked just as yet regarding the lawsuit, though it’s worth noting that the processor maker is pulling back from the modular chip designs at the center of this legal scuffle. Therefore, it argues that AMD’s Bulldozer CPUs suffer from material performance degradation, and cannot perform eight instructions simultaneously and independently as claimed.

Its next architecture, Zen, epitomizes a more usual line of attack that concentrates on concurrent code threads inside each core, such as Intel’s Hyperthreading. Dickey is particularly angry because he thinks average consumers in the computer CPU market lack the technical expertise to understand the design of AMD’s processors and therefore rely on the company to convey accurate specifications. Joel Hruska over at ExtremeTech isn’t buying the claim that AMD’s eight-core processors perform like a quad-core CPU, saying it’s “utterly without technical merit.” That site’s testing shows that multi-threaded applications scale up in performance as more Bulldozer CPU cores are used. He says that because AMD did not do this, “tens of thousands of consumers have been misled into buying Bulldozer CPUs”, which can’t perform the way an eight-core CPU would.

In the lawsuit’s bulwark of California, if throngs of people who purchased the Bulldozer-based computers win in the legal battle, they are cinched to receive a whopping settlement amount.

Here you can write a commentary on the recording "Class action lawsuit alleges AMD’s Bulldozer CPUs aren’t really 8-core processors".

* Required fields
All the reviews are moderated.
Our partners
Follow us
Contact us
Our contacts

ICQ: 423360519

About this site