Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 158 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,502 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Very interesting.

http://uk.hardware.info/reviews/5835/spot-the-differences-gigabyte-motherboard-revisisons-present-markedly-different-test-results

First news post, and posting on mobile - delete/amend/advise as appropriate if I've missed anything.
Quote:
Several days ago, one of our (Dutch) forum visitors asked about a Gigabyte motherboard with difference characteristics than the original model, and visible differences from the photo displayed by the shop where it was purchased. A bit of Googling and browsing through Gigabyte's website shows that the Taiwanese manufacturer makes new revisions of quite a few of its motherboards, mostly in the budget segment. For us reason to do some more research and buy and test the motherboards. The results are more than a little remarkable...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
WOW, I've always been a big fan of Gigabyte motherboards for being very stable and having quality parts based on my experience with them and from reviews. Seeing them pull this BS now though really changes my opinion of them. Really hope this is a minor blemish on their quality standards and they issue some form of apology/refund/promise to improve. Otherwise I will start avoiding and stop recommending their products.
mad.gif


Edit: I wanted to quote two paragraphs from the article which I think summed up the issue well.
Quote:
So, as a potential buyer you check specifications and photos of the product at the shops, but these are based on the first revision; once you order, you will probably receive a newer revision. Because price comparison engines such as Hardware.Info also use UPC and product codes to categorise information, these also don't spot new revisions and thus keep showing old specifications and photos. And thus this way too doesn't offer you as customer correct information about the product you are ordering.
Quote:
The significantly higher temperature of the components in the CPU power supply and the unbalanced load over the mosfets in the Rev 2.0 board make it likely that the new revision won't last as long as the Rev 1.0, even though we cannot prove that using this test. What we can demonstrate beyond any doubt is that the CPU power supply of the Rev 2.0 board is not up to the task, even for normal consumer workloads. The video encoding test shows that thanks to the lower amount of mosfets temperatures rise much more quickly, leading to CPU throttling and lowered performance. Rev 1.0 does not show that behaviour at all.
 

·
To The Game
Joined
·
7,674 Posts
Yea, you have to keep a eye out for things like this. A company will put out a product, get it reviewed, then revise it using cheaper parts but keeping the general name. Sure, you can find out it's a different version, but, we all know this is pure BS meant to deceive the end user.

Quote:
Originally Posted by szeged View Post

Low end mobos in the first place I'm just glad it wasn't on their overclock or gaming series.
So when you're on a budget, you don't deserve to get the product you're paying for?
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: FreeElectron

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
I've experienced this with my Gigabyte GTX970 G1. All the reviews I read were raving about the Samsung memory being able to hit 8GHz but my 970 came with Hynix memory and can barely hit 7.2GHz. I realise that they don't guarantee any results from overclocking, but I can't help but feel that they made the initial 970's with Samsung memory to hype the product and then switch to the Hynix for cost savings.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,348 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chargeit View Post

Yea, you have to keep a eye out for things like this. A company will put out a product, get it reviewed, then revise it using cheaper parts but keeping the general name. Sure, you can find out it's a different version, but, we all know this is pure BS meant to deceive the end user.
So when you're on a budget, you don't deserve to get the product you're paying for?
When your on a budget you should do your homework like the fine people in this article did so you don't end up paying for cheap underperforming garbage. Get the most for your money.

Also these low end mobos don't need a trillion vrm phases in the first place, chances are you weren't gonna go far overclocking on them anyways.
 

·
Pinoy po mga koya
Joined
·
7,528 Posts
im dissapointed gigabyte. I've been a loyal gigabyte user since early 2000's. revisions = improvements. not downgrades smh
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrusherW9 View Post

I've experienced this with my Gigabyte GTX970 G1. All the reviews I read were raving about the Samsung memory being able to hit 8GHz but my 970 came with Hynix memory and can barely hit 7.2GHz. I realise that they don't guarantee any results from overclocking, but I can't help but feel that they made the initial 970's with Samsung memory to hype the product and then switch to the Hynix for cost savings.
ot but I have two 970's. both have samsung chips. they suck so hard can't get past 7.5ghz
 

·
To The Game
Joined
·
7,674 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by szeged View Post

When your on a budget you should do your homework like the fine people in this article did so you don't end up paying for cheap underperforming garbage. Get the most for your money.

Also these low end mobos don't need a trillion vrm phases in the first place, chances are you weren't gonna go far overclocking on them anyways.
The problem is when you do your homework you're seeing reviews for a similarly named product that really isn't the one being reviewed. On top of that, most people buying real budget products are going to be new, and really don't know enough to know what little differences totally change the perceived value of a product.

It's a sleazy practice if you ask me.

I don't blame GB for it though, since all companies seem to do it.

*In my back up rig I used one of those Kingston V300. It wasn't until after I bought it that I found out about the different memory types used. I got lucky on mine, but, I know I spent hours reading up on that SSD before buying it. It's easy to miss things.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: -iceblade^

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
Quote:
The reason for that lies in the way Gigabyte brings the new products to market, using exactly the same manufacturer and UPC codes as for the original versions. Thanks to that, distributors and online shops (who work with automatic links based on these codes) cannot tell the difference.
I can't be completely certain, but I seem to recall my previous motherboards having the revision on the info sticker on the box.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
740 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by szeged View Post

Low end mobos in the first place I'm just glad it wasn't on their overclock or gaming series.
Quote:
Originally Posted by szeged View Post

When your on a budget you should do your homework like the fine people in this article did so you don't end up paying for cheap underperforming garbage. Get the most for your money.

Also these low end mobos don't need a trillion vrm phases in the first place, chances are you weren't gonna go far overclocking on them anyways.
I thought you was crazy for having a human unicorn. I have to agree with you. Here a rep+
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by szeged View Post

When your on a budget you should do your homework like the fine people in this article did so you don't end up paying for cheap underperforming garbage. Get the most for your money.

Also these low end mobos don't need a trillion vrm phases in the first place, chances are you weren't gonna go far overclocking on them anyways.
My issue with this is that the video encoding tests using the stock processor specification clearly show that the Rev 2.0 board cannot even properly support stock settings, so of course any thoughts about overclocking are out the window when this trash fails to perform advertised functions. I'm not sure if this falls under false advertising of support for many processors or if it's very poor quality control/faulty product.
frown.gif
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,090 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrusherW9 View Post

I've experienced this with my Gigabyte GTX970 G1. All the reviews I read were raving about the Samsung memory being able to hit 8GHz but my 970 came with Hynix memory and can barely hit 7.2GHz. I realise that they don't guarantee any results from overclocking, but I can't help but feel that they made the initial 970's with Samsung memory to hype the product and then switch to the Hynix for cost savings.
I've seen plenty of Hynix equipped 970s reach 8ghz, enough that I lost count. Similarly, I've seen plenty of Samsung equipped 970s not even getting past 7.4ghz. So....?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,010 Posts
So , while it is clearly stated on their webpage about the differences in revisions ,this part is not, which is a worry,
Quote:
(even though changes like a lower number of phases are not to be found in the official specification lists)
I would´nt call it a switch and bait before the lynch mob come out, it looks like manufacturers just need to sort out their product codes
Also mentioned that they are not alone , some of the other big hitters pull the same.
Quote:
New revisions of existing products without changing the codes unfortunately is hardly unique to Gigabyte. We have had our share of discussions on the topic with manufacturers of power supplies such as Nexus, Antec, Seasonic and XFX, who have the same bad habits. An important difference: in all cases we discussed with those brands, the new products were clearly superior to the predecessors. Although we remain of the opinion that significant product changes should come with new product codes, it is less of a problem to deliver a better product to people, than when it is a markedly worse one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,282 Posts
All kinds of manufacturers do this with their value products all the time.

With revisions to their motherboards that most people on this site are buying like a UD3 or higher they fix issues or upgrade components, sometimes both.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,083 Posts
Asus all the way.

I am also Gigabyte user, but if i rebuild my system, gigabyte mobo or any of its component won't be in it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,997 Posts
Ahh. The old 'bait-n-switch'. I wonder how many people got stiffed with one of these.

The did it. they got called out for it. Now the straw that broke the camels back will be how Gigabyte responds.

Make it right. There is no excuse acceptable in my eyes. And a public "Sorry" isn't gonna cut it either.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
17,348 Posts
they dont really need to apologize, i bet you a lot more companies do this than you think and none of them are apologizing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,502 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Dunno.

Gigabyte are free to do this, just as we consumers are free to not purchase their products or send them back for a refund.

Personally I think it's pretty disgusting. I take no umbrage as long as the overall quality isn't impacted, but in this case there are clear disadvantages to the new revision and as such I will boycott.
 
1 - 20 of 158 Posts
Top