[Mobo] BEWARE!! of the latest Gigabyte motherboard

[shadow84]

If today, the pen coy advertise they use 14 coil, but in the end user found out it is diff rev becos onli 10 coil. The coy is at fault for misleading. Hw can coy claim things that they do not fulfilled or inform customer abt the change.

Tis might NT cause the customer anything, pen can write, throw on floor still can write.

But it is dishonest for coy to claim things they did not, n no do their part to highlight properly.

Just to pacify a troublesome customer like you, they must print big big rev.X on top of their other marketing points on the package? You willing to pay them the costs?

Just because of 1 customer, they must change the whole printing process? You absorb the costs so that you can see big big rev. X on the package?

 

[shadow84]

Found a copy of Gigabyte disclaimer online

Gigabyte Official disclaimer statement:
Please note that new version amended to all of our motherboard is better than the old version.

Gigabyte Responsibility clause:
* The above product specifications, images and other information for reference only.
If there is anything the actual product does not match, the actual product shall prevail
GIGABYTE reserves the right to make modifications at any time.
For any loss arising from the use of such information, the GIGABYTE assumes no responsibility.

For a clone account by ykrap1, you proved something right this time....

This clause is commonly found in most items.

 

[MPotato]

After so many pages of flaming, fighting, I still don't get TS and his side of the argument. How does a revision change to a B85 motherboard (any brand, not just Gigabyte for the matter), result in 'worse performance' and hence the conclusion that Gigabyte is out to scam people just because no one told TS he is buying rev2, not rev1? Its like you go and buy Windows 8 OS, end up you buy Windows 8.1 OS, do you sue Microsoft for selling an updated version and sue the salesman for 'not informing you'?

And wads with the comparison to onboard capacitors? By now you shld know that B85 boards are lowest of the range. B85 < H87 < Z87. And many people have repeated over and over again, B85 boards are not designed for overclocking. If you insist on good capacitors for overclocking on B85, your problem, not Intel/Gigabyte/Bizgram problem. Do you expect to pay $20 for a cheap set of speakers and get superb high-quality sound? Do you expect to play Crysis 3 at 4k resolution at 120fps using cheap sub-$100 graphic cards?

If the above don't convince you of why so many HWC forumers are posting comments against your thread, then I believe that your thread is a nuisance thread aimed at damaging the reputation of Gigabyte and/or Bizgram.

I no say it is NT working
I no say it is bad performance becos I not tech
I no say I will Overclock

Wat I say is

1. Misleading claim in advertise, no highlight properly in website
2. No make effort 2 correct mistake
3. Gigabyte cut cost from my pt of view
4. Integrity of gigabyte to do such ting for low end board, what else could they b hiding

 

[shadow84]

I no say it is NT working
I no say it is bad performance becos I not tech
I no say I will Overclock

Wat I say is

1. Misleading claim in advertise, no highlight properly in website
2. No make effort 2 correct mistake
3. Gigabyte cut cost from my pt of view
4. Integrity of gigabyte to do such ting for low end board, what else could they b hiding

So, do highlight what you want gigabyte to do? Send you an official letter apologising to you that their simple layout cant be understood by you and that you had assumed to be rev.1 which is Gigabyte's fault?

1. The rev. 2 was highlighted out in the website, your eyes too small to see it and you assumed it was rev.1. Besides, you did not refer to Gigabyte's website when you did your research. You refered to bizgram website. How is that Gigabyte's fault?
2. They had already indicated rev.2 at the side of the box, it is your fault for not reading that portion till you reached home.
3. Your point of view is based on? Gut feeling? Heart feeling? Brain feeling?
4. How do you know that they are hiding other stuff? With this statement, Gigabyte can sue you for slandering since you have so far not provided any solid proof that they are hiding something. Maybe we should send this thread to Gigabyte, telling them that someone mentioned that Gigabyte is hiding something by changing the rev.2 and is based on his gut feelings and that he is spreading bad words about Gigabyte's brand... Wonder when you will receive their lawyer letter? Should be smaller than CASE letter, based on your logic.

 

[MPotato]

Found a copy of Gigabyte disclaimer online

Gigabyte Official disclaimer statement:
Please note that new version amended to all of our motherboard is better than the old version.

Gigabyte Responsibility clause:
* The above product specifications, images and other information for reference only.
If there is anything the actual product does not match, the actual product shall prevail
GIGABYTE reserves the right to make modifications at any time.
For any loss arising from the use of such information, GIGABYTE assumes no responsibility.

Tis terms is to protect manufacturer, it no mean gigabyte can shove all responsibility.

 

[tlkchew]

Hello, the pt is nt abt which board has more cap. Tis problem happen when info is nt passed down properly by manufacturer. They hv NT done their duty 2 inform customer of changes. If so efficient, y no highlight.

Also, it ABT integrity of gigabyte 2 do tis, nt abt money or the component use. If they can mislead tis, what else r they hiding as well.

Also, hw come if rev 2, onli write at the smallest area wit sticker , y NT print on colour box, change model 2 rev 2.0. Y hide at small sticker at 1 corner. To b frank, they shuld admit their mistake and move on. But no!

Clone from where ever who ever be it cdl or gigabyte think that they r right & no improvement 2 prevent tis. Hw 2 have gd customer satisfaction, then no pt developing product if u no put think frm customer pt of view.

User like us, nt many are like hwz shadow84, Roy, nanana82 and whoever commented. Hw can u just tink I m the 1 that shuld bear all the responsibility while manufacturer no wrong.

Seriously if gigabyte or cdl is reading tis, really disappointed wit your action and response.

They did put sticker at the corner so you are informed. Also what problems wit revision 2? Hardware revision are done all the time. There is probably no change in the specs.

 

[whereisyh]

hello, it is NT whether it is functioning, I m saying it is misleading in its claim like what CASE mention n agree. So wT if it is function, I did nt buy this board as it is diff frm what it advertise.

Ppl here are like u, stubborn n unable to accept with fact.

I buy base on PIC A, come out is PIC B. So what if B functioning like A. I buy base on info frm A, but B is the 1 I gt. It's misleading.


It is all ABT honesty and integrity. If wrong, just admit n improve, NT here trying to cover here n there

Unsurprisingly you're muddying the waters. Let's distill your argument. You claim that Giga had misrepresented its product. That is unlikely. Let me give you an example of misrepresentation. Giga claims that it's product is unrevised and yet sells you a revised product. Clearly not the case here.

More likely, your gripe is that Giga failed to properly inform you of the relevant changes. Here, the debate centres on the standard of disclosure. From your replies, you imply that Giga is obliged to splash the revision in red ink on the front of the box and, on top of that, have the sales person specifically direct you to the obscene red ink. Perhaps clear to observers, this is an unrealistic expectation on your part, completely separate from Giga's duty of disclosure. For Giga, its duty of disclosure is directly related to the represented functions of its product. I think here's where you have the greatest difficulty with comprehension. Misrepresentation, as the word suggests, involves the failure to fulfil one's representation. To avoid this, where revisions are made, Giga is obliged to specifically disclose important changes that affect the represented functions of the board (pcie slots, sockets, etc). Since you readily admit that the functions are undisturbed, it is beyond difficult to understand your allegations of bad faith on Giga's part.

Of course, I don't expect you to be capable of following the points mentioned above although they are already broken down. Rather, I should think that the earlier quote by Mark Twain would be increasingly apt.

 

[royfrosty]

230 replies already. lol

 

[shadow84]

Funny that TS can continue to KP in this thread while he have not visited CDL to try find a remedy... He hoping Gigabyte SG or CDL will be reading this thread? Then, if nvr read, gonna report to CASE for not supporting their customers?

 

[Dr.Vijay]

Are you new to SLS or the world of motherboards?

As far as I can see, you've got a perfectly fine rev 2.0 board as seen on their product page.

Yes, revisions are not usually reflected anywhere prominent because it's like the equivalent of BIOS updates on the s/w level. You want those intricate details prominently printed too? The exception to this is - when the next revision rectifies major issues or concerns present in the earlier version.

As far as the shops are concerned, it's just a newer version of the same board, SKU. Whether it's reflected in the shop's inventory appropriately, it really depends - most of the time those minor details aren't updated/reflected, you've to do your own homework. Another example is RAM - do you know how complicated their actual product naming is? It's all simplified in the price list and the bill (sometimes). You've to conduct your own checks to ensure what you're actually getting.

And as for where the revision 2.0 is reflected - it is reflected in all the standard locations.

Gosh, so many pages on this topic when it's actually nothing out of the ordinary.

This is how things have been since - forever.

Closing this thread as it serves no purpose; you've just misunderstood the product/situation.

If today, the pen coy advertise they use 14 coil, but in the end user found out it is diff rev becos onli 10 coil. The coy is at fault for misleading. Hw can coy claim things that they do not fulfilled or inform customer abt the change.

Tis might NT cause the customer anything, pen can write, throw on floor still can write.

But it is dishonest for coy to claim things they did not, n no do their part to highlight properly.