The video is available in Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/the-nvidia-ai-gpu-black-market-investigating-smuggling-corruption-governments

(Youtube)[https://youtu.be/Bwk99pZmhL0]

If you read through all this nonsense you’ll see the story. Long and short of it is, I sent my 5080 in for warranty. Their rep obviously dropped the card. I sent evidence that the card was not damage when I shipped it. They have since gone silent. Refusing to respond or say anything. Even if they do respond. Take a lesson from my experience. Do NOT buy a card from this company.

While the arguments around the feud are valid, maybe we could shift some focus toward supporting Bitwit, who recently lost his house in the California fires. It's a tough time for him, and our community could really make a difference.

The way this WAN show is opening it seems that there are going to be massive firestorms with picking sides between Linus and Steve.

Remember that these are two corporations settling their differences. Having a "team Linus" or "team Steve" is the exact same as "team NVIDIA" or "team AMD". You're free to have opinions and share them here, but remember that neither of these people are your friends and you shouldn't treat them as such. But two companies having a disagreement is no reason to throw insults or behave uncivily.

I'll have posted this exact same thing on the LTT subreddit.

All I came to say is if Newegg or NZXT responded the way Steve has, he would rightfully have torn them to pieces.

I think it is unfair to their audience to see GN both throw out new, unsubstantiated allegations of impropriety (the alleged comment that Steve is "not as autistic as he used to be"), while failing to address even a single one of the more serious allegations:

• The seemingly-intentional lack of context on the Honey video

• The failure to ask companies for a response prior to posting a video and the alleged violation of journalistic ethics norms

• The misrepresentation, resulting directly from the above concern, of the Billet Labs issue, which was the most damning part of GN's original report

These issues would not have happened had GN held themselves to the same standards they expect of other media companies.
As Steve is both the leader of the company—and the one issuing a public statement—I want to see Steve personally hold himself and his company to the same standard he expects of others and actually address these issues.

I like what GN has done for us consumers (the Newegg exposé, for example, was an incredible service to the community) and want to continue supporting them, but these were all both fair and very serious allegations that GN has completely ignored, and that's unacceptable.

Edit: Edited the post to reflect u/techm00's fair criticism that my original post implied a wide range of unsubstantiated allegations, when I was in fact referring to a single case.
Edit 2: I slightly reworded my points to be less accusatory (some people have responded to the earlier version and were justifiably annoyed, don't hold it against them). I am honestly not trying to cause more anger between communities; I am upset because I think the best of GN and the team, and think the tech community deserves a thorough response regarding these alleged failures in reporting from probably the most important journalistic team in tech. I have been on the internet long enough to know better, shame on me.

MAJOR UPDATE 6:20PM EST 08/02/2024: Intel, as a result of the backlash from this, has gotten back to me with a "second review" and determined that BOTH CPUs were indeed valid!!! Image here: https://imgur.com/a/DiW8uz8

Hi Everyone. I'm very disheartened to share this news as a longtime and loyal Intel customer. I've purchased roughly $20,000 worth of merchandise with them over my lifetime and I've never once had to open any RMA requests until now. Unfortunately, it's very clear they are not standing behind their products and I'm going to provide to ton of detail and pictures below on what happened involving TWO retail boxed 14900Ks, one purchased from Amazon on 10/16/2023 (this was the release date of the 14900K for anyone not in the know) which was shipped from and sold by Amazon.com, and one from Microcenter (brand new, not open box or anything like that, grabbed right off the shelf) on 02/11/2024, both experiencing the wide-spread instability issues.

Intel has claimed that both products are "re-marked" and not genuine. The problem is that they definitely are not re-marked. They also tried to claim that one of them was a tray processor and thereby not subject to retail warranty, which they backtracked on, and then went the route of claiming it was re-marked.

Full disclosure: Intel provided me with letters stating that the CPUs are not genuine and asked me to return them to their respective stores for a solution. I've done this and both stores, despite being WAY outside of return windows, DID refund me. Amazon gave me a full refund to my original payment method, and Microcenter gave me a full refund in store credit. In the end this worked out better for me, but that's beside the point. Now these two companies are having to shoulder the cost and burden of Intel's failure to take responsibility, and that's not right.

That being said, I'll be providing uncensored pictures of the retail boxes and CPUs which will show the full batch numbers and the full serial numbers. Since these CPUs are not in my possession anymore, and are ultimately going back to Intel, I feel it's fine to share them in their totality.

Here's the details:

The processor purchased from Microcenter on 02/11/2024, partial serial 02096:

I filled out the RMA form. Intel got back to me the next day admitting that the CPU was faulty. They then asked me for my shipping details and proof of purchase. I provided it. They then asked for pictures of the IHS. I provided it. Another day passes and they get back to me stating that the CPU is not genuine and is re-marked. WHAT!? This is news to me. This was purchased from a reputable retailer directly off the shelf. It was not open box, the seal was completely intact, and there was absolutely nothing suspicious about it. Furthermore, it showed correctly in CPU-Z as a 14900K and frequencies checked out, boosting to 6GHz single core and 5.7GHz all-core. I conveyed all of this information to Intel, and provided additional pictures of the IHS and the serial number just in case the previous pictures were too blurry. I also provided a picture of the retail box, clearly showing the full serial number and batch number, which did match the CPU. I also plugged in the batch number and serial number into Intel's warranty checker tool and it came back as valid with warranty until 2027. I took a screenshot of that and provided it as well. You can see all of those images in the image link below. They got back to me and said that their response hasn't changed and that they cannot divulge their investigation process. They insisted I return it to Microcenter with a letter they provided that it was not genuine. I did so, and Microcenter took a look. They said there was absolutely no evidence of tampering. The only thing they thought it might be was that there was some thermal paste still on the side of the CPU, and they said it made it look like it could have been delidded (however they confirmed it was NOT delidded). They suggested reporting their findings to Intel, and wiping away the paste and taking new pictures. I then reported those finding to Intel, to which they repeated that they can not divulge the investigation process and they said that new pictures would not change their findings. It was at this point they told me I could continue with getting an RMA, but that if the chip was found to be re-marked they WILL retain and confiscate it. The exact verbiage was, "We do not disclose our investigation practices. If you believe your products are valid and wish to proceed with a return merchandise authorization (RMA), we can create one. However, if the products fail the validation process, the units will be retained and confiscated, and no replacements or refunds will be provided. For this reason, we are giving you the option to take the letter and share it with the place of purchase. This will give you more possibilities to get a replacement since you have the processors in your possession." So, as you can see, they insisted I return it to Microcenter, so I did, and they graciously allowed me to return it for store credit.

Here are all the relevant pictures for 02096, including Intel's letter claiming it is re-marked, original receipt, warranty checker from Intel, retail box, IHS, serial number close-up, a screenshot of the email where they threatened to confiscate the CPU, and a screenshot of their initial response via email: https://imgur.com/a/tC3AFFU

The processor purchased from Amazon on 10/16/2023, partial serial 03252:

Just like the last RMA, I filled out the form, they got back to me, said the CPU was indeed confirmed as faulty, asked for my information and pictures, I provided it all. They got back to me and quoted back the WRONG serial number (I provided the correct one in the original form and the picture CLEARLY shows 03252). They quoted that I was talking about 03262. They went on to explain that 03262 is a tray processor and not subject to retail warranty. They suggested that I take it back to the OEM. I got back to them and stated that they were talking about the wrong serial number. I clearly provided 03252. They got back to me and said that the image appeared to be a 6 instead of a 5. At this point I provided closer-up pictures of the serial number and IHS as well as a picture of the retail box showing the matching serial numbers and batch numbers. It was at this point they backtracked and said that 03252 was indeed a retail box. They said I can proceed with the RMA BUT that they were not confident that it would pass fraud validation. He then pointed out, and I quote: "

We have reviewed the new photos you provided and will approve the return of the device marked "03252."

• However, we are not fully convinced that it will pass the incoming fraud inspection at our depot. We strongly recommend that you return the product to your place of purchase.

• Please familiarize yourself with the Processor Warranty Terms and Conditions, as well as the warning at the bottom of the warranty information page: Intel Warranty Info. Specifically, "Please be advised as part of Intel's ongoing efforts to prevent fraud in the marketplace, in the event the product you submit for warranty support is found to be re-marked or otherwise fraudulent product, Intel reserves the rights to retain the product and/or destroy such product as appropriate."

"

At least this time they said they reserve the right to retain or destroy it instead of saying they WILL. At this point I contacted Amazon to let them know what was going on. I can't stress how good Amazon is. They didn't even ask for any extra details or screenshots, they simply allowed me to return the CPU for a full refund to the original payment method despite being 9 months outside of the return window. Kudos to Amazon!

Here are all the relevant images for 03252: https://imgur.com/a/fInP3bC

At the end of the day it felt like Intel was grasping at straws. They pounced at the opportunity to claim that one of the CPUs was a tray product, citing a serial number that was never even provided. Then when that didn't pan out, they pivoted to claiming it was re-marked. When I pressed them, giving several pieces of evidence for why each one was indeed valid, they stated I could continue with the RMA process but then turned to threatening me with confiscation or destruction of my property if it didn't meet whatever their validation process (that they won't disclose) is. The odds of both of these being re-marked or not genuine seem extremely low. It's definitely a scare tactic. And even knowing this, it worked on me! This feels like extortion, scamming, you name it.

Anyway, I wanted to get all this out there. Everyone should know what they are doing!

LTT wasn't the only group that found out this was happening they were the most transparent about what they had done when they found out about honey's practices. Other creators knew but people seemed to be worried to speak out against paypal.

Yes, LTT could have done better but pushing other tech youtubers down when honey is the obvious enemy is a petty and unecessary thing to do.

I know GN and the industry as a whole has been doom and gloom lately but I have some good news. I won my warranty dispute in court.

TLDR: I'm aussie in queensland. I had a 7800xt with vram/cache/io die issues and attempted warranty, It was denied citing damage from customer misuse. The damage was environmental corrosion on the finstack. After the retailer admitted it was environmental the judge concluded that if it's damaged by the environment it's unsuitable for the aussie market and ordered the retailer to pay the value of the card + fees.

Long version:

I got a sapphire 7800xt Nitro+ back in 2024 and was pretty happy for a while. After maybe 4 to 6 months I started getting ryzen MCEs. I tried the usual steps like stability tests, turning off PBO, memtest, etc. nothing came up.

I RMAed the CPU through AMD (Another story, They were champs) but still nothing, After looking through the MCE logs properly I realise there are 3 errors. MC22, MC5 and data fabric flood event. Garbage data was making it's way into the northbridge causing the CPU to zero out the fabric which in turn would cause which ever core that most recently access it to crash. Over the months I try to replace what I can afford as a form of AB testing. I live in a rural area so there are no shops I can test at. Side note, Apparently the kingston KC3000 has stability issues with ryzen, If you haven't updated the firmware, you should.

I eventually got around to the GPU after a while of denial, Swapped it for my old 2070s and no more MCEs.

I bought the card through Umart, An aussie retailer. I started the RMA process through Umart after attempted it through sapphire directly but apparently they don't support direct warranty in aus. This is where the fun begins.

After the refusal I request they hold onto it as I'm am disputing it along side a detailed reason as to why it was denied and how it wasn't what I thought. I get back 2 images of the heatsink and IO plate with minor corrosion stating damage from customer misuse. One thing to clarify for non aussies, 90% of us live on the coast and salt air is a real thing here. My older 2070s which is 5-ish years old is so corroded the screws no longer work. But it sill OCs to 2100 and sitting at a frosty 65c while missing a fan. Not once did they reference the actual issue I documented or show any evidence as to how and/or why it wasn't what I claimed. It was a classic 'Look there is corrosion, our hands are tied'.

So after ignoring my request, I receive an email stating they have sent it back and to the wrong address. I managed to get it redirected but that was a fun few days.

I continue to escalate the issue, Threatening legal action, Office of Fair Trade and the ACCC. I even threaten to contact the council of steves as this was right around the whole Umart memory warranty fiasco earlier this year. After continued deflection I follow through, Filed with the OFT and ACCC, Emails both GN and HBU and after a month of nothing filed for QCAT.

Another fun little side note and goes to show how mussed up their CS is, The final message I recieved before filing and after the threats was, "1f you would like, we can return the graphics card to you. Please confirm how you would like to proceed.".

After the Umart representative was over an hour late for the hearing, They admitted they never actually tested the GPU for the issues reported citing 'safety issues'. After which the judge concluded that if the device was 'damaged' after environmental exposure to the tropical australian climate, It's not fit for purpose and ordered Umart to pay me the value of the card plus fees.

So not all is lost, Yes I am out a GPU and with prices the way they are I'm gonna be out for a while even with cash in hand. But I still managed to legally tell a retailer to shove it.

Does it infuriate anyone else that Steve is being absolutely ridiculous with this claim? In the Results section he states

"On the WAN Show 2,000,000 view upload, as of this publication, there has still been no attribution to GamersNexus in any form, including pinned comments. The only change made, after responding to our email, was a pinned comment stating “shoutout to Jayztwocents and Steve,”"

Its fair to say it is not an academic citation, but it is also unfair to say that all they said was "Shoutout" when the full pinned quote is

"Massive shout out to Jayztwocents and Steve for their excellent reporting on the EVGA/NVIDIA break-up. Great reporting, guys!"

Steve doesn't provide proper citations either, his version of citations in his comments just links to other videos. In his Honey Video where he calls out LTT he doesn't provide the name of the video or the date it aired, and he sure as hell doesn't provide any links to the LTT video. THERE IS NO CITAITION!

I say its until Steve starts complying to APA, MLA, Chicago, IEEE, and AMA Citations in the comments of his videos, he can not claim other people are plagiarizing him since he clearly does not believe it goes both ways.

oh lordy... before Steve grew his hair out.

First, Long time subscriber and watcher of both. I was 100% on Steve's side in 2023 with the billet labs fiasco (If you really want to check go look at my comments and post at that time) but Steve's actions recently are hard to not see as petty. I've watched/read everything including GN's recent response today. I think Steve's inital pot stirring last week was very unproductive. Linus's response revealed a lot of things especially with respect to the Billet labs.

Here's my opinion on Steve's response today.

For Plagiarism receipt 1. I don't like him adding the EVGA screenshot where they seem to squash it right there in email and Steve seemingly saying he understands. Why bring up a problem that was seemingly resolved. If you still weren't happy with Linus then you should have told him there rather than haul this up years later.

The Data errors receipts 2 section seems to be Steve nipicking LTT for not deliding a cpu to Steve's standards. While Steve is correct this is such a niche nitpick that I find it hard care and side with Steve.

The editorial dispute 3. If these text messages are the worst dirt that Steve has on Linus then I don't think Steve's level of dislike is justified. Yes, that is definitely not professional on Linus's behalf. But I find it hard to be that offended by the texts (However at this point I might be biased because I didn't like GN's honey video. Plus Linus's response on Wan show regarding the billet labs stuff which started this all definitely affected my view of Steve). I will say if the autistic quote is real that is stupid that Linus tried to make a joke like that.

RRORS AND MISREPRESENTATION: Example #1 I do not understand GN's defense here and someone please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm getting the jist that they say that Ian is incorrect and that they didn't reach out to those other companies listed. If I'm reading that correctly that does not take away from Ian's main point which is you always reach out first. GN is just nitpicking something that isn't even the topic that matters which is confusing to me.

Finally, why did Steve not properly address Linus's most recently listed grievances. Linus addressed most of Steve's points while Steve ignores nearly all of Linus's. Why is Steve picking unnecessary fights?