Originally Posted by LordJuanlo
As I posted in other thread, GPU cafe got this data from hardware.fr, and it's one of the most reputed French tech sites, but it may not be very famous outside France. They did a similar research to check hard drive failure rates, you can check it here
, being Samsung the worst with a 2.8% and Western Digital the best with 1.2%. I consider those guys a reliable source.
Faulty GPUs cost nVidia $43.6 million
, I think most of them are from the infamous notebook GPUs.
What do you consider hardware.fr a "reliable source" based on Lord Juanlo? Have you been reading them many years and found what they said to be true most of the time? Or does agreeing with them serve your pro-ATi agenda?
As far as the Tom's article goes, we've all known for some time that some laptop chips had a higher failure rate and that NVIDIA and their partners did the right thing and offered extended warranties. That article just tells us that that only 1/5 of the money they set aside was used last year, suggesting the problem may be for less common than even NVIDIA thought.
The problem with hardware.fr's article is that is uses an "unnamed source" so we have no way of verifying it. It boils down to "some guy said". What if the guy applied for a job at NVIDIA, got told to get lost, went back to his job at the computer store shipping dept. and sent these cooked statistics on company letterhead for revenge?
What if the returns numbers are valid, but the GTX280 has the highest number because people returned them due to the highest cost?
Point being, data from one unnamed retailer in a small foreign country isn't exactly what I'm going to assume is the worldwide trend.