If you think youre having a bad day....

[BoggledBeagle]

They never supplied the new cables for the replacement supply that had different pinout, so how is it his fault.

Are you really sure about this? I have not followed the case, so I do not know.

I strongly doubt that any company would send out power supply without cables that are needed for safely running the power supply.

 

[LabRat 891]

Sorry, but the information packed with the product is above any information any represantative or sales person or emplyee of a third party fixing the PSU gave to the customer. If they write YOU MUST USE SUPPLIED CABLES WITH THIS PRODUCT on the box or in the supllied manual, and the customer did not do this, it is his fault.

In the case of this thread's topic:
that's wholly and thoroughly incorrect.

 

[Vayra86]

Wow. I learned a thing. And also: wow

 

[BoggledBeagle]

If they really do not want the cables with the PSU, that is weird, because they are a part of the PSU and there may be some problem with them.

And if they really ship out PSU without proper cables for it, it is inexcusable.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Trying to rewrite EVGAs history based on your own obviously jaded opinion barren of any actual FACTS is just sad.

You're obviously emotionally invested. Let me guess, it's also Jensen Huang's fault they screwed up every side business they've had right? From motherboards to mice and keyboards to their network and audio cards right?

I, like everyone, loved EVGA's products (when they hit the mark anyway and they usually did), but it's undeniable that their quality standards dropped HEAVILY over time and that they were unable to continue to provide the same level of service they did when they were at their prime, around the time Pascal generation cards were the good stuff.

Power supplies like their N1 series shouldn't be used on ANY computer and I'll stand by that but I've seen lots of people using them just because of the brand. They have regularly released trash products in the PSU market and relied on RMA in case anything goes wrong. This isn't up for debate, it's a hard fact.

The fate of EVGA was sealed by a series of bad decisions. The power supply drama is just one of them.

 

[HTC]

I think the "original problem" is the fact they changed the pin layout WITHIN a model, instead of BETWEEN different models, AND without notifying users of it: whomever though that was a bright idea ought to be fired ...

@ minimum, they should replace the hard drives, but it seems they aren't going to ... BAD CALL, IMO ...

 

[faye]

To expand on this, the replacement PSU was the same model, and EVGA's own guidance on warranty returns tells the customer to keep and reuse the cables, as they will not return sent in cables with the replacement PSU.

Posted about this in the staff chat, shocked me too, considering how respected EVGA is in the community.

... Yeah, unless the conclusion here is they replace all his drives and pay for data recovery at a world class facility at no cost to the customer without any further action required on the customer's part, I will never own or recommend another EVGA product. And that's thousands in lost sales from me alone, likely, over the next few years. This is a travesty.

I think the "original problem" is the fact they changed the pin layout WITHIN a model, instead of BETWEEN different models, AND without notifying users of it: whomever though that was a bright idea ought to be fired ...

@ minimum, they should replace the hard drives, but it seems they aren't going to ... BAD CALL, IMO ...

This literally never should have happened under any circumstances. It could be nothing but a cost saving move. There's no other reason to do it.

Are you really sure about this? I have not followed the case, so I do not know.

I strongly doubt that any company would send out power supply without cables that are needed for safely running the power supply.

This is their policy. It has been clearly stated multiple times.

What's more, as a PSU "manufacturer" (reseller) it is their moral responsibility to make sure that incompatible cables that looks similar that came with their products are physically incompatible if they are not pin compatible. Think about it, what is the likelihood this was going to happen regardless, given how many people, once they have a good experience with a brand buy multiple products from that brand and store them close together? If a set of cables look exactly like another set of cables and fit the same sockets for the same brand of PSU, they should be interchangeable. Anything less than this is a disservice to the consumer and a clear cost cutting move on the part of the manufacturer. It is not defensible.

 

[Keullo-e]

How is this user error? they changed the pinouts, never told him, and never sent the new cables to match the new pinout.



They never supplied the new cables for the replacement supply that had different pinout, so how is it his fault.

Didn't read that first yet still didn't edit my post, as that's still a valid advice in overall to never use other than the PSU's own cables. My bad.

 

[Dr. Dro]

I think the "original problem" is the fact they changed the pin layout WITHIN a model, instead of BETWEEN different models, AND without notifying users of it: whomever though that was a bright idea ought to be fired ...

@ minimum, they should replace the hard drives, but it seems they aren't going to ... BAD CALL, IMO ...

I mean this occurred because they're selling different power supplies that were contracted out to different OEMs under the same product line and in this case same wattage.

It's common practice when you're running a white label business which is what EVGA's power supply business essentially had become by their final years around Ampere generation GPUs.

For example, I'm aware that their BQ series use an Andyson platform on lower capacities and HEC on higher capacities. Their internal projects and platforms are completely different, which explains the pinout changes: they're a consequence and not a deliberate choice, and one that wouldn't matter if due diligence was made by RMA personnel in verifying the actual revision of the product.

Thing is it's just not something most RMA departments are even trained to check particularly if they're a skeleton crew.

 

[faye]

I mean this occurred because they're selling different power supplies that were contracted out to different OEMs under the same product line and in this case same wattage.

It's common practice when you're running a white label business which is what EVGA's power supply business essentially had become by their final years around Ampere generation GPUs.

For example, I'm aware that their BQ series use an Andyson platform on lower capacities and HEC on higher capacities. Their internal projects and platforms are completely different, which explains the pinout changes: they're a consequence and not a deliberate choice, and one that wouldn't matter if due diligence was made by RMA personnel in verifying the actual revision of the product.

Thing is it's just not something most RMA departments are even trained to check particularly if they're a skeleton crew.

Which is why at this point absolutely no one should be buying EVGA products.

 

[Dr. Dro]

Which is why at this point absolutely no one should be buying EVGA products.

Agreed. EVGA's case also brings to light another interesting phenomenon, that of extremely long warranties. The RAM business has long offered lifetime warranties because of the extremely low likelihood that the RAM would ever fail but it's often not the case with PSUs that offer 8 to 12 years in some cases but have to deal with power conversion and the instability from mains, heat in components etc.

If someone purchased a power supply with 10 years warranty in 2015 and it failed today, EVGA wouldn't have an equal product to replace it with and the one you'd get back is very likely to be completely different - and with the way things are going, suppose someone did this in 2021, what are the realistic prospects this company will be around by 2031? Slim at best I'd say.

My case with a 1300 G2 that I bought brand new, sealed in box in 2017 would fit in the latter. It was obviously older stock at that point, TPU's review of it is dated 2013(!), and it's an exceptionally high-quality power supply but... Yep, I'm not getting a warranty replacement on it.

 

[faye]

Agreed. EVGA's case also brings to light another interesting phenomenon, that of extremely long warranties. The RAM business has long offered lifetime warranties because of the extremely low likelihood that the RAM would ever fail but it's often not the case with PSUs that offer 8 to 12 years in some cases but have to deal with power conversion and the instability from mains, heat in components etc.

If someone purchased a power supply with 10 years warranty in 2015 and it failed today, EVGA wouldn't have an equal product to replace it with and the one you'd get back is very likely to be completely different - and with the way things are going, suppose someone did this in 2021, what are the realistic prospects this company will be around by 2031? Slim at best I'd say.

My case with a 1300 G2 that I bought brand new, sealed in box in 2017 would fit in the latter. It was obviously older stock at that point, TPU's review of it is dated 2013(!), and it's an exceptionally high-quality power supply but... Yep, I'm not getting a warranty replacement on it.

We all remember the heyday, the only difference here between those trying to defend EVGA and those horrified with how this is being handled and rightly shaming them / cutting all ties is whether we recognize how far they've fallen since.

 

[BoggledBeagle]

I think the "original problem" is the fact they changed the pin layout WITHIN a model

They can do whatever they want, as long the information you got when purchasing the product, information on the box and in documentation and the actual product match.

When they do a radical technical revision of the product, these are functionally two different products and it is up to them to keep track of which product is which.

If they send a customer a different product without all accessories neccessary to safely run the product, they are responsible for the damage.

 

[faye]

They can do whatever they want, as long the information you got when purchasing the product, information on the box and in documentation and the actual product match.

When they do a radical technical revision of the product, these are functionally two different products and it is up to them to keep track of which product is which.

If they send a customer a different product without all accessories neccessary to safely run the product, they are responsible for the damage.

I am blocking you.

 

[BoggledBeagle]

I am blocking you.

Good, your smile frightens me anyway.

 

[freeagent]

I have a few Evga cards, and a PSU. But I won’t be buying from them anymore. When they gave up being a partner is when I gave up being a customer. It still hurts a bit, but not interested in their peripherals.

 

[BoggledBeagle]

BTW a major part of this problem may be that EVGA is not a real PSU manufacturer. They just resell what somebody else made.

I only buy Seasonic PSUs because they really make them.

 

[Ferrum Master]

Meh, my mate fried my X58 a while ago, he mixed up his Corsair cables, that had similar fashion of doing stuff...

 

[HTC]

I mean this occurred because they're selling different power supplies that were contracted out to different OEMs under the same product line and in this case same wattage.

This SHOULD NEVER happen: LABEL IT something different, to indicate there's @ least ONE difference.

For example, I'm aware that their BQ series use an Andyson platform on lower capacities and HEC on higher capacities. Their internal projects and platforms are completely different, which explains the pinout changes: they're a consequence and not a deliberate choice, and one that wouldn't matter if due diligence was made by RMA personnel in verifying the actual revision of the product.

MAJOR FAULT ... but it wouldn't be required if they simply NAMED the changed product DIFFERENTLY (a simple letter or number after a "-" @ the end would be enough): different name means SOMETHING is different.


I work @ a ball bearing factory and EVERY component change means a new name for the final product, even if just a different letter.

For example:

- type of spheres used - metal, ceramic
- type of grease used - MANY different types
- type of cages used (what keeps the spheres separated) - of plastic, steal, brass, etc
- slack tolerance size (difference between the size of the inner and outer rings from nominal values, in microns) - C0 (normal), C2 (smaller), C3 (wide), C4 (wider) and C5 (widest)
- type of shields (what protects the bearing from contamination) - of plastic or metal, only 1 side or both sides
- type of packaging (how they are sold to client) - individual boxes or in a card / plastic box with X bearings

And ALL OF THIS for ONE TYPE of bearing, and we make SEVERAL DOZEN different types of bearings.

 

[faye]

Good, your smile frightens me anyway.

Not used to strong women. No surprise.

 

[LabRat 891]

This SHOULD NEVER happen: LABEL IT something different, to indicate there's @ least ONE difference.



MAJOR FAULT ... but it wouldn't be required if they simply NAMED the changed product DIFFERENTLY (a simple letter or number after a "-" @ the end would be enough): different name means SOMETHING is different.


I work @ a ball bearing factory and EVERY component change means a new name for the final product, even if just a different letter.

For example:

- type of spheres used - metal, ceramic
- type of grease used - MANY different types
- type of cages used (what keeps the spheres separated) - of plastic, steal, brass, etc
- slack tolerance size (difference between the size of the inner and outer rings from nominal values, in microns) - C0 (normal), C2 (smaller), C3 (wide), C4 (wider) and C5 (widest)
- type of shields (what protects the bearing from contamination) - of plastic or metal, only 1 side or both sides
- type of packaging (how they are sold to client) - individual boxes or in a card / plastic box with X bearings

And ALL OF THIS for ONE TYPE of bearing, and we make SEVERAL DOZEN different types of bearings.

While I (overall) agree, and found all that intriguing*...
I have 1st hand (humiliating) experience that says "not all industries follow those tight standards".

Ever installed a brake caliper 'upside down' (on the wrong side)?
I have.

At least for a Dodge Dakota, both left and right (front) brake calipers have IDENTICAL (marked) Part#s and casting marks.

Why? It's a quick and simple process to drill+tap the brake bleeder, etc. location specific to ea. side.
The casting (with the integral identification) is the same so, any 'differences' post-casting are not differentiated in the part number or any other markings.

*No Sarcasm. I'm the type of person that enjoys the 'industry insider-facing' advertisements I get on YouTube, etc.

 

[AsRock]

I could see how this would happen. Especially when they RMA the PSU and do not want the cables back. Just the PSU (this is the policy)

But who has 22Tb and doesn't back up?

What about the cost to replace.

If they honor this i think it could put the final nail in the coffin, hate to think how many would take advantage of this if they agree that they are at fault..

The real problem here is that it's not been standardized already. PSU's been getting more and more like pre-built ones

 

[claylomax]

I have a few Evga cards, and a PSU. But I won’t be buying from them anymore

If it's cards, you couldn't even if you wanted to

 

[HTC]

While I (overall) agree, and found all that intriguing*...
I have 1st hand (humiliating) experience that says "not all industries follow those tight standards".

Ever installed a brake caliper 'upside down'? I have.

At least for a Dodge Dakota, both left and right (front) brake calipers have IDENTICAL (marked) Part#s and casting marks.

Why? It's a quick and simple process to drill+tap the brake bleeder, etc. location specific to ea. side.
The casting (with the integral identification) is the same so, any 'differences' post-casting are not differentiated in the part number or any other markings.

*No Sarcasm. I'm the type of person that enjoys the 'industry insider-facing' advertisements I get on YouTube, etc.

The scale we work in is in microns: hence the "tight standards".


That's a bad idea, IMO ... not making the differences from each side CLEAR ...

Referring to my comments about bearings, and using specifically the example of the bearings i'm making since yesterday, which is 6205 series (rings FOR the bearings, actually: no longer work @ the bearing assembly section due to an arm injury, for about 11 years) and, a quick look @ the company's site shows THIS MANY variants:

- "C" - the generation (forgot that one ...)
- "2HRS" or "2Z" are shield types - some use only 1, or none even, which is why it's absent in some
- "L069" is the standard grease, but "L038" and "L100" are also very common, though there are MANY other greases
- "C3" is the slack tolerance size - C0 is the default so it's NOT used: they use "C3", "C4", others when NOT the default
- "TVH" is a cage for the spheres - it's a single cage: when it's metal, it's not named (default) UNLESS it's a "special" type, like brass for instance
- ">V" - when i worked in that section it didn't have that, so i dunno what that is for sure, but I THINK it's to differentiate "C" generation from "2nd C" generation ("C" generation fazed out somewhat recently)

Link to the 6205 page, where i took the pic from: https://medias-at.schaeffler.com/en...rings/deep-groove-ball-bearings/6205/p/354175

SOME bearings have more variants than others: i used 6205 because it's the one i was making yesterday (from Monday to Thursday it was 6204, and it changes often).


Noticed how EVERY DIFFERENCE is reflected in the final name? THAT'S THE POINT i'm trying to make.

 

[Vya Domus]

I am still baffled as to why PSU manufactures started using cables with different pinouts in the first place, what was the point, why do that ? What a horrendously moronic design choice.