A few years ago I purchased an Intel processor simply because this has TSX features and I wanted to write code to test this feature out. They disabled this feature in a microcode update because it was buggy and they alleged they fixed this in a subsequent version of IP.

Now in the later processors this and many other so called performancec features that command a premiuim on price have been removed. I complained to intel and requested a refund and they ignored me. Is there a remedy avaiable me? And if so what is this? And why is there no compensation made for loss of enjoyment, loss of performance and nuisance caused to reimplement software when they have to clearly and publicly produced defective goods?

  • Consumer protection law varies greatly between jurisdictions. Please state where you are located. You may also want to carefully read the warranty terms you agreed to when you bought the product, and note that the warranty is almost certainly expired by now. – Nate Eldredge May 31 '19 at 21:49
  • I guess the very general answer would be "because the manufacturer never promised to provide any such remedy in this case, and so unless there is a specific law requiring them to do so, they don't have to". I don't think most jurisdictions have laws that are nearly so broad as requiring them to compensate for "loss of enjoyment, loss of performance and nuisance", nor even requiring them to provide refunds for more than a limited time period (usually less than "a few years"). – Nate Eldredge May 31 '19 at 21:56
  • Strange, I think that most of the Meltdown and Specter fixes were applied for chips sold from 2008. I guess they would not spend resources supporting something if it was not being used. Also chips are in use or longer these days. Twenty five years ago you used to upgrade every 3 years but now it's much longer. The lifetime of the product is different from the warranty perdiod. – Ramelle Barber-Meyer May 31 '19 at 22:16
  • Again, the question of whether they had any legal obligation to require such fixes might be dependent on the jurisdiction, which you still have not specified. But they could certainly still have business reasons to do so, to placate their customers and make it more likely for them to buy more Intel products in the future. – Nate Eldredge May 31 '19 at 22:53
  • Obligation? None. It would be negligent not to remedy the defects. So they admitted they sold defective products, that cannot be fixed, and they implement work arounds that affect the consumer detrimentally, AND you say that's fine? – Ramelle Barber-Meyer May 31 '19 at 22:56

Under EU consumer law, should that be your jurisdiction, you would have a claim against the seller for a full or partial refund.

Amazon was forced to do this when Sony removed the OtherOS feature from Playstations against the wishes of its users (users were forced to either update to continue to be able to play new games, or refuse and never receive a game update and lose the ability to play new games).


You do not have to update the firmware if you do not want to. I'm sorry that you did not get what you wanted, but you don't have to install the updates.

The refund is normally only mandatory if the product is faulty in some way or if some other thing out of your control happened.

  • But it is still faulty as shipped. Would you buy a processor if you were told that TSX might cause corruption? Or would you have bought the CPU if you had known of the spectre and meltdown vulnerabilities? – Ramelle Barber-Meyer May 31 '19 at 21:40
  • How would it be faulty as shipped? – Putvi May 31 '19 at 21:40
  • Becuase TSX bugs were discovered two generation later. The IP as shipped was defective, not fit for purpose. So you would drive a car with Takata airbags? No you'd remove them, in as much as you would take the performance hit of enabling the Spectre and Meltdown mitigations. But you would expect damages to be paid for loss of performance and resale value. – Ramelle Barber-Meyer May 31 '19 at 21:43
  • And you agreed to install the fix for that. – Putvi May 31 '19 at 21:44
  • Which means you suffer damage because of a defective product? And you say just forgive Intel? Are they offering CPUs for free these days and making money off you data? Are you saying that I have to take whatever Intel is telling me and there is no recourse? That was the question in a nutshell. – Ramelle Barber-Meyer May 31 '19 at 21:46

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.