GIGABYTE ripped me off

ponder said:
If that is indeed the case wrt his order then he has a legit complaint & I retract my previous comment. In the past a newer rev. was usually better.
Click to expand...
It's not so simply. Was he aware of the performance difference and seeking a rev. 1 board for that purpose or did he simply go by the picture that he was shortchanged? In either case he can't blame Gigabyte. Takealot has hundreds of thousands of products and you can't expect them to keep every picture updated. They are doing the right thing and offering a refund when it matters so there's no reason for a thread like this for a simple issue.

As for the performance difference, newer revision board are usually better but it won't always be the case. There are a myriad of components today with practically infinite configurations so in some cases it may be better and in others not.
 
Swa said:
It's not so simply. Was he aware of the performance difference and seeking a rev. 1 board for that purpose or did he simply go by the picture that he was shortchanged? In either case he can't blame Gigabyte. Takealot has hundreds of thousands of products and you can't expect them to keep every picture updated. They are doing the right thing and offering a refund when it matters so there's no reason for a thread like this for a simple issue.

As for the performance difference, newer revision board are usually better but it won't always be the case. There are a myriad of components today with practically infinite configurations so in some cases it may be better and in others not.
Click to expand...

One should always refer to the manufacturers website, well that's what I do anyway.
 
ponder said:
One should always refer to the manufacturers website, well that's what I do anyway.
Click to expand...

It depends on the vendor as well. In the case of the P85-D3, Gigabyte definitely pulled a bait-and-switch quietly and hoped that no-one would notice until it was too late (though the new board's layout is much better). MSI has two versions of the 990FXA-GD65 (V1 and V2) but despite being different product codes, they are actually the exact same board, causing further confusion.

The people who get it the worst are the Pentium G3258 owners who buy boards like the B85M-HD3 expecting it to overclock as well as others and they land up with the crappier three-phase version, not the four-phase launch board with the better chokes and capacitors. Its a sad practice and too many other vendors get away with the same thing (like SanDisk switching out flash types and using AS-SSD scores as proof that things are still fine).

Also, I can see the DualBIOS chips on the P85-D3 just fine, they are nestled underneath the DIMM slots. So that's not a feature that was missing.
 
Last edited:
CataclysmZA said:
It depends on the vendor as well. In the case of the P85-D3, Gigabyte definitely pulled a bait-and-switch quietly and hoped that no-one would notice until it was too late (though the new board's layout is much better). MSI has two versions of the 990FXA-GD65 (V1 and V2) but despite being different product codes, they are actually the exact same board, causing further confusion.
Click to expand...
That would depend on whether it's different than advertised. One can't really complain about performance differences between revisions when performance isn't something that's advertised. I also saw this huge hoopla with the B85M-HD3 being made on just a single test for each revision. Benchmarks can differ even on the same board when done at different times and in different locations. More of something isn't always better.

Gigabyte actually has both boards listed under different product codes so they aren't the ones pulling a bait and switch
http://www.gigabyte.co.za/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4569#ov
http://www.gigabyte.co.za/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4977#ov
 
Swa said:
That would depend on whether it's different than advertised. One can't really complain about performance differences between revisions when performance isn't something that's advertised. I also saw this huge hoopla with the B85M-HD3 being made on just a single test for each revision. Benchmarks can differ even on the same board when done at different times and in different locations. More of something isn't always better.

Gigabyte actually has both boards listed under different product codes so they aren't the ones pulling a bait and switch
http://www.gigabyte.co.za/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4569#ov
http://www.gigabyte.co.za/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4977#ov
Click to expand...

The case with the P85-D3 is different because it doesn't seem to be missing any major parts, it's mostly just a rearrange (with a fugly heatsink). Anyone complaining about the B85M-HD3 is justified because not only is there a missing power phase, the chokes used are of lower quality and don't deliver as much power, changing the board's behaviour when mated to a Core i7 and possibly a high-clocked Core i5. One could have done those tests even under a watercooling loop and I'm sure there would still be significant differences due to the changes in power delivery.
 
CataclysmZA said:
The case with the P85-D3 is different because it doesn't seem to be missing any major parts, it's mostly just a rearrange (with a fugly heatsink). Anyone complaining about the B85M-HD3 is justified because not only is there a missing power phase, the chokes used are of lower quality and don't deliver as much power, changing the board's behaviour when mated to a Core i7 and possibly a high-clocked Core i5. One could have done those tests even under a watercooling loop and I'm sure there would still be significant differences due to the changes in power delivery.
Click to expand...

^^ Indeed. The P85-D3 seems to be a narrower, re-arranged revision of the board... all still there, but in a different location.

gigabait.jpg

I somehow wish that the revision number would be included in the model name, GA-P85-D3.1 and so on...
 
Goodness. Why are there always clever asses attacking anyone who makes a claim that he was ripped or feel conned? A person may have been ripped off in reality, like it this case it seems that the OP has a valid point, but it should also be considered that not every consumer is an IT hardware expert. :mad:
 
Last edited:
i.got~issues said:
I somehow wish that the revision number would be included in the model name, GA-P85-D3.1 and so on...
Click to expand...

At least ASUS and MSI do it and that's fine by me. I'm not yet familiar with how ASRock's revisioning works, but they are also above board. But make no mistake, this has happened to high-end products as well, most recently Gigabyte's GTX780 Windforce 3X. Between V1.0 and V2.0, the power delivery was redone and the V2.0 boards do not overclock as high as the launch ones did.

Edit: I'm also reminded of the XFX R7970 Double Dissipation saga. V1 has its voltage unlocked for tweaking, V2 locked that out, so it became useless for competitions unless you did some voltage mods to it.
 
Last edited:
they should actaully put on theire site that the actual product may vary from the picture
 
Seriously said:
Goodness. Why are there always clever asses attacking anyone who makes a claim that he was ripped or feel conned? A person may have been ripped off in reality, like it this case it seems that the OP has a valid point, but it should also be considered that not every consumer is an IT hardware expert. :mad:
Click to expand...

Well, surely the OP should then have said "Takealot ripped me off", instead of Gigabyte? Takelot sold him a different MB than what they have listed. It's not Gigabyte's fault...
 
SoftDux-Rudi said:
Well, surely the OP should then have said "Takealot ripped me off", instead of Gigabyte? Takelot sold him a different MB than what they have listed. It's not Gigabyte's fault...
Click to expand...

Its partly both. Hardware.info found that the UPC for Gigabyte's motherboard revisions is unchanged, so when Takealot scans it into their database it picks up the existing barcode and files it under the original board part. Both are at fault, but Gigabyte more so for not changing the UPC and segmenting their revisions to an original board design.
 
CataclysmZA said:
The case with the P85-D3 is different because it doesn't seem to be missing any major parts, it's mostly just a rearrange (with a fugly heatsink). Anyone complaining about the B85M-HD3 is justified because not only is there a missing power phase, the chokes used are of lower quality and don't deliver as much power, changing the board's behaviour when mated to a Core i7 and possibly a high-clocked Core i5. One could have done those tests even under a watercooling loop and I'm sure there would still be significant differences due to the changes in power delivery.
Click to expand...
The fact of the matter is we simply don't know as all opinions are based on a single review with single tests. Even being the case it still wouldn't warrant the hoopla that's being made. You can't expect every revision to have the same or better performance and Gigabyte has the revisions listed as different products under different codes.

If an online retailer happens to list them the same that isn't Gigabyte's fault. It's the cost of doing business without actually seeing the product bought.
 
CataclysmZA said:
Its partly both. Hardware.info found that the UPC for Gigabyte's motherboard revisions is unchanged, so when Takealot scans it into their database it picks up the existing barcode and files it under the original board part. Both are at fault, but Gigabyte more so for not changing the UPC and segmenting their revisions to an original board design.
Click to expand...

^this^ and like I said earlier, Takealot rely on GB to send them the correct info. If you do a search you will see this is a worldwide issues. Also the EAN codes for the rev 1 & rev 2 are the same so its not like Takealot or their distributor can even tell if they have purchased a rev 1 or rev 2 board for resale.
 
Last edited:
notsohappy said:
^this^ and like I said earlier, Takealot rely on GB to send them the correct info. If you do a search you will see this is a worldwide issues. Also the EAN codes for the rev 1 & rev 2 are the same so its not like Takealot or their distributor can even tell if they have purchased a rev 1 or rev 2 board for resale.
Click to expand...
They can. Gigabyte lists their revisions as different part codes. You don't use the UPC but the supplier's product code to order. Rectron and Takealot should take note if product codes are different and make a new listing.

In your case though the differences appear to be mostly aesthetic so nothing there that hasn't been going on for decades as standard practice.
 
Seriously said:
Goodness. Why are there always clever asses attacking anyone who makes a claim that he was ripped or feel conned? A person may have been ripped off in reality, like it this case it seems that the OP has a valid point, but it should also be considered that not every consumer is an IT hardware expert. :mad:
Click to expand...

^This
 
Swa said:
They can. Gigabyte lists their revisions as different part codes. You don't use the UPC but the supplier's product code to order. Rectron and Takealot should take note if product codes are different and make a new listing.

In your case though the differences appear to be mostly aesthetic so nothing there that hasn't been going on for decades as standard practice.
Click to expand...

After checking all replies. I think if GB can deliver all the product info clearly and completely then it won't cause these issue anyway... Because in this case customer get product info from takealot- takealot get it from distributor- distributor get it from GB. So if GB do it right from the very begin, then nothing will happened..
 
SifisoBlackEdition said:
After checking all replies. I think if GB can deliver all the product info clearly and completely then it won't cause these issue anyway... Because in this case customer get product info from takealot- takealot get it from distributor- distributor get it from GB. So if GB do it right from the very begin, then nothing will happened..
Click to expand...
I don't think you and a number of people are getting it. Gigabyte has the correct info, they have different product codes. You have to use the product codes when ordering. It can't be any more clear and complete. So if there's a stuffup it's either the retailer or distributor. In the case of the OP though Takealot did refund him even though the difference was only aesthetic so they didn't really have to.
 
Swa said:
I don't think you and a number of people are getting it. Gigabyte has the correct info, they have different product codes. You have to use the product codes when ordering. It can't be any more clear and complete. So if there's a stuffup it's either the retailer or distributor. In the case of the OP though Takealot did refund him even though the difference was only aesthetic so they didn't really have to.
Click to expand...

I don't know, but just do some research, guys can check from below links, its highlight from the article that

"Gigabyte brings the new products to market, using exactly the same manufacturer and UPC codes as for the original versions. Thanks to that, distributors and online shops (who work with automatic links based on these codes) cannot tell the difference."(hardware.info, Koen Crijns. 22nd Dec. 2014)

So basically i think it support what i wrote a bit...



http://us.hardware.info/reviews/583...sions-present-markedly-different-test-results
 
Problem is.. If the EAN codes are the same even though the models have been revised (i.e. downsized), how are distributors supposed to know the difference when placing orders? I'll have to agree with OP that he has been ripped off by GB.

S3PXyJP.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X