Intel class-action settlement to pay those who purchased a Pentium 4 PC nearly 15 years ago

[Shawn Knight]

Did you purchase a computer powered by Intel’s Pentium 4 processor roughly 15 years ago? If so, you may be eligible to receive a cash payout of $15 as settlement in a long-running class-action lawsuit against Intel and HP.

The lawsuit alleges that Intel and HP manipulated benchmark scores for its Pentium 4 processor during the heated processor war with rival AMD.

So, who’s eligible to apply for compensation? The proposed settlement limits eligibility to residents of the United States (except those living in Illinois) who purchased a new computer equipped with a Pentium 4 processor between November 20, 2000 and June 30, 2002. The machine must have been purchased for personal family or household use.

The settlement works out to about a buck a year – not exactly a hefty bounty but money is money if you were affected.

It’s worth pointing out that both companies have denied these claims from the get-go but agreed to the settlement, perhaps just to be done with the whole fiasco. And in addition to paying claims to customers, Intel has agreed to donate $4 million to education non-profits as part of the settlement.

Fortunately, you won’t be required to come up with a receipt to prove you purchased a P4 system. Instead, class members will be required to sign the claim form under good faith and risk perjury if they aren’t truthful.

The deadline to submit a claim form is April 14, 2015.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/58673-intel-class-action-settlement-pay-who-purchased-pentium.html

 

[captaincranky]

I take it these would all be socket 478 "Northwood" P-4s? (Not LGA775).

 

[SuperVeloce]

I take it these would all be socket 478 "Northwood" P-4s? (Not LGA775).

yeah, first 775 pentiums were quite a bit later, Q3 2004.

 

[Guest]

I have used so many systems over the past 15 years (plus) that I don't remember if I purchased a P4, though I'm thinking not. In any case it's not worth the hassle for $15.

 

[RustyTech]

I remember that system very well...it's the last time I purchased a PC; I've been building my own since then.
I'd qualify...but mehhh

 

[tipstir]

Wow a check or really prepaid debit card more likely today. So the GHz speeds weren't as they were posted on the box. Shame, shame on Intel. But are they practicing the same way today?

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

What about the rest of us chumps in the rest of the world, don't we also count as consumers and didn't we also add to Intels coffers? Not that I'd expend the energy bothering to claim $15 even if I was American, I'd just like to know.

 

[Guest]

The first Pentium 4 was socket 423 and ran at 1.3-GHz. Socket 478 followed later. The line ended on socket 775. Pentium 4 lived a long and overheated life..

 

[captaincranky]

The first Pentium 4 was socket 423 and ran at 1.3-GHz. Socket 478 followed later. The line ended on socket 775. Pentium 4 lived a long and overheated life..

Sort of true. The Northwood iteration of the P-4, I believe, ran at reasonably cool temps, and up until now, I had thought that their owners were fairly happy with them.

It wasn't until the LGA775 "Prescott" P-4's, that heat became a major talking point. With that said, many of the Prescotts were still under 90 watts TDP, save for the "Extreme" editions, and of course, overclocked examples. .

Were today's high tech coolers available back in the day, the heat issue arguably could have been at least partially resolved.

Here's a (hot) "blast from the past" article about the Prescott CPU: http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1036882/is-intel-prescott-p4-hot-handle

 

[Guest]

See..that's exactly what Intel wants everyone to think..too much hassle..in the end they might end up payinig a lot lesser than p4 customersx15.

 

[Guest]

You're kidding, right? It's not worth $15 of my time to even answer the question about something I owned that long ago!

 

[dividebyzero]

I take it these would all be socket 478 "Northwood" P-4s? (Not LGA775).

Probably split between Williamette (Skt 423 and 478) and Northwood. Numbers wise are probably equal, even though it covers the most of Williamette's lifespan those processors had some iffy availability at the top clocks. From memory there was good supply of Northwoods from day one.

 

[Guest]

$15 is not worth my time. You can be sure the lawyers will get millions and this is most likely what this lawsuit was all about to begin with. Some class actions are justified. Lots of them are just about vulture lawyers and their desire to purchase expensive toys.

 

[captaincranky]

$15 is not worth my time. You can be sure the lawyers will get millions and this is most likely what this lawsuit was all about to begin with. Some class actions are justified. Lots of them are just about vulture lawyers and their desire to purchase expensive toys.

Even this woman: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Brockovich got a million dollar bonus on her 1st advocacy case, and she's not a lawyer!

So yeah, the law firm(s?) handling the case will likely get millions.

Myself, if the clock speeds of these Pentium 4s in question was lower than advertised, and that was the only issue, I wouldn't have bothered to file suit at all.

It's pretty common for electronics makers to publish specs that are higher than advertised, then pepper the fine print with disclaimers such as, "specifications subject to change without notice". By the time the FTC catches up with them, the item is long discontinued, as is certainly the case here.

I doubt you'd find it too much trouble to bend over and pick up an ten dollar bill blowing down the street, however undignified as that might be. So, all you'd have to do here, is sign a couple of papers and burn a stamp to get $15.00.

When I get stiffed with a lousy product, I simply don't buy from that manufacturer again, (at least if I can possibly help it).

I guess that wouldn't be possible for these Intel customers, now would it? AMD has become somewhat of a joke where desktop CPUs are concerned, while Intel's CPU are overclockable beyond most user's wildest dreams, not to mention having through-puts almost unimaginable back in 2000AD.

So, if you can overclock a CPU well past the specs on the box, but it is a tiny bit slower than the box claims it should be, I'd keep my mouth shut, then simply boot into BIOS and deal with it. I suggest you consider doing the same thing.

If it isn't worth the trouble to file a claim, it logically shouldn't be worth the trouble to whine about the self same issue all over the internet either.

Remember: Stay a lawsuit, starve a lawyer......

 

[SuperVeloce]

@captaincranky:
This has nothing to do with clock speeds. They manipulated benchmarks. And while today you can overclock your K cpu 10-20% over the stock and core2's were actually even more amazing overclockers, Pentiums4 were terrible. Stock at more than 3ghz, topped somewhere around 3,5-3,6ghz with motherboards and air cooling available at that time.

 

[dividebyzero]

Pentiums4 were terrible. Stock at more than 3ghz, topped somewhere around 3,5-3,6ghz with motherboards and air cooling available at that time.

Not all P4's started at 3GHz stock. I suggest you Google " Intel Pentium 4 1.6A overclocking" , or 2.0A for that matter.

 

[captaincranky]

@captaincranky:
This has nothing to do with clock speeds. They manipulated benchmarks. And while today you can overclock your K cpu 10-20% over the stock and core2's were actually even more amazing overclockers, Pentiums4 were terrible. Stock at more than 3ghz, topped somewhere around 3,5-3,6ghz with motherboards and air cooling available at that time.

Well, this is pretty much what I said earlier, electronics manufacturers manipulate specs all the time. As an example, let's consider an audio amplifier. Altered specs aren't limited to just the power output stat. It could be the noise, channel crosstalk, IM distortion, or what have you.

It also pointed out somewhere in this thread, the contemporary cooling solutions of the time period, weren't adequate. Could you have used the coolers available in 2002 for one of today's 140+ watt monsters? The answer is, "absolutely not"!

So, did Intel, "cook the books"? Yes.

Did Pentium 4 CPUs suck? Well, yes and no.

For me a bad product is one that breaks, not something which simply , "mislabeled" a bit.

My Prescott P-4 519, is still chugging along nicely in its 10th year.

If I were due a settlement award, I wouldn't be here running my yap about how it would be, "beneath my dignity and to much trouble", bothering to file for it in the first place

But then again, I wouldn't have joined this frivolous lawsuit either.

 

[Boilerhog146]

Pentiums4 were terrible. Stock at more than 3ghz, topped somewhere around 3,5-3,6ghz with motherboards and air cooling available at that time.

Not all P4's started at 3GHz stock. I suggest you Google " Intel Pentium 4 1.6A overclocking" , or 2.0A for that matter.

I still have a 2.0 that hits 3.0 easily..and my 3.0 Prescott. hits 3.8. depends some on the board and memory.

 

[tomrocha]

$15 is not worth my time. You can be sure the lawyers will get millions and this is most likely what this lawsuit was all about to begin with. Some class actions are justified. Lots of them are just about vulture lawyers and their desire to purchase expensive toys.

That is exactly right and if you hadn't said it I was going to.