It's not a failure rate problem. It's a "this is designed to fail" problem. You can make the arguement that "it isn't really designed to fail, it's just not designed to last or not designed for certain usage conditions" etc, but that boils down to the same thing. It's not designed to last someone through the ages, and it could have been easily prevented with a few CENTS more cost per unit made (in all cases; the mosfet issue, the design issue of Kepler's vBIOS chips, AND the overheating M.2 slot in the RBP).
This is a logical fallacy arguement. The majority of people who have equipment don't report on it. You're assuming that everybody who has had this issue has gotten it fixed, knows what the problem is, and has reported it. This is not nearly true. It will never be even close to being true. The facts, however, are that the ones fixing pointed out what the problem is, and what the fixes are, and that it is a cost-cutting cop-out. One which they attempted to silence when asked for comment about it (not being insulted, or having harsh language used, but being asked for comments with the video about the issues posted). That, is damage control. Damage control is only performed when some sort of screw up happens. If those things were false, they could literally have replied and said "no, we've changed this and that and we have services now in place for this and that in case users encounter issues, etc". But they did not, because they do not, and don't want that public place to see it. This is why the posts were not only deleted, but
@Mobius 1 BANNED from the page. You don't ban somebody accidentally after deleting four questioning posts without malice in them and then say you had any other reason other than "I don't want people to see this because we have no answer for your questions that will let us save face".
I can't agree. The notebooks' designs are at fault too. Heavily at fault. Their support just makes it that much worse, especially for the non-extendable warranties and the ridiculous price premium.
I remember what he said. There were articles about it. He laughed and said it was because they use "special" thermal paste that is better than the rest of the industry, and that using "normal" pastes like IC Diamond weren't going to cut it. And basically that he learned his lesson, don't try to improve on what they've done. As for the OP, he was literally attacked by every single Razer cultist and made fun of. He deleted his harsh posts toward them and toned down his statements, because he decided that being harsh was getting nowhere. He mentioned much later that he DID fix the issue, and realized why his repastes were not working well (needing a kind of paste designed not for flat surfaces like ICD, but for bare heatpipe contact), not "well our paste is best" like they said.
The CEO could have simply said "traditional pastes don't work for our cooling design, you shouldn't try to change what we did" and it would have gotten across so significantly better that it'd have been respect-worthy, even. But that really wasn't what happened. Lies, marketing or otherwise, especially from a CEO, are always bad. Especially in this context.
And this leads me into the next point...
Direct heatpipe contact is *NOT* best. Not for such thermally dense scenarios like a mobile GPU or bare CPU die. The best would be a vapor chamber, which as you will notice the RBP does use... because it's NECESSARY for that 1080N (TDP crippled as it may be) to use it. They should be using it for their slimmer models in the first place... and if engineered well, they could use Liquid Ultra thermal paste too. It might ACTUALLY get their laptops into something resembling a product that can at least hold stock under simultaneous load. But nah, their "premium" product would cost too much to make then.
And as we've said earlier, having to do aftermarket work on a heatsink is terrible. You don't need to do it for ASUS, you don't need to do it for MSI, you may or may not need to do it for Clevo depending on if you get a good one (and cannot do it if you have their P870DM3 grid heatsink as it's a vapor chamber contact point as well) but even with a bad one it could be replaced with a working model entirely so the design isn't really the issue, and you don't need to (except for this current generation) do it for AW. In fact I refuse to recommend the AW models this gen because you need to bend the heatsink for proper contact as well as adjusting thermal pads etc... which means I will never recommend Razer if that is required as a standard.
Even with Clevo who generally needs thermal pad adjustments (which I do dislike that is necessary for best cooling, but I digress) can have machines sold with said thermal pad arrangements done already, like from
@Donald@HIDevolution or
@John@OBSIDIAN-PC (who also delid those Kaby Lake desktop chips and apply CLU for free).
This is the final nail in the coffin. I'm going to be bloody honest with you. If they added even 0.1" and 0.3 pounds (I'm being GENEROUS; it could require less) to the thing, added vapour chambers to all their models, used better paste like liquid metal and engineered the heatsinks so the contact is good enough that it never runs out, maybe add a second and third M.2 slot, add quality of life features like ability to turn off trackpad, etc, un-solder the RAM and support better RAM on the mobo, fix their mosfet and cooling subsystem issues? Then it would be a respectable small machine. I would still not consider it a good primary machine for myself or anybody that wants real performance or overclockability, but I wouldn't be tumbling head over heels to make sure people don't waste their money if they mention they want a razer.
When they want to make a good laptop, we'll talk. This goes for ANY device and ANY company. If you're making bad products I'll recommend alternatives that are better for similar prices if available. If you're making bad products and overpricing them, and silencing people where you have reach to do so if they ask you for comment about these issues? Welllll then. That's an entirely different story. And it returns me to my original conclusion: I feel nobody should ever buy a product from such a company.
Note what I am saying? "If they improve" is key. If they actually try to make a good product. Not what they've been doing here. I'm extremely fair... but that means that the worse a person or company is, the more harsh I am. It's their fault, not mine. I have no feelings or brand loyalty. I deal with everything as-is, logically.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.
![[IMG]](images/storyImages/402446101d13303c.jpg)
