Bumpgate: Difference between revisions

Line 5:

===Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) Faults===

From approximately 2005-2010, GPU manufacturers Nvidia and ATI developed some GPUs that had a serious design flaw. This flaw led to failures in many of their GPUs during that time period, and Nvidia even saw a lawsuit from it. In order to understand what truly happened during this controversy, though, it's important to understand what exactly led to the faults.

From approximately 2005-2010, GPU manufacturers Nvidia and ATI developed some GPUs that had a serious design flaw. This flaw led to failures in many of their GPUs during that time period, and Nvidia even saw a class action lawsuit from it. In order to understand what truly happened during this controversy, though, it's important to understand what exactly led to the faults.

These manufacturers had engineered GPUs that electrically connected the silicon chip (die) to the substrate (the "green square part") using high-lead solder bumps. High-lead solder bumps were chosen in order to fit the power delivery specifications that these GPUs needed.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Williams |first=Rob |date=29 Sep 2008 |title=NVIDIA at a Disadvantage Due to their Choice of Solder? |url=https://techgage.com/news/nvidia_at_a_disadvantage_due_to_their_choice_of_solder/ |url-status=live |access-date=1 Jun 2025 |website=Techgage}}</ref> To give these solder bumps more strength (especially when operating at high temperatures), it's standard to use an epoxy with silica filler known as underfill. Underfill needs to fit certain specifications, depending on how hot the processor it's used on is expected to get. If it's too hard, the underfill will crack the die. If it's too soft, ~~it'll~~ crack the ~~bumps~~. It also needs to still fit within the right specifications at both high and low temperatures.

These manufacturers had engineered GPUs that electrically connected the silicon chip (die) to the substrate (the "green square part") using high-lead solder bumps. High-lead solder bumps were chosen in order to fit the power delivery specifications that these GPUs needed.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Williams |first=Rob |date=29 Sep 2008 |title=NVIDIA at a Disadvantage Due to their Choice of Solder? |url=https://techgage.com/news/nvidia_at_a_disadvantage_due_to_their_choice_of_solder/ |url-status=live |access-date=1 Jun 2025 |website=Techgage}}</ref> To give these solder bumps more strength (especially when operating at high temperatures), it's standard to use an epoxy with silica filler known as underfill. Underfill needs to fit certain specifications, depending on how hot the processor it's used on is expected to get. If it's too hard, the underfill will crack the die. If it's too soft, the bumps will crack because the underfill isn't supportive enough. It also needs to still fit within the right specifications at both high and low temperatures.

In 2006, IBM and Amkor published a study that explained that use of a low Tg underfill was not acceptable with high-lead solder bumps, and high Tg would be necessary to avoid defects.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ray |first=S. |last2=Kiyono |first2=S. |last3=Waite |first3=K. |last4=Nicholls |first4=L. |date=2006 |title=Qualification of low-K 90nm Technology Die with Pb-free Bumps on

Line 15:

==Companies involved and responses==

Bumpgate was a worldwide issue for any consumer that purchased these defective graphics processors. However, it's not fully clear who was the most responsible for the incident. Building a GPU is a specialized process that requires it to go through multiple partner companies before ultimately ending up with the company that sells the unit (i.e., Microsoft, Sony, etc.). With this in mind, it is still important to note the response of each of the companies that were the public faces involved in this incident.

Bumpgate was a worldwide issue for any consumer that purchased these defective graphics processors. However, it's not fully clear who was the most responsible for the incident. Building a GPU is a specialized process that requires it to go through multiple partner companies before ultimately ending up with the company that sells the unit (i.e., Microsoft, Sony, Nvidia, etc.). With this in mind, it is still important to note the response of each of the companies that were the public faces involved in this incident.

====Microsoft's Response - The "Red Ring of Death"====

[[File:GPU early.jpg|alt=An image of a 90 nanometer graphics processing unit from a Microsoft Xbox 360. The die is in the center of the green square, and the eDRAM is located to the left of it. The die has dark greenish low Tg underfill under it, indicating that it is defective.|thumb|200x200px|A ''defective'' 90nm "Xenos" GPU from an '''early''' Xbox 360 (Xenon revision). Note the large die in the center of the chip, and the dark greenish underfill. The color of the underfill is one way to tell if the chip has the low Tg underfill.]]<blockquote>''"The breakthrough came when we understood that the connections that were being broken were not located on the motherboard, but they were actually located inside the components."''

- Leo Del Castillo, member of Xbox's hardware engineering group; ''Power On: The Story of Xbox (2021)''<ref name=":3">{{Cite web |last=Xbox |date=13 Dec 2021 |title=Power On: The Story of Xbox {{!}} Chapter 5: The Red Ring of Death |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2d6IMBS8oY |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.org/details/power-on-the-story-of-xbox/The+Story+of+the+Xbox+-+Chapter+5/Power+On+-+The+Story+of+Xbox+-+Chapter+5+-+The+Red+Ring+of+Death.mp4 |archive-date=13 Dec 2021 |access-date=4 Jun 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref></blockquote>In November 2005, Microsoft released the Xbox 360 with the ATI Xenos GPU. According to leaked internal Microsoft documents from the time, 1.2 million 360s shipped out to consumers by November 30th, 2005. 3% of customers had some type of issue with their system. Out of that 3%, 19% had three flashing red rings, and 24% had freezing problems.

- Leo Del Castillo, member of Xbox's hardware engineering group; ''Power On: The Story of Xbox (2021)''<ref name=":3">{{Cite web |last=Xbox |date=13 Dec 2021 |title=Power On: The Story of Xbox {{!}} Chapter 5: The Red Ring of Death |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2d6IMBS8oY |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.org/details/power-on-the-story-of-xbox/The+Story+of+the+Xbox+-+Chapter+5/Power+On+-+The+Story+of+Xbox+-+Chapter+5+-+The+Red+Ring+of+Death.mp4 |archive-date=13 Dec 2021 |access-date=4 Jun 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref></blockquote>In November 2005, Microsoft released the Xbox 360 with the ATI Xenos GPU. According to leaked internal Microsoft documents from the time, 1.2 million 360s shipped out to consumers by November 30th, 2005. 3% of customers had some type of issue with their system. Out of that 3%, 19% had three flashing red rings, and 24% had freezing problems.<ref name=":2" />

Therefore, 43% of consumers shortly after launch had these familiar symptoms to retro console enthusiasts: the "Red Ring of Death"- which is what consumers around the world called the Xbox 360's Bumpgate-related fault. However, "three flashing red rings" on the Xbox 360 simply means "core digital error"- in other words, a general hardware failure. ~~As it~~ takes multiple power-on cycles to cause a failure in the solder bumps, it is unlikely that these systems were failing specifically because of the Bumpgate defect. 56% of systems worked on the first try, and after component reworks, that number improved to 71%. Only 200,000 consoles went to what Microsoft termed "the bonepile", a collection of broken consoles that still did not work after a component rework. However, it is also worth noting that some afflicted Xbox 360s will work again after a "reflow"- which is effectively redoing all of the components on the motherboard at once. In addition, Microsoft wasn't aware that the "Red Ring of Death" was a specific widespread problem yet, so they would not have been taking major note of consoles with a GPU problem. At the height of the Bumpgate-related defect, approximately 600,000 to ~~one million~~ Xbox 360s were suffering from the "Red Ring of Death".

Therefore, 43% of consumers shortly after launch had these familiar symptoms to retro console enthusiasts: the "Red Ring of Death"- which is what consumers around the world called the Xbox 360's Bumpgate-related fault. However, "three flashing red rings" on the Xbox 360 simply means "core digital error"- in other words, a general hardware failure. It takes multiple power-on cycles to cause a failure in the solder bumps, so it is unlikely that these systems were failing specifically because of the Bumpgate defect. 56% of systems worked on the first try, and after component reworks, that number improved to 71%. Only 200,000 consoles went to what Microsoft termed "the bonepile", a collection of broken consoles that still did not work after a component rework. However, it is also worth noting that some owners discovered that some afflicted Xbox 360s will work again after a "reflow"- which is effectively redoing all of the components on the motherboard at once. In addition, Microsoft wasn't aware that the "Red Ring of Death" was a specific widespread problem yet, so they would not have been taking major note of consoles with a GPU problem. At the height of the Bumpgate-related defect, approximately 600,000 to 1,000,000 Xbox 360s were suffering from the "Red Ring of Death".

[[File:GPU late.jpg|alt=An image of a 65 nanometer graphics processing unit from a Microsoft Xbox 360. The die is in the center of the green square, and the eDRAM is located to the left of it. The die has a light, whitish underfill- indicating that it is not one of the defective units.|thumb|204x204px|A ''non-defective'' 65nm "Xenos" GPU from a later revision of Xbox 360 (Jasper V2 on "Kronos 1" package). Note the smaller die and the light, whitish underfill.]]

For several months, Microsoft had consumers pay to repair their consoles. However, in 2007, they chose to extend the warranty for Xbox 360 consoles displaying an E74 error (an on-screen error also associated with "Red Ring of Death") from one year from date of purchase, to three years from date of purchase. This allowed most consumers who had consoles with the issue to get their consoles refurbished. In addition, they refunded any consumers who had paid to have their afflicted systems repaired.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Moore |first=Peter |date=2007 |title=Open Letter From Peter Moore |url=http://xbox.com/en-ca/support/petermooreletter.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071023004948/http://xbox.com/en-ca/support/petermooreletter.htm |archive-date=23 Oct 2007 |access-date=4 Jun 2025 |website=Xbox}}</ref>

Line 28:

Microsoft primarily seemed to have done this to protect the Xbox brand. The Xbox 360 was only their second console, and the original Xbox hadn't done as well as they'd hoped it would. Microsoft confirmed this in Chapter 5 of their 2021 documentary, ''Power On: The Story of Xbox''.<ref name=":3" />

By ~~2009~~, the cause of the issue was confirmed to be "within the components"- the low Tg underfill. ATI and Microsoft completely fixed the issue in Xbox 360s made after this point.

By mid-2008, the cause of the issue was confirmed to be "within the components"- the low Tg underfill. ATI and Microsoft completely fixed the issue in Xbox 360s made after this point. Generally, it is recommended by retro console enthusiasts to purchase consoles manufactured after May 2008 (or marked "Q2 2008") and avoid consoles manufactured before this point, but the Tonasket (AKA "Jasper Kronos" or "Jasper V2") motherboard revision is generally considered to be the most reliable of the original "phat" model Xbox 360 consoles.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Nadaman |last2=et al. |date=8 Jun 2025 |title=Xbox 360 - Buying Guide |url=https://consolemods.org/wiki/Xbox_360:Buying_Guide |url-status=live |access-date=14 Jun 2025 |website=ConsoleMods Wiki}}</ref>

====Sony's Response - The "Yellow Light of Death"====

<blockquote>''"We entirely refute the suggestion that PS3 consoles have an inherent defect or other design issue which is akin to any warranty issue experienced by another console manufacturer. [...] We think it is highly unfair to suggest that from an installed base of 2.5 million that the numbers you mention somehow are evidence of a 'manufacturing defect'..."''

- Ray Maguire, managing director and senior vice president of Sony Computer Entertainment Europe in 2009; in a letter responding to a BBC Watchdog segment covering the "Yellow Light of Death".<ref name=":12">{{Cite web |last=BBC |date=18 Sep 2009 |title=Sony rebuts BBC PlayStation claim |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8263063.stm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250219154020/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8263063.stm |archive-date=19 Feb 2025 |access-date=4 Jun 2025 |website=BBC NEWS}}</ref><ref name=":13">{{Cite web |last=Martin |first=Matt |date=17 Sep 2009 |title=Sony tackles BBC over 'PS3 failure' report |url=https://www.gamesindustry.biz/sony-tackles-bbc-over-ps3-failure-report |url-status=live |access-date=10 Jun 2025 |website=Gamesindustry.biz}}</ref></blockquote>In November 2006, Sony released the PlayStation 3. Like the Xbox 360, the early models of PlayStation 3 had what consumers believe to be Bumpgate-related issues with ~~their~~ Nvidia-based RSX GPU. Many consumers who had bought launch models- what are now commonly known as "PlayStation 2 backwards compatible" models- found that their systems were malfunctioning. PlayStation 3 systems that were exhibiting the issue may freeze suddenly during gameplay and shut off, but all users who dealt with the defect had a common experience: when ~~turning~~ their PlayStation 3 on, the LED power indicator would turn green for a moment, then the system would beep three times, very briefly flash to a yellow light, then it would blink red. This was coined by consumers as the "Yellow Light of Death".

- Ray Maguire, managing director and senior vice president of Sony Computer Entertainment Europe in 2009; in a letter responding to a BBC Watchdog segment covering the "Yellow Light of Death".<ref name=":12">{{Cite web |last=BBC |date=18 Sep 2009 |title=Sony rebuts BBC PlayStation claim |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8263063.stm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250219154020/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8263063.stm |archive-date=19 Feb 2025 |access-date=4 Jun 2025 |website=BBC NEWS}}</ref><ref name=":13">{{Cite web |last=Martin |first=Matt |date=17 Sep 2009 |title=Sony tackles BBC over 'PS3 failure' report |url=https://www.gamesindustry.biz/sony-tackles-bbc-over-ps3-failure-report |url-status=live |access-date=10 Jun 2025 |website=Gamesindustry.biz}}</ref></blockquote>In November 2006, Sony released the PlayStation 3. Like the Xbox 360, the early models of PlayStation 3 had what consumers believe to be Bumpgate-related issues with its Nvidia-based RSX GPU. Many consumers who had bought launch models- what are now commonly known as "PlayStation 2 backwards compatible" models- found that their systems were malfunctioning. PlayStation 3 systems that were exhibiting the issue may freeze suddenly during gameplay and shut off, but all users who dealt with the defect had a common experience: when attempting to turn their PlayStation 3 on, the LED power indicator would turn green for a moment, then the system would beep three times, very briefly flash to a yellow light, then it would continuously blink red without booting the system. This was coined by consumers as the "Yellow Light of Death".

BBC Watchdog aired a segment in 2009 covering the "Yellow Light of Death".<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=HelpForPS3 (Reuploader) |last2=BBC |date=17 Dec 2009 |title=Sony PS3 Yellow Light of Death - BBC |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_ef8bDQktI |url-status=live |access-date=3 Jun 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref> The hosts stated that when viewers called Sony because their console was malfunctioning, Sony told them that it could have been for a variety of reasons, and they couldn't determine exactly what the problem was without disassembling the console having the issue. While all of this is true- the LED indicators do simply indicate a general hardware failure that requires ~~detailed~~ troubleshooting- it is worth noting that by August 2008, Sony was building consoles with the 65nm RSX<ref name=":6">{{Cite web |last=Miller |first=R. |date=26 Jun 2008 |title=PS3 graphics chip going 65nm this Fall |url=https://www.engadget.com/2008-06-26-ps3-graphics-chip-going-65nm-this-fall.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210924101930/https://www.engadget.com/2008-06-26-ps3-graphics-chip-going-65nm-this-fall.html |archive-date=24 Sep 2021 |access-date=3 Jun 2025 |website=Engadget}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=NVIDIA Playstation 3 GPU 65nm Specs |url=https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/playstation-3-gpu-65nm.c1682 |url-status=live |access-date=3 Jun 2025 |website=TechPowerUp GPU Database}}</ref>, which has been confirmed by enthusiasts to not suffer from the theoretically Bumpgate-related fault.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |last=RIP Felix |date=15 Jan 2024 |title=A 360 Story - The RED Ring of Death & the 7th Generation Console War |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qKtS_uxdcU |url-status=live |access-date=2 Jun 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref>

BBC Watchdog aired a segment in 2009 covering the "Yellow Light of Death".<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=HelpForPS3 (Reuploader) |last2=BBC |date=17 Dec 2009 |title=Sony PS3 Yellow Light of Death - BBC |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_ef8bDQktI |url-status=live |access-date=3 Jun 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref> The hosts stated that when viewers called Sony because their console was malfunctioning, Sony told them that it could have been for a variety of reasons, and they couldn't determine exactly what the problem was without disassembling the console having the issue. While all of this is true- the LED indicators do simply indicate a general hardware failure that requires troubleshooting by connecting to the System Controller (Syscon) and checking for error codes- it is worth noting that by August 2008, Sony was building consoles with the 65nm RSX<ref name=":6">{{Cite web |last=Miller |first=R. |date=26 Jun 2008 |title=PS3 graphics chip going 65nm this Fall |url=https://www.engadget.com/2008-06-26-ps3-graphics-chip-going-65nm-this-fall.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210924101930/https://www.engadget.com/2008-06-26-ps3-graphics-chip-going-65nm-this-fall.html |archive-date=24 Sep 2021 |access-date=3 Jun 2025 |website=Engadget}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=NVIDIA Playstation 3 GPU 65nm Specs |url=https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/playstation-3-gpu-65nm.c1682 |url-status=live |access-date=3 Jun 2025 |website=TechPowerUp GPU Database}}</ref>, which has been confirmed by enthusiasts to not suffer from the theoretically Bumpgate-related fault.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |last=RIP Felix |date=15 Jan 2024 |title=A 360 Story - The RED Ring of Death & the 7th Generation Console War |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qKtS_uxdcU |url-status=live |access-date=2 Jun 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref><ref name=":14" />

Sony never issued a recall or extended warranty for these systems; all consumers had to pay out of their own pocket if they wanted their consoles repaired, unless the system failed during the standard one-year warranty period. According to one of the individuals interviewed in BBC's Watchdog segment, if the system was outside of its one year warranty period, they would have to pay £128 (~$173) to get the system fixed, and they would only provide customers with a three-month post-repair warranty. If it failed again after that point, they would have to pay out of pocket again. Keeping in mind that the fault was very likely caused by a GPU defect, this possibility was very likely unless Sony's repair technicians replaced the defective 90nm GPU with a non-defective one, which they were able to do for some consoles. In addition, the console would also be reset during the repair, meaning that the owner would lose all data that was not backed up prior to the failure, such as game saves.<ref name=":1" /~~><!-- Felix also mentions the official "Frankies" in the PS3 Story video, but there's a primary source for it that I need to find. -V --~~>

Sony never issued a recall or extended warranty for these systems; all consumers had to pay out of their own pocket if they wanted their consoles repaired, unless the system failed during the standard one-year warranty period. However, that was rare; the PS3's fan table accommodated better for the temperature changes than the Xbox 360 did, so it took longer for the defect to break the console. Depending on how frequently the console was used, some consumers could have had their console for a few years before it displayed symptoms.

According to one of the individuals interviewed in BBC's Watchdog segment, if the system was outside of its one year warranty period, they would have to pay £128 (~$173) to get the system fixed, and they would only provide customers with a three-month post-repair warranty. If it failed again after that point, they would have to pay out of pocket again. Keeping in mind that the fault was very likely caused by a GPU defect, this possibility was very likely unless Sony's repair technicians replaced the defective 90nm GPU with a non-defective one, which they were able to do for some consoles.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Icferrum |date=2 Feb 2020 |title=Frankenstein PHAT PS3: CECHA with 40nm RSX |url=https://www.psx-place.com/threads/frankenstein-phat-ps3-cecha-with-40nm-rsx.28069/ |url-status=live |access-date=14 Jun 2025 |website=PSX-Place}}</ref> In addition, the console would also be reset during the repair, meaning that the owner would lose all data that was not backed up prior to the failure, such as game saves.<ref name=":1" />

Instead of admitting that there was a defect and issuing an extended warranty to consumers (like Microsoft did) Sony simply quietly fixed the defect around the same time that Microsoft did for the Xbox 360, so PS3 "slim" revisions and newer were not affected. Specifically, it was only 90nm GPUs that appeared to have low Tg underfill- and hence, the defect.

Line 79:

Line 81:

Nvidia opted for a settlement<ref>{{Cite web |date=2010 |title=Frequently Asked Questions - What can I get from the settlement? |url=http://www.nvidiasettlement.com/faq.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101001080625/http://www.nvidiasettlement.com/faq.html |archive-date=1 Sep 2010 |access-date=13 Jun 2025 |website=The NVIDIA GPU Litigation}}</ref>- though, asserted that the settlement was not an admission of wrongdoing. Consumers who participated as Settlement Class Members were presented with three options to be compensated:

# A replacement GPU inside their affected notebook;

#A replacement GPU inside their affected notebook;

# A replacement HP notebook computer with one "similar in kind and value" to the one they owned;

#A replacement HP notebook computer with one "similar in kind and value" to the one they owned;

# Reimbursement of either the whole cost of repairing the notebook due to a previous GPU failure or a portion of that amount (dependent on how many people submitted valid claims for reimbursement).

#Reimbursement of either the whole cost of repairing the notebook due to a previous GPU failure or a portion of that amount (dependent on how many people submitted valid claims for reimbursement).

Of course, all the settlement benefits for Class Members were paid for by Nvidia.

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 ===Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) Faults===
-From approximately 2005-2010, GPU manufacturers Nvidia and ATI developed some GPUs that had a serious design flaw. This flaw led to failures in many of their GPUs during that time period, and Nvidia even saw a lawsuit from it. In order to understand what truly happened during this controversy, though, it's important to understand what exactly led to the faults.
+From approximately 2005-2010, GPU manufacturers Nvidia and ATI developed some GPUs that had a serious design flaw. This flaw led to failures in many of their GPUs during that time period, and Nvidia even saw a class action lawsuit from it. In order to understand what truly happened during this controversy, though, it's important to understand what exactly led to the faults.
-These manufacturers had engineered GPUs that electrically connected the silicon chip (die) to the substrate (the "green square part") using high-lead solder bumps. High-lead solder bumps were chosen in order to fit the power delivery specifications that these GPUs needed.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Williams |first=Rob |date=29 Sep 2008 |title=NVIDIA at a Disadvantage Due to their Choice of Solder? |url=https://techgage.com/news/nvidia_at_a_disadvantage_due_to_their_choice_of_solder/ |url-status=live |access-date=1 Jun 2025 |website=Techgage}}</ref> To give these solder bumps more strength (especially when operating at high temperatures), it's standard to use an epoxy with silica filler known as underfill. Underfill needs to fit certain specifications, depending on how hot the processor it's used on is expected to get. If it's too hard, the underfill will crack the die. If it's too soft, it'll crack the bumps. It also needs to still fit within the right specifications at both high and low temperatures.
+These manufacturers had engineered GPUs that electrically connected the silicon chip (die) to the substrate (the "green square part") using high-lead solder bumps. High-lead solder bumps were chosen in order to fit the power delivery specifications that these GPUs needed.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Williams |first=Rob |date=29 Sep 2008 |title=NVIDIA at a Disadvantage Due to their Choice of Solder? |url=https://techgage.com/news/nvidia_at_a_disadvantage_due_to_their_choice_of_solder/ |url-status=live |access-date=1 Jun 2025 |website=Techgage}}</ref> To give these solder bumps more strength (especially when operating at high temperatures), it's standard to use an epoxy with silica filler known as underfill. Underfill needs to fit certain specifications, depending on how hot the processor it's used on is expected to get. If it's too hard, the underfill will crack the die. If it's too soft, the bumps will crack because the underfill isn't supportive enough. It also needs to still fit within the right specifications at both high and low temperatures.
 In 2006, IBM and Amkor published a study that explained that use of a low T<sub>g</sub> underfill was not acceptable with high-lead solder bumps, and high T<sub>g</sub> would be necessary to avoid defects.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ray |first=S. |last2=Kiyono |first2=S. |last3=Waite |first3=K. |last4=Nicholls |first4=L. |date=2006 |title=Qualification of low-K 90nm Technology Die with Pb-free Bumps on
@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 ==Companies involved and responses==
-Bumpgate was a worldwide issue for any consumer that purchased these defective graphics processors. However, it's not fully clear who was the most responsible for the incident. Building a GPU is a specialized process that requires it to go through multiple partner companies before ultimately ending up with the company that sells the unit (i.e., Microsoft, Sony, etc.). With this in mind, it is still important to note the response of each of the companies that were the public faces involved in this incident.
+Bumpgate was a worldwide issue for any consumer that purchased these defective graphics processors. However, it's not fully clear who was the most responsible for the incident. Building a GPU is a specialized process that requires it to go through multiple partner companies before ultimately ending up with the company that sells the unit (i.e., Microsoft, Sony, Nvidia, etc.). With this in mind, it is still important to note the response of each of the companies that were the public faces involved in this incident.
 ====Microsoft's Response - The "Red Ring of Death"====
 [[File:GPU early.jpg|alt=An image of a 90 nanometer graphics processing unit from a Microsoft Xbox 360. The die is in the center of the green square, and the eDRAM is located to the left of it. The die has dark greenish low Tg underfill under it, indicating that it is defective.|thumb|200x200px|A ''defective'' 90nm "Xenos" GPU from an '''early''' Xbox 360 (Xenon revision). Note the large die in the center of the chip, and the dark greenish underfill. The color of the underfill is one way to tell if the chip has the low T<sub>g</sub> underfill.]]<blockquote>''"The breakthrough came when we understood that the connections that were being broken were not located on the motherboard, but they were actually located inside the components."''
-- Leo Del Castillo, member of Xbox's hardware engineering group; ''Power On: The Story of Xbox (2021)''<ref name=":3">{{Cite web |last=Xbox |date=13 Dec 2021 |title=Power On: The Story of Xbox {{!}} Chapter 5: The Red Ring of Death |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2d6IMBS8oY |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.org/details/power-on-the-story-of-xbox/The+Story+of+the+Xbox+-+Chapter+5/Power+On+-+The+Story+of+Xbox+-+Chapter+5+-+The+Red+Ring+of+Death.mp4 |archive-date=13 Dec 2021 |access-date=4 Jun 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref></blockquote>In November 2005, Microsoft released the Xbox 360 with the ATI Xenos GPU. According to leaked internal Microsoft documents from the time, 1.2 million 360s shipped out to consumers by November 30th, 2005. 3% of customers had some type of issue with their system. Out of that 3%, 19% had three flashing red rings, and 24% had freezing problems. <!-- I would like to find the leaked documents that say this so that I can cite it properly. However, if I can't find it at some point (or there are any objections to citing a leaked document- even for this old info), I'll just cite Felix's video. -V -->
+- Leo Del Castillo, member of Xbox's hardware engineering group; ''Power On: The Story of Xbox (2021)''<ref name=":3">{{Cite web |last=Xbox |date=13 Dec 2021 |title=Power On: The Story of Xbox {{!}} Chapter 5: The Red Ring of Death |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2d6IMBS8oY |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.org/details/power-on-the-story-of-xbox/The+Story+of+the+Xbox+-+Chapter+5/Power+On+-+The+Story+of+Xbox+-+Chapter+5+-+The+Red+Ring+of+Death.mp4 |archive-date=13 Dec 2021 |access-date=4 Jun 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref></blockquote>In November 2005, Microsoft released the Xbox 360 with the ATI Xenos GPU. According to leaked internal Microsoft documents from the time, 1.2 million 360s shipped out to consumers by November 30th, 2005. 3% of customers had some type of issue with their system. Out of that 3%, 19% had three flashing red rings, and 24% had freezing problems.<ref name=":2" /> <!-- I could not find the leaked documents, and I'm not totally sure if citing a leak is okay anyway (even if the info is old), so I chose to just cite Felix's video. -V -->
-Therefore, 43% of consumers shortly after launch had these familiar symptoms to retro console enthusiasts: the "Red Ring of Death"- which is what consumers around the world called the Xbox 360's Bumpgate-related fault. However, "three flashing red rings" on the Xbox 360 simply means "core digital error"- in other words, a general hardware failure. As it takes multiple power-on cycles to cause a failure in the solder bumps, it is unlikely that these systems were failing specifically because of the Bumpgate defect. 56% of systems worked on the first try, and after component reworks, that number improved to 71%. Only 200,000 consoles went to what Microsoft termed "the bonepile", a collection of broken consoles that still did not work after a component rework. However, it is also worth noting that some afflicted Xbox 360s will work again after a "reflow"- which is effectively redoing all of the components on the motherboard at once. In addition, Microsoft wasn't aware that the "Red Ring of Death" was a specific widespread problem yet, so they would not have been taking major note of consoles with a GPU problem. At the height of the Bumpgate-related defect, approximately 600,000 to one million Xbox 360s were suffering from the "Red Ring of Death".
+Therefore, 43% of consumers shortly after launch had these familiar symptoms to retro console enthusiasts: the "Red Ring of Death"- which is what consumers around the world called the Xbox 360's Bumpgate-related fault. However, "three flashing red rings" on the Xbox 360 simply means "core digital error"- in other words, a general hardware failure. It takes multiple power-on cycles to cause a failure in the solder bumps, so it is unlikely that these systems were failing specifically because of the Bumpgate defect. 56% of systems worked on the first try, and after component reworks, that number improved to 71%. Only 200,000 consoles went to what Microsoft termed "the bonepile", a collection of broken consoles that still did not work after a component rework. However, it is also worth noting that some owners discovered that some afflicted Xbox 360s will work again after a "reflow"- which is effectively redoing all of the components on the motherboard at once. In addition, Microsoft wasn't aware that the "Red Ring of Death" was a specific widespread problem yet, so they would not have been taking major note of consoles with a GPU problem. At the height of the Bumpgate-related defect, approximately 600,000 to 1,000,000 Xbox 360s were suffering from the "Red Ring of Death".
 [[File:GPU late.jpg|alt=An image of a 65 nanometer graphics processing unit from a Microsoft Xbox 360. The die is in the center of the green square, and the eDRAM is located to the left of it. The die has a light, whitish underfill- indicating that it is not one of the defective units.|thumb|204x204px|A ''non-defective'' 65nm "Xenos" GPU from a later revision of Xbox 360 (Jasper V2 on "Kronos 1" package). Note the smaller die and the light, whitish underfill.]]
 For several months, Microsoft had consumers pay to repair their consoles. However, in 2007, they chose to extend the warranty for Xbox 360 consoles displaying an E74 error (an on-screen error also associated with "Red Ring of Death") from one year from date of purchase, to three years from date of purchase. This allowed most consumers who had consoles with the issue to get their consoles refurbished. In addition, they refunded any consumers who had paid to have their afflicted systems repaired.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Moore |first=Peter |date=2007 |title=Open Letter From Peter Moore |url=http://xbox.com/en-ca/support/petermooreletter.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071023004948/http://xbox.com/en-ca/support/petermooreletter.htm |archive-date=23 Oct 2007 |access-date=4 Jun 2025 |website=Xbox}}</ref>
@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 Microsoft primarily seemed to have done this to protect the Xbox brand. The Xbox 360 was only their second console, and the original Xbox hadn't done as well as they'd hoped it would. Microsoft confirmed this in Chapter 5 of their 2021 documentary, ''Power On: The Story of Xbox''.<ref name=":3" />
-By 2009, the cause of the issue was confirmed to be "within the components"- the low T<sub>g</sub> underfill. ATI and Microsoft completely fixed the issue in Xbox 360s made after this point.
+By mid-2008, the cause of the issue was confirmed to be "within the components"- the low T<sub>g</sub> underfill. ATI and Microsoft completely fixed the issue in Xbox 360s made after this point. Generally, it is recommended by retro console enthusiasts to purchase consoles manufactured after May 2008 (or marked "Q2 2008") and avoid consoles manufactured before this point, but the Tonasket (AKA "Jasper Kronos" or "Jasper V2") motherboard revision is generally considered to be the most reliable of the original "phat" model Xbox 360 consoles.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Nadaman |last2=et al. |date=8 Jun 2025 |title=Xbox 360 - Buying Guide |url=https://consolemods.org/wiki/Xbox_360:Buying_Guide |url-status=live |access-date=14 Jun 2025 |website=ConsoleMods Wiki}}</ref>
 ====Sony's Response - The "Yellow Light of Death"====
 <blockquote>''"We entirely refute the suggestion that PS3 consoles have an inherent defect or other design issue which is akin to any warranty issue experienced by another console manufacturer. [...] We think it is highly unfair to suggest that from an installed base of 2.5 million that the numbers you mention somehow are evidence of a 'manufacturing defect'..."''
-- Ray Maguire, managing director and senior vice president of Sony Computer Entertainment Europe in 2009; in a letter responding to a BBC Watchdog segment covering the "Yellow Light of Death".<ref name=":12">{{Cite web |last=BBC |date=18 Sep 2009 |title=Sony rebuts BBC PlayStation claim |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8263063.stm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250219154020/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8263063.stm |archive-date=19 Feb 2025 |access-date=4 Jun 2025 |website=BBC NEWS}}</ref><ref name=":13">{{Cite web |last=Martin |first=Matt |date=17 Sep 2009 |title=Sony tackles BBC over 'PS3 failure' report |url=https://www.gamesindustry.biz/sony-tackles-bbc-over-ps3-failure-report |url-status=live |access-date=10 Jun 2025 |website=Gamesindustry.biz}}</ref></blockquote>In November 2006, Sony released the PlayStation 3. Like the Xbox 360, the early models of PlayStation 3 had what consumers believe to be Bumpgate-related issues with their Nvidia-based RSX GPU. Many consumers who had bought launch models- what are now commonly known as "PlayStation 2 backwards compatible" models- found that their systems were malfunctioning. PlayStation 3 systems that were exhibiting the issue may freeze suddenly during gameplay and shut off, but all users who dealt with the defect had a common experience: when turning their PlayStation 3 on, the LED power indicator would turn green for a moment, then the system would beep three times, very briefly flash to a yellow light, then it would blink red. This was coined by consumers as the "Yellow Light of Death".
+- Ray Maguire, managing director and senior vice president of Sony Computer Entertainment Europe in 2009; in a letter responding to a BBC Watchdog segment covering the "Yellow Light of Death".<ref name=":12">{{Cite web |last=BBC |date=18 Sep 2009 |title=Sony rebuts BBC PlayStation claim |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8263063.stm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20250219154020/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8263063.stm |archive-date=19 Feb 2025 |access-date=4 Jun 2025 |website=BBC NEWS}}</ref><ref name=":13">{{Cite web |last=Martin |first=Matt |date=17 Sep 2009 |title=Sony tackles BBC over 'PS3 failure' report |url=https://www.gamesindustry.biz/sony-tackles-bbc-over-ps3-failure-report |url-status=live |access-date=10 Jun 2025 |website=Gamesindustry.biz}}</ref></blockquote>In November 2006, Sony released the PlayStation 3. Like the Xbox 360, the early models of PlayStation 3 had what consumers believe to be Bumpgate-related issues with its Nvidia-based RSX GPU. Many consumers who had bought launch models- what are now commonly known as "PlayStation 2 backwards compatible" models- found that their systems were malfunctioning. PlayStation 3 systems that were exhibiting the issue may freeze suddenly during gameplay and shut off, but all users who dealt with the defect had a common experience: when attempting to turn their PlayStation 3 on, the LED power indicator would turn green for a moment, then the system would beep three times, very briefly flash to a yellow light, then it would continuously blink red without booting the system. This was coined by consumers as the "Yellow Light of Death".
-BBC Watchdog aired a segment in 2009 covering the "Yellow Light of Death".<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=HelpForPS3 (Reuploader) |last2=BBC |date=17 Dec 2009 |title=Sony PS3 Yellow Light of Death - BBC |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_ef8bDQktI |url-status=live |access-date=3 Jun 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref> The hosts stated that when viewers called Sony because their console was malfunctioning, Sony told them that it could have been for a variety of reasons, and they couldn't determine exactly what the problem was without disassembling the console having the issue. While all of this is true- the LED indicators do simply indicate a general hardware failure that requires detailed troubleshooting- it is worth noting that by August 2008, Sony was building consoles with the 65nm RSX<ref name=":6">{{Cite web |last=Miller |first=R. |date=26 Jun 2008 |title=PS3 graphics chip going 65nm this Fall |url=https://www.engadget.com/2008-06-26-ps3-graphics-chip-going-65nm-this-fall.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210924101930/https://www.engadget.com/2008-06-26-ps3-graphics-chip-going-65nm-this-fall.html |archive-date=24 Sep 2021 |access-date=3 Jun 2025 |website=Engadget}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=NVIDIA Playstation 3 GPU 65nm Specs |url=https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/playstation-3-gpu-65nm.c1682 |url-status=live |access-date=3 Jun 2025 |website=TechPowerUp GPU Database}}</ref>, which has been confirmed by enthusiasts to not suffer from the theoretically Bumpgate-related fault.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |last=RIP Felix |date=15 Jan 2024 |title=A 360 Story - The RED Ring of Death & the 7th Generation Console War |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qKtS_uxdcU |url-status=live |access-date=2 Jun 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref>
+BBC Watchdog aired a segment in 2009 covering the "Yellow Light of Death".<ref name=":1">{{Cite web |last=HelpForPS3 (Reuploader) |last2=BBC |date=17 Dec 2009 |title=Sony PS3 Yellow Light of Death - BBC |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_ef8bDQktI |url-status=live |access-date=3 Jun 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref> The hosts stated that when viewers called Sony because their console was malfunctioning, Sony told them that it could have been for a variety of reasons, and they couldn't determine exactly what the problem was without disassembling the console having the issue. While all of this is true- the LED indicators do simply indicate a general hardware failure that requires troubleshooting by connecting to the System Controller (Syscon) and checking for error codes- it is worth noting that by August 2008, Sony was building consoles with the 65nm RSX<ref name=":6">{{Cite web |last=Miller |first=R. |date=26 Jun 2008 |title=PS3 graphics chip going 65nm this Fall |url=https://www.engadget.com/2008-06-26-ps3-graphics-chip-going-65nm-this-fall.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210924101930/https://www.engadget.com/2008-06-26-ps3-graphics-chip-going-65nm-this-fall.html |archive-date=24 Sep 2021 |access-date=3 Jun 2025 |website=Engadget}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=NVIDIA Playstation 3 GPU 65nm Specs |url=https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/playstation-3-gpu-65nm.c1682 |url-status=live |access-date=3 Jun 2025 |website=TechPowerUp GPU Database}}</ref>, which has been confirmed by enthusiasts to not suffer from the theoretically Bumpgate-related fault.<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |last=RIP Felix |date=15 Jan 2024 |title=A 360 Story - The RED Ring of Death & the 7th Generation Console War |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qKtS_uxdcU |url-status=live |access-date=2 Jun 2025 |website=YouTube}}</ref><ref name=":14" />
-Sony never issued a recall or extended warranty for these systems; all consumers had to pay out of their own pocket if they wanted their consoles repaired, unless the system failed during the standard one-year warranty period. According to one of the individuals interviewed in BBC's Watchdog segment, if the system was outside of its one year warranty period, they would have to pay £128 (~$173) to get the system fixed, and they would only provide customers with a three-month post-repair warranty. If it failed again after that point, they would have to pay out of pocket again. Keeping in mind that the fault was very likely caused by a GPU defect, this possibility was very likely unless Sony's repair technicians replaced the defective 90nm GPU with a non-defective one, which they were able to do for some consoles. In addition, the console would also be reset during the repair, meaning that the owner would lose all data that was not backed up prior to the failure, such as game saves.<ref name=":1" /><!-- Felix also mentions the official "Frankies" in the PS3 Story video, but there's a primary source for it that I need to find. -V -->
+Sony never issued a recall or extended warranty for these systems; all consumers had to pay out of their own pocket if they wanted their consoles repaired, unless the system failed during the standard one-year warranty period. However, that was rare; the PS3's fan table accommodated better for the temperature changes than the Xbox 360 did, so it took longer for the defect to break the console. Depending on how frequently the console was used, some consumers could have had their console for a few years before it displayed symptoms.
+According to one of the individuals interviewed in BBC's Watchdog segment, if the system was outside of its one year warranty period, they would have to pay £128 (~$173) to get the system fixed, and they would only provide customers with a three-month post-repair warranty. If it failed again after that point, they would have to pay out of pocket again. Keeping in mind that the fault was very likely caused by a GPU defect, this possibility was very likely unless Sony's repair technicians replaced the defective 90nm GPU with a non-defective one, which they were able to do for some consoles.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Icferrum |date=2 Feb 2020 |title=Frankenstein PHAT PS3: CECHA with 40nm RSX |url=https://www.psx-place.com/threads/frankenstein-phat-ps3-cecha-with-40nm-rsx.28069/ |url-status=live |access-date=14 Jun 2025 |website=PSX-Place}}</ref> In addition, the console would also be reset during the repair, meaning that the owner would lose all data that was not backed up prior to the failure, such as game saves.<ref name=":1" />
 Instead of admitting that there was a defect and issuing an extended warranty to consumers (like Microsoft did) Sony simply quietly fixed the defect around the same time that Microsoft did for the Xbox 360, so PS3 "slim" revisions and newer were not affected. Specifically, it was only 90nm GPUs that appeared to have low T<sub>g</sub> underfill- and hence, the defect.
@@ Line 79: / Line 81: @@
 Nvidia opted for a settlement<ref>{{Cite web |date=2010 |title=Frequently Asked Questions - What can I get from the settlement? |url=http://www.nvidiasettlement.com/faq.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101001080625/http://www.nvidiasettlement.com/faq.html |archive-date=1 Sep 2010 |access-date=13 Jun 2025 |website=The NVIDIA GPU Litigation}}</ref>- though, asserted that the settlement was not an admission of wrongdoing. Consumers who participated as Settlement Class Members were presented with three options to be compensated:
-# A replacement GPU inside their affected notebook;
+#A replacement GPU inside their affected notebook;
-# A replacement HP notebook computer with one "similar in kind and value" to the one they owned;
+#A replacement HP notebook computer with one "similar in kind and value" to the one they owned;
-# Reimbursement of either the whole cost of repairing the notebook due to a previous GPU failure or a portion of that amount (dependent on how many people submitted valid claims for reimbursement).
+#Reimbursement of either the whole cost of repairing the notebook due to a previous GPU failure or a portion of that amount (dependent on how many people submitted valid claims for reimbursement).
 Of course, all the settlement benefits for Class Members were paid for by Nvidia.