Hey Friends, I’m thinking about putting a 28 core CPU in my Mac Pro. If I keep the original CPU and put it back in in the event of any problems, will Apple still honor the warranty?
Ryan
Ryan
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MP 7,1 New cpu = voided warranty?
- Thread starter RyanFlynn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you are in the US, technically this shouldn't void the warranty as long as the CPU swap wasn't the cause of the problem.
Although, Apple may not honor the warranty and make you jump through hoops to get them to fix/replace your device.
If you decide to do this, I would keep the CPU swap to yourself.
Well , technically it does violate the warranty . This is a pretty serious unauthorized operation .
And Apple will definitely know if you altered their Systems this significantly .
( Fingerprints all over the heatsink , non factory replacement thermal paste , loose fasteners , wear on the fasteners , minor bent pins in the socket , missing Loc Tite from the fasteners , possibly processor serial number mismatch check if you don't reinstall the exact processor from the factory , missing fit and finish details , etc ) .
If you decide to go this route do not volunteer any information . Apple Store Geniuses are not as clever as the regional center techs and you might get better cooperation from them if they are not ... ahem .... fully informed .
But , I wouldn't deceive Apple . So , if they ask , tell them the whole nine yards .
Who knows ? They might just admire you even more as they charge you full price for the replacement parts 😂 .
If in the US, this is not accurate:
FTC Staff Warns Companies that It Is Illegal to Condition Warranty Coverage on the Use of Specified Parts or Services
The Federal Trade Commission staff has sent warning letters to six major companies that market and sell automobiles, cellular devices, and video gaming systems in the United States.
FTC said:
Although, that doesn't mean that Apple wouldn't give the OP a hard time with fixing and issue with a modified MP if it comes up.
If in the US, this is not accurate:
FTC Staff Warns Companies that It Is Illegal to Condition Warranty Coverage on the Use of Specified Parts or Services
The Federal Trade Commission staff has sent warning letters to six major companies that market and sell automobiles, cellular devices, and video gaming systems in the United States.www.ftc.gov
Although, that doesn't mean that Apple wouldn't give the OP a hard time with fixing and issue with a modified MP if it comes up.
Aha , but they will just pull the Ace of Spades from their sleeve and claim you damaged something ( the processor socket would be my guess ) . How many end users do you think can install one of these big chips without altering the pin array of the socket ? Even experienced techs would struggle with finger installing a large piece of silicon like a C.L. Xeon .
If the CPU change is the cause pf the damage then yes, it will void the warranty. I would consider any attempt to deceive Apple by undoing the change as dishonest. If you want to alter the configuration in a non-Apple approved way you should be willing to accept the consequences of your actions.
Maybe, but that doesn't mean the user voided the warranty. That just means that Apple is violating the US consumer protection laws.
Apple should be able to prove it was the user that cause the issue in question.
If the user replaces the CPU, and a few months later the GPU starts to fail, this should not void the warranty of the GPU. Could the GPU have been damaged in some way due to the user's replacement of the CPU? Of course, but Apple should be able to prove that.
Although, I understand that just because a company violates consumer protection laws, it doesn't always mean there is easy recourse for the consumer.
That is why I mentioned:
I
Apple totally controls the MP7,1 and an user is required to have Apple's cooperation at some time in the future ( e.g. replacement NAND drive with boot ROM that requires a handshake with T2 before start up ) to continue to use the product . I think most users would be cowed by Apple .
A certain large farm equipment company in my state is trying to force local farmers to only use authorized service centers for repairs and repair parts . This is actually a part of a firmware or software lock with the equipment and the farmers hired Eastern European hackers to bypass it . Hope that equipment manufacturer never hires Apple to learn about the miraculous T2 chip or there are going to be combines deserted in the fields .
I believe very strongly in the type of law you referred to earlier , but unless it goes to court an uncooperative big company can simply wear you down until you wave a white flag and go on with your life . When I bought my MP7,1 I simply psychologically prepared myself for paying for any repairs at full price because tinkering is a part of my job description and I'll accept responsibility for unusual operations that go south . And that's despite all my experience working with gear and having immaculate shop safety protocols . Twice in the last month I was amazed my Mac booted up and resumed acting normally , after playing around with it .
Apple totally controls the MP7,1 and an user is required to have Apple's cooperation at some time in the future ( e.g. replacement NAND drive with boot ROM that requires a handshake with T2 before start up ) to continue to use the product . I think most users would be cowed by Apple .
A certain large farm equipment company in my state is trying to force local farmers to only use authorized service centers for repairs and repair parts . This is actually a part of a firmware or software lock with the equipment and the farmers hired Eastern European hackers to bypass it . Hope that equipment manufacturer never hires Apple to learn about the miraculous T2 chip or there are going to be combines deserted in the fields .
I completely see you point of view, and would feel similar if I was in your position.
I just disagreed with this statement:
Because technically, Apple voiding the warranty would be against US consumer laws..
While it is illegal for Apple to void the warranty, the OP might have issues with Apple honoring the warranty on MP with an user modded CPU.
I agree, I wouldn't blame Apple for not honoring a warranty claim on something that is not covered, such as damage by an user mod, but it wouldn't be right nor legal for Apple to deny a warranty claim for a warranty-covered faulty component if the user made a modification to something else on the device that didn't have anything to do with the component failure.
It would be nice if everyone, user and company, just behaved in a honest way and owned their responsibility, the user if they screwed up, but even more so, the company, for complying with consumer laws.
Personally, if I did a mod to a Mac under warranty, and that Mac had a failure that had nothing to do with my mod, I would revert the Mac back to the way it was at purchase (as long as it wasn't too inconvenient) before I sent it to Apple, just to make things easier.
Also, I wouldn't tell them about the mod, unless they specifically asked.
Yeah, for a long time now companies have been trying all sorts of stuff to limit consumer rights or to find ways to void their own manufacturer warranties, even though a lot of the behavior is against the law.
One good example, which Apple has been called out recently for violating the consumer laws is the "Void It Removed" stickers. Apple, along with other companies, were recently sent letters warning them about the stickers being against the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act:
Those ‘warranty void if removed’ stickers are illegal says US consumer watchdog
Prohibitively conditional warranties aren’t on
Car dealerships and even their corporate offices in the US try to convince car owners that if the car is not serviced at the dealership service centers with OEM factory parts that the warranties may be voided. Which is against consumer laws of course, but it still doesn't stop them from not honoring warranty claims.
For example: In the late 2000's, Mazda started to deny warranty claims on cars with the 2.3L Turbo motors after they started to receive a lot of claims on motor and turbo failures. They justified their warranty denial by saying the owners were not using Mazda authorized service for the maintenance, such as oil changes.
So, even if the car owner had maintenance records from a non-Mazda service station, and all the maintenance was completed, warranty claims was still being denied.
All of which is illegal.
Mazda eventually walked this back and refunded people that had to pay out-of-pocket for repairs, but it took a couple of class-action lawsuit threats for this to happen.
You may not blame them but you're clearly being dishonest with them. If you know a modification you made was not the cause of a problem then why be deceptive with them by hiding the modification?
Nope, it isn't being dishonest. It is giving the only information they need related to the topic at hand, which in the example was a failed component not related to the mod.
For all the reasons discussed above. I am not going to give them information that they did not ask for because then they might unlawfully deny my warranty claim.
Refer to this example or the many other claims like it:
The consumer did nothing wrong, but Mazda denied their claim anyway. You cannot count on Apple to do the right thing either, so keep the information given for a warranty claim to the bare minimum.
Yes, it is being dishonest. You're withholding information from them.
They very well may deny a warranty claim however that doesn't change the fact you're robbing them of information which would help them make such a determination. I suspect if someone did the same to you that you would feel they were being dishonest. IMO you're being dishonest. If you feel you're in the right then fully disclose everything and then deal with their decision if you disagree with it.
Nope, it isn't.
You see it as withholding information, I don't. I see it as giving the information they ask for, but nothing more that might lead to a claim being denied.
I doubt you volunteer every detail about your use of a device when making a warranty claim.
I am going to use extremes for an example:
If you have a warranty claim due to a faulty component on your Mac Pro do volunteer the following information if it wasn't asked:
How/if the MP was transferred.
If it was a professional that set up the HW and SW of your MP.
If the MP was near a window.
If the MP spent time in direct sunlight.
Ambient temperature of the room that the MP was used in.
Humidly of the room.
If you have pets that were in the same area as your MP.
If the MP was near a potential source of water.
What you used your MP for.
If anyone ate near the MP.
What Websites did you visit on your MP.
If there any other users of the MP besides you.
If there was a surge protector utilized for the MP.
Is there HVAC vents near the MP.
If anything was ever placed on your MP.
Etc........
Of course you don't volunteer this info, because one thing you know it had nothing to do with the faulty component, especially when this extra information could lead to a claim being denied. However that doesn't change the fact you're robbing them of information which would help them make such a determination.
Now, how about a more realistic example:
You have your new MP set up, everything is going great, but then you accidentally bump into it, causing it to fall over. The power shuts off by itself, although it could have been just it yanking the power cord too hard.
You start it back up, everything seems fine. You go on with life enjoying your MP. It works perfectly fine with not issues.
Six months later, the power supply fails.
Do you volunteer the information about it falling six months earlier?
The failure most likely had nothing to do with that fall six months earlier, but you are robbing them of info which would help them make a warranty claim determination if you don't tell them.
You don't have to answer, just something to think about.
Yup, it is.
You're hiding information. Period. That makes it dishonest. If you truly believe a modification didn't cause the problem then there's no reason to withhold it.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this matter.
Like you would volunteer all the information from this scenario:
If you truly believe those facts didn't cause the problem then there's no reason to withhold it.
[automerge]1580951382[/automerge]
This thread went a little sideways, but getting back to the OP's question:
Basically, Mod at your own risk.
Legally, a mod shouldn't void a warranty, but that doesn't mean Apple will honor a warranty claim to a modded Mac.
There is no simple or easy recourse for you if Apple decided to unlawfully deny a warranty claim, so again, mod at your own risk.
Last edited:
You can disagree all you want. If you are withholding information then you're not providing Apple all the information and therefore being dishonest. There's no ambiguity here, just denial.
Do you let the police in without a warrant if you have nothing to hide? No, of course not.
When you file a warranty claim you should be an honest broker and answer questions truthfully - but you also gotta cover your ass if you expect the company in question to seize on some irrelevant detail and deny you coverage for a frivolous and vague reason.
Apple is not your friend. Apple is a company you do business with, and their goal is to make the most money from you over your lifetime with the least hassle.
When you file a warranty claim you should be an honest broker and answer questions truthfully - but you also gotta cover your ass if you expect the company in question to seize on some irrelevant detail and deny you coverage for a frivolous and vague reason.
Apple is not your friend. Apple is a company you do business with, and their goal is to make the most money from you over your lifetime with the least hassle.
It's ~$300 for an accidental damage claim; I don't know of anyone who has tried to make a CPU upgrade damage claim at this time.
It is one thing if the upgrade caused the damage, that make sense. But, if an unrelated component fails, the consumer shouldn't be charged an accidental damage fee.
Great point, I completely agree.
There is no good reason to volunteer unnecessary info, especially if that info could be used against you.
I agree. However removing a modification you made denies them the ability to have a full understanding of the system at the time of the issue and ask all relevant questions. You're intentionally hiding information because you feel is irrelevant. You're attempting to increase you chances of a warranty repair by hiding a modification. That is, IMO, dishonest.