CHF6188.–
ASUS ROG Astral LC GeForce RTX 5090 OC
32 GB, GDDR7
Question about ASUS ROG Astral LC GeForce RTX 5090 OC
Beware when sending in high-end hardware under warranty: Are defective cards simply retained despite an increase in value?
Helpful answer
After a little thought, I came to realise this. If I take a sober look at the background processes in the Swiss distributor trade, Digitec's behaviour is absolutely understandable from a purely commercial point of view: The distributor also only receives a credit note from the upstream supplier in the event of a warranty claim based on the old purchase price (I assume). If Digitec were to provide the customer with an up-to-date replacement device, they would have to finance the glaring market difference out of their own pocket. It makes perfect sense that a company in the rigid structures of the supply chain would not voluntarily swallow these costs.
Digitec handles the process in exactly the same way as the internal commercial processes and the GTC (section 7.1) stipulate in order to protect itself from these additional costs of global inflation for which it is not responsible. As a consumer, you simply have to learn that in the event of a market shortage, a credit note completely shifts the financial risk onto the buyer and, in case of doubt, repairing minor damage yourself is the smarter option.
Support has strictly adhered to its commercial guidelines. It went badly.
Digitec handles the process in exactly the same way as the internal commercial processes and the GTC (section 7.1) stipulate in order to protect itself from these additional costs of global inflation for which it is not responsible. As a consumer, you simply have to learn that in the event of a market shortage, a credit note completely shifts the financial risk onto the buyer and, in case of doubt, repairing minor damage yourself is the smarter option.
Support has strictly adhered to its commercial guidelines. It went badly.
I would like to share a current service case here that makes me very thoughtful and shows how automated warranty processes are designed completely at the expense of us customers.
The facts of the case:
In October 2025, I bought an ASUS ROG Astral LC GeForce RTX 5090 OC for around CHF 2,300. Recently, a minimal defect occurred on the radiator connector (a loose contact on the magnetic connector system that supplies the fans and RGB lighting). The cable had to be shaken regularly to get the power flowing again. As the device was under full warranty, I sent the card in for repair in May 2026. The card itself and the graphics chip worked perfectly.
The handling by the dealer:
Instead of repairing this connector or replacing the fan cable, the case was classified as "not economical to repair" by the service centre. An automatic credit note for the old purchase price of CHF 2,300 was issued - completely without consulting me - and the case was closed. When I insisted on simply having my card returned to me unrepaired so that I could fix the cable myself or have it repaired if necessary, I was flatly refused at all levels (right up to the Customer Care team). The hardware was "no longer in stock".
The economic and logical problem:
Due to the current market situation and massive shortage, the replacement value of the RTX 5090 is now around CHF 3,400. This unsolicited, compulsory credit means that I suffer a direct financial loss of over CHF 1,100 if I want to get the same performance back. The support team's argument that customers cannot be asked in advance due to the high volume is seriously flawed: after all, if the repair is successful, the hardware is returned to the customer without any logistical errors.
Conclusion:
It is deeply disappointing how the full market risk and inflation in the event of hardware shortages are unilaterally passed on to the buyer via rigid processes. By refusing to hand over the defective but still extremely valuable property, you are deprived of any opportunity to minimise the damage yourself.
I would be interested to know whether others here have had similar experiences. Has the warranty now become a financial risk for the buyer as soon as a product increases in market value?
The facts of the case:
In October 2025, I bought an ASUS ROG Astral LC GeForce RTX 5090 OC for around CHF 2,300. Recently, a minimal defect occurred on the radiator connector (a loose contact on the magnetic connector system that supplies the fans and RGB lighting). The cable had to be shaken regularly to get the power flowing again. As the device was under full warranty, I sent the card in for repair in May 2026. The card itself and the graphics chip worked perfectly.
The handling by the dealer:
Instead of repairing this connector or replacing the fan cable, the case was classified as "not economical to repair" by the service centre. An automatic credit note for the old purchase price of CHF 2,300 was issued - completely without consulting me - and the case was closed. When I insisted on simply having my card returned to me unrepaired so that I could fix the cable myself or have it repaired if necessary, I was flatly refused at all levels (right up to the Customer Care team). The hardware was "no longer in stock".
The economic and logical problem:
Due to the current market situation and massive shortage, the replacement value of the RTX 5090 is now around CHF 3,400. This unsolicited, compulsory credit means that I suffer a direct financial loss of over CHF 1,100 if I want to get the same performance back. The support team's argument that customers cannot be asked in advance due to the high volume is seriously flawed: after all, if the repair is successful, the hardware is returned to the customer without any logistical errors.
Conclusion:
It is deeply disappointing how the full market risk and inflation in the event of hardware shortages are unilaterally passed on to the buyer via rigid processes. By refusing to hand over the defective but still extremely valuable property, you are deprived of any opportunity to minimise the damage yourself.
I would be interested to know whether others here have had similar experiences. Has the warranty now become a financial risk for the buyer as soon as a product increases in market value?