Samsung Electronics has come under scrutiny from regulatory authorities for failing to disclose that the gaming performance of its Galaxy smartphones and tablets is limited when running high-spec games. In some cases, the maximum performance of the devices was restricted by up to 30% for the central processing unit (CPU) and graphics processing unit (GPU).
On October 27, the Fair Trade Commission announced it would impose a corrective order and a provisional fine of 20.1 billion won (approximately $15 million) on Samsung for its misleading advertising practices. The sanctions apply to the Galaxy S21 and S22 series, as well as the Galaxy Tab S8 series, which were released and advertised between January 2021 and March 2022.
Samsung promoted these products by highlighting their gaming performance as a key advantage through its website, promotional videos, and product launch events. The Galaxy S21 series was advertised as featuring the 'fastest 5nm AP in Galaxy history,' emphasizing its capability for high-spec gaming. Similarly, the Galaxy S22 series was marketed with phrases like 'the fastest chip in Galaxy history,' showcasing quick touch response and smooth screen transitions.
However, when specific high-spec games are launched, the Game Optimization Service (GOS) immediately activates, limiting the CPU and GPU speeds to pre-set levels, regardless of the device's temperature. GOS is designed to manage heat in smart devices. While the general policy adjusts performance based on device temperature, the individual policy restricts maximum performance as soon as certain games are launched.
For instance, when running 'PUBG: New State' on the Galaxy S22 series, the CPU speed was capped at 0.94 GHz from a maximum of 2.99 GHz, and the GPU was limited to 220 MHz from 818 MHz, representing only 31.4% and 26.9% of their original maximum speeds, respectively.
In total, 82 games on the Galaxy S21 series, 47 on the S22 series, and 8 on the Tab S8 series experienced these performance limitations. The Fair Trade Commission explained that such restrictions could lead to issues like screen stuttering, delays, and reduced graphic quality during moments requiring high computational power.
Lee Soon-mi, a commissioner at the Fair Trade Commission, stated, "Limiting the maximum clock speed means that even in moments requiring high performance, it cannot exceed that limit. Consumers will notice a decrease in screen smoothness, slower touch response, and lower graphic quality."
The Fair Trade Commission determined that Samsung's actions constituted deceptive advertising under the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising. By emphasizing gaming performance while omitting crucial information about performance limitations when running specific high-spec games, Samsung hindered consumers' ability to make informed purchasing decisions.
Samsung argued that only a small portion of consumers would be affected by the limitations on high-spec games, but the Fair Trade Commission rejected this claim. The commissioner noted, "The advertisement was aimed at general consumers, not just those using specific high-spec games, and we assessed the potential for misunderstanding from the perspective of consumers purchasing premium smartphones."
However, the final fine was lower than the amount initially proposed by the investigators, who had suggested a fine of up to 60 billion won due to the severity of the violations. The commission ultimately deemed the violations to be of lesser severity, taking into account Samsung's voluntary corrective actions. The provisional fine of 20.1 billion won was calculated based on approximately 4.2 trillion won in related sales at a 0.5% penalty rate.
The commissioner remarked, "We considered Samsung's proactive measures, such as quickly updating software following the public outcry regarding GOS." In March 2022, amid the GOS controversy, Samsung released a software update that lifted the restrictions on CPU and GPU speeds and removed the GOS bypass block, allowing users to set a game performance mode.
In a related consumer lawsuit regarding GOS, the first-instance court ruled that the advertising was misleading. However, it did not accept the claims for damages due to a lack of evidence proving specific damages and causation. The case was later resolved through a mandatory mediation process in the appeals court.
The Fair Trade Commission clarified that civil liability for damages and violations of the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising are separate issues. The commissioner emphasized, "If a product's specific performance is highlighted as a key feature in advertising, any significant limitations affecting that performance must be clearly communicated to consumers."
Meanwhile, Samsung has indicated plans to pursue legal action. The company stated, "GOS is a feature designed to enhance the perceived performance of games and optimize them for stable long-term enjoyment. Given that all domestic and international lawsuits have been concluded and the complaints filed with the Fair Trade Commission have been withdrawn, we find this decision difficult to understand. We will actively clarify our position through legal procedures going forward."
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.