Many years ago Intel tried to bankrupt AMD in a big way - that and their dodgy business practices is why I will never buy Intel as long as I have a hole in my ****.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
14th Gen "Raptor Lake Refresh"
- Thread starter Dave2150
- Start date
Associate
Yes, they're all guilty of acting in disreputable ways. I don't understand why some people cheerlead for companies that are concerned only with making a buck and pleasing their shareholders. I really don't expect Intel to do the right thing here, the cost of that is far too high. They will stall, obfuscate and deny. AMD and NVidia would do (and in NV's case, have done) exactly the same in similar circumstances.
If I had a 13900 or 14900 right now I'd be walking into a certain used goods chain tomorrow to get rid of it.
Caporegime
Before it becomes a problem because it they are burning out in what is relative terms rapidly you could be in for a headache soon as there are already reports of Intel refusing RMA's, normally they are pretty good like that but as the RMA levels increase Intel will just get more vagarous in wanting to protect their bottom line.
Having to refund half on all the 13/14900K's they sold would be catastrophic for them, that's what they are trying desperately to avoid.
Last edited:
Caporegime
They will leave you holding a broken CPU if they can, make no bones about it.
Soldato
but not doing so will hurt them, either way you look at it intel is between a serious rock and a hard place
Caporegime
They are, its a battle between long term reputation and short term money, right now everyone is confused, no one but Intel know how bad it is and how deep it goes, that is how they would like it to stay but its not going to, Journalists know this is potentially catastrophic for Intel and with that they are going to be very careful and give Intel the benefit of that confusion but eventually that become assisting in covering up a conspiracy and now their long term reputation is in peril.
Over these next few week Jurnoes will gradually increase the noise and hope Intel can figure this out before they need to get too noisy.
Soldato
Caporegime
"I didn't want to believe because Intel pretty good"
There comes a point where the laws of physics say nope and you don't need a physics degree to realise Intel are playing a dangerous game with Physics.
This is not the first time i've said this, i've been saying it for a while.
Problem is no one is really adding anything new, just doesn't seem to be enough information/potential for a deep dive at this point to really understand it.
Soldato
No. No to all of that. My post says that meeting Intel spec leads to higher temperature and load voltage. Doesn't mention anything about degrading. It's not easily quantifiable, hence why nobody has done it. IMO whatever is happening, is going to happen regardless of how it's being or been treated, at least in the case of afflicted CPUs.
Nothing you've said adds any real weight to the argument for or against Intel. It's entirely fair to say you know less than most people commenting, having never once used the platform.
Last edited:
Associate
All anyone can do right now is sift through part failure data looking for clues, there's no realistic way for journalists or end users to examine the chips and find out what's failed. In fact, there's a non-trivial chance Intel doesn't even know what's gone wrong yet. Doing failure analysis on enough chips to get reliable data would be expensive, and possibly Intel management are in denial and have not, up to this point, been prepared to pay for it to be done.
The Boeing situation has shown quite starkly how management bent on short-term financial gain can become completely detached from the reality of running an engineering-focused company and fail to take otherwise obvious steps to head off disaster.
If it is a repeatable failure that is triggered by UE5 shader compiling and/or similar scenarios or whatever it should be possible to isolate a specific example of that and use that to investigate further though.
Soldato
So anyone an i9 13/14 th gen is sitting on a ticking clock until failure.
We don't even know that yet, only a small number of people claiming failure rates are that high. I know people who are running loads of 13th and 14th gen systems who've only encountered a tiny number of CPUs which are failing in certain situations which are probably this problem.
Also something that may be relevant, though mixed laptop, etc. systems might go against that a bit - in these contexts where a studio or server hosting company does a big update to their hardware they'll often be provided via trayed CPUs - so may be a batch problem.
Like all those years when Intel was doing share buybacks - to me share buybacks always said:
"we have tons of money now in the short-term, but we have no clue about the long-terms or diversifying*
... so the good news is that we and the board have decided to inflate the shareprice.
... BTW, I'm due to retire next year".
* Of course, a lot of the ways Intel has historically tried to diversity have been total disasters so maybe at Intel that is a valid excuse?
I haven’t had any problems at all with my 14900k cpu 
Associate
If there's a particular series of instructions or mix of instructions and data causing the crash then, yes, that would at least give a starting point. And Intel obviously has access to configuration options and status monitoring on the processors that we don't, but to confirm beyond doubt what's wrong I expect they'd have to shave the layers from known faulty dies until the suspect area is visible and compare that to brand-new, known good parts.
If Buildzoid is right and the root cause is ring bus degradation from too much voltage they'll need to shave dies to find out how badly the transistors in still working chips have degraded. If i9s with 1.503v vcore are failing rapidly, what's happening to the 1.483v parts? Are those enduring, or just degrading more slowly? Ideally they will want to find what the long-term safe voltage is, because going forward all chips that can't run at or below that voltage will have to be discarded. That's going to need physical inspection of a whole pile of both failed and working chips. Not easy or cheap.
Glad I don't work for Intel, their failure analysis guys are probably working the mother of all crunches right now.
Caporegime
I dodged it... my weight has been behind this longer than anyone.
Take your blinkers off, this story is writing its self. Apply some critical thinking.
I questioned that log term reliability of these CPU's, to me it was obvious, but i never predicted this.
Last edited:
Caporegime
JayZ2Cents unironically had this when he was trying to explain, in his own way the PL1 vs PL2 thing, his stock 13900K crashed during an R23 run, what he said was this... "oh just 13'th gen stuff, some of them don't run Cinebench, ignore that its normal"
Really? Since when is it normal that a CPU can't run a simple Ray Traced Tile Render? Rhetorical question, we know... But how has it become normalised? If i buy a CPU and if after 2 hours, never mind 20 seconds of tile rendering it crashed its getting pulled out, boxed up and sent back as faulty, because that's exactly what it is, its faulty.
This is why i said this without any apparent prompt.
And think about it, this is not normal, there is something wrong with it.
youtu.be
Never mind here's how to fix it, its broken, its not the end users job to fix their broken brand new CPU its their job to send it back as a broken CPU, your job, Mr Expert Influencer is to tell Intel to fix their broken crap, not influence the end user to hold on to a very expensive broken pile of crap excusing Intel from their responsibilities.
Really? Since when is it normal that a CPU can't run a simple Ray Traced Tile Render? Rhetorical question, we know... But how has it become normalised? If i buy a CPU and if after 2 hours, never mind 20 seconds of tile rendering it crashed its getting pulled out, boxed up and sent back as faulty, because that's exactly what it is, its faulty.
This is why i said this without any apparent prompt.
And think about it, this is not normal, there is something wrong with it.
The intel instability and degradation rant.
Level1Techs video: https://youtu.be/QzHcrbT5D_Y?si=CmpLDLsV3SKTiXugigorslab binning data: https://www.igorslab.de/en/r-batches-13900kss-and-imc-regressions-i...
youtu.be
Never mind here's how to fix it, its broken, its not the end users job to fix their broken brand new CPU its their job to send it back as a broken CPU, your job, Mr Expert Influencer is to tell Intel to fix their broken crap, not influence the end user to hold on to a very expensive broken pile of crap excusing Intel from their responsibilities.
Last edited:
Soldato
Please tell us the crux of this matter that your industry knowledge has foreseen for so long, we’re all ears