Soldato
I can tell you it’s fairly widespread just by the
number of cases we see on the ROG forum, I’m not at all surprised by some partners seeing the numbers being quoted.
Last edited:
-
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
I can tell you it’s fairly widespread just by the
number of cases we see on the ROG forum, I’m not at all surprised by some partners seeing the numbers being quoted.
Soldato
As immaterial as this may be, I don’t think you’re in a position to be calling anyone out for gas lightning having never seen one of these CPUs in person, let alone used one. Lets keep things in the sanity lane lol
Last edited:
How many are actually *this* problem though?, I see a loads of posts about 14900s (and 14700s) crashing where it is far more likely incompatibility/wrong settings/unstable RAM/other software issues than this specific issue with Intel CPUs.
Last edited:
Soldato
All of the obvious factors are established before coming to more sinister conclusions. Failing the user being stable at Intel Fail Safe SVID and reducing the core frequency to 5500MHz, quite often the user will come back to say that a replacement CPU solved the problem. Of course, not all requests for support are going to be the main crux, but the frequency of the reports for these CPUs is exponentially higher than 12th gen. If I had to put a number on it, I'd probably guestimate similarly to Nexus' numbers and say as much as 25% may be impacted - but right now we're still working with incomplete information and the cause is unverified.
Last edited:
Soldato
Intel introduces 14th Gen Core SKUs without E-Cores: 125W Core i9-14901KE features 8 P-Cores, 16 threads - VideoCardz.com
Core 14×01 SKUs: Up to 8 Performance cores, no Efficient cores at all Intel has quietly introduced a new series of processors. Recently, we covered a leak of Intel’s future plans for the LGA-1700 socket, which involved a product named “Bartlett Lake-S”. This product is expected to feature both...
videocardz.com
They’re getting rid of the cinebench cores, and also adding more normal cores in some other models. The clocks will obviously have to be reduced.Intel introduces 14th Gen Core SKUs without E-Cores: 125W Core i9-14901KE features 8 P-Cores, 16 threads - VideoCardz.com
Core 14×01 SKUs: Up to 8 Performance cores, no Efficient cores at all Intel has quietly introduced a new series of processors. Recently, we covered a leak of Intel’s future plans for the LGA-1700 socket, which involved a product named “Bartlett Lake-S”. This product is expected to feature both...
I imagine even with the additional normal cores it will probably lead to a drop in cinebench scores, but overall improvement in general computing and perhaps even newer games.
Back to the way it was.
The P-core only CPUs were first rumoured back in February. Going to be a long time coming if they are targeting Q3 2025. The leaker claims these P-core only variants will be consumer items and work on existing LGA1700. Perhaps these are timed as an easy replacement for the existing chips which may fail...
Intel Bartlett Lake-S Desktop CPUs Launching In 2025: Up To 8+16 Hybrid & Up To 12 P-Core Only Flavors
Intel's Bartlett Lake-S Desktop CPUs are reportedly launching in 2025 in hybrid and P-Core-only flavors with up to 12 P-Cores.wccftech.com
Last edited:
Maybe the issue is batch related, where certain production batches were affected and your contacts have CPUs from an unaffected batch
This would make the most sense, since the latest thinking is the issue is caused by foreign debris contamination during production, causing oxidation of the power components. Such an issue could very likely affect certain batches or certain CPUs that came from a specific factory and not others
Last edited:
Do you know what that means exactly in the manufacturing process?
Like, if we take the country code from the batch number on the CPU, is that meaningful to anything in terms of contamination, or is it just where the CPU was finally packaged?
I wonder where packaging itself could contaminated things?
Sure you can delid CPUs but that still isn't the raw die (and aren't they flipped?), and cutting and then packaging is all part of packing
Thing is, since RPL is a monolith that kind of packaging is decades old so for something to go wrong there seems unlikely.
I would imagine that Intel internally can trace bad CPUs quite well in terms of batches, any parameters used etc.
Us outsiders probably have no chance to decipher the serial numbers.
Sure you can delid CPUs but that still isn't the raw die (and aren't they flipped?), and cutting and then packaging is all part of packing
Thing is, since RPL is a monolith that kind of packaging is decades old so for something to go wrong there seems unlikely.
I would imagine that Intel internally can trace bad CPUs quite well in terms of batches, any parameters used etc.
Us outsiders probably have no chance to decipher the serial numbers.
Yeah, you'd think so, though in those videos customers have said that they get trays of faulty CPUs in exchange for trays of faulty CPUs, which isn't very reassuring that Intel can tell the difference.
they are basically selling faulty cpus and they know it
It is possible they really cannot tell by batch etc., but equally it could just be that sales reps & sales technical support do not or did not have this info, or don't care.
Obviously costumers using desktop CPUs on W motherboard are relatively small fry - if big DC clients were treated like this it might be a different thing. (Sapphire Rapids is a similar process but all is fine there).
Although, those "small fry" W board customers may actually be part of larger DC operators using the full spectrum of Xeon etc., so treating them poorly or indifferently could have wider consequences.
Last edited:
Soldato
July 2024 Update on Instability Reports on Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen Desktop Processors
*9/25/24 - Please go to the following link for the latest updates: Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen Desktop Processor Vmin Instability Issue Root Cause* *Update 8/26 clarifying support guidance for Intel Core 13th/14th Gen desktop tray CPU purchases* *Update 7/29 regarding customer support process...
community.intel.com
This sounds A LOT like the TVB leak awhile back that Intel denied and since they only say "in some 13th/14th gen", I'd say it is leaving the door open for another disclosure later.July 2024 Update on Instability Reports on Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen Desktop Processors
*9/25/24 - Please go to the following link for the latest updates: Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen Desktop Processor Vmin Instability Issue Root Cause* *Update 8/26 clarifying support guidance for Intel Core 13th/14th Gen desktop tray CPU purchases* *Update 7/29 regarding customer support process...community.intel.com
Don't find this statement satisfactory at all, tbh, though this is mildly reassuring they're going to be fair to buyers:
A small statement after months of silence, but it could be worse:
Of course the patch only in "mid-August" does imply that upcoming CPU reviews could use the Intel figures which are actually unstable.
Describing permanent damage as "causing instability issues" is a bit poor but the "stemming from a microcode algorithm" rather BIOS settings does imply they are not just blaming motherboard vendors for this.
Of course the patch only in "mid-August" does imply that upcoming CPU reviews could use the Intel figures which are actually unstable.
Soldato
What are the odds that the microcode update actually fixes the issue? I hope it does, but i have my doubts.
I get the impression this is some kind of "there's so much negativity we better make a statement" and they cooked up whatever they could, or were willing to say, because they're leaving it open:
and
It was already guessed ages ago that voltages were too high for some CPUs.
Not great, I'd say. Though, it might well fix it for CPUs that were otherwise fine and have just degraded over time due to the overvolting.
Associate
That's all? Seems unlikely.July 2024 Update on Instability Reports on Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen Desktop Processors
*9/25/24 - Please go to the following link for the latest updates: Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen Desktop Processor Vmin Instability Issue Root Cause* *Update 8/26 clarifying support guidance for Intel Core 13th/14th Gen desktop tray CPU purchases* *Update 7/29 regarding customer support process...community.intel.com
Caporegime
Is this Intel's way of saying "yeah, we pushed them too hard"