• 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.

Intel has a Pretty Big Problem..

McManicMan said:
I wonder what OCUK store has to say about this!. My rig was bought from them with 3yr warranty, 14 months have passed with no issues YET, BUT not particularly happy that something my be wrong with the CPU
Click to expand...

Be interesting to know what kind of failure rates they are seeing. Unfortunately I only see the supply side of this through work, not point of retail or for the most part returns.
 
cliffy said:
If the issue covers 2 generatiosn (which it pretty obviously does) that means it includes multiple batches, multiple manufacturing dates and presumably more thnen 1 fab. Also it raises the question of did Intel know about this before they started producing the 14th gen, considering the size of the issue i would be surprised if they didn't and did nothing.

Also if a recall happens how the hell do they work out which batches to recall (it would have to surely be all of them) but more importantly how would they know if the replacements were good?

This seems like Intel are majorly FUBAR'd
Click to expand...
It doesn't need to be. If the theory about it being primarily between two manufacturing dates in 2023-2024 is true, then all of those 13th & 14th gen CPUs could have been produced as part of the same process.

They started producing 14th gen CPUs way before they launched and they're identical (I mean, the dies are identical) between 13th/14th gen.
 
TrixP10 said:
if you were a retailer you would certainly want some reassurances from them. Tricky position IMHO.
Click to expand...
Since DC customers are getting mixed messages or mixed RMA experience, I wouldn't expect mere retailers being told anything.

Certainly the smaller DC consumers, hyperscalers may have been told more. Who knows, but Intel (and AMD) know that the really big hyperscalers can and will roll their server chips (not just AWS but Microsoft, Facebook, Google, etc. especially since ARM are now moving into the reference designs for server workloads) and until that happens they could easily swap x86 vendor if fobbed off
 
Last edited:
KompuKare said:
Since DC customers are getting mixed messages or mixed RMA experience, I wouldn't expect mere retailers being told anything.

Certainly the smaller DC consumers, hyperscalers may have been told more. Who knows, but Intel (and AMD) know that the really big hyperscalers can and will roll their server chips (not just AWS but Microsoft, Facebook, Google, etc. especially since ARM are now moving into the reference designs for server workloads) and until that happens they could easily swap x86 vendor if fobbed off
Click to expand...

The bigger places probably aren't running a lot of 13th/14th gen desktop parts either - where they tend to be used is where single thread performance is paramount, some types of game server hosting, some places use them for mini-render farms for fast preview rendering, etc. for 3D design and video production, etc. I'm open to being wrong as my access to information is limited and from casual conversation rather than having access to people's monitoring systems, etc. but so far no one I've talked to in those kind of businesses is seeing anything like the failure rates some YouTubers are talking of - not even close, though the issue does exist - but more like 3% of systems rather than the 20-100% some are saying.
 
Rroff said:
The bigger places probably aren't running a lot of 13th/14th gen desktop parts either - where they tend to be used is where single thread performance is paramount, some types of game server hosting, some places use them for mini-render farms for fast preview rendering, etc. for 3D design and video production, etc. I'm open to being wrong as my access to information is limited and from casual conversation rather than having access to people's monitoring systems, etc. but so far no one I've talked to in those kind of businesses is seeing anything like the failure rates some YouTubers are talking of - not even close, though the issue does exist - but more like 3% of systems rather than the 20-100% some are saying.
Click to expand...
If the problem is definitely a fabrication/manufacturing issue, then it is possible that certain customers/regions got the bulk of orders at that time. Funnily enough, it seems like (from the GN and L1 videos) that the largest suppliers got the highest number of CPUs, so maybe they were directed toward large orders/OEMs rather than in retail and small suppliers.
 
Last edited:
Tetras said:
If the problem is definitely a fabrication/manufacturing issue, then it is possible that certain customers/regions got the bulk of orders at that time. Funnily enough, it seems like (from the GN and L1 videos) that the largest suppliers got the highest number of CPUs, so maybe they were directed toward large orders/OEMs rather than in retail and small suppliers.
Click to expand...

Bigger upgrade projects, etc. will use trayed CPUs which are often all from the same batch. Which may have a bearing on it.

It is entirely possible a smaller number of buyers ended up with the larger number of faulty CPUs if it does turn out to be down to specific batch(es).
 
Last edited:
Rroff said:
Bigger upgrade projects, etc. will use trayed CPUs which are often all from the same batch. Which may have a bearing on it.
Click to expand...
Yeah and then they're replaced by more tray CPUs from Intel, which are again all from the same batch, hence the OEM has to sift through them to find some that actually function properly.

But..., that would suggest Intel didn't realise that the replacement batch was part of the same set of contaminated CPUs :o
 
Chud_Jenny said:
videocardz.com

Intel states mobile 13/14th Gen Core series are not affected by instability issues - VideoCardz.com

Intel claims 13/14th Gen Core mobile CPU are not exposed to instability issues An in-depth internal investigation has shown. Intel has issued a statement to Digital Trends, who followed a story on recent instability issues. Recently, one of the game developers, Matthew Cassells, founder of...
videocardz.com videocardz.com
Click to expand...
In their statement they say that the issue does not affect mobile CPUs the same way, which strongly implies they know exactly what the problem is on desktop, but are not disclosing it publicly.
 
Intel says that mobiles aren't impacted. I struggle to believe this, because they've not said what the problem is.

I'm eyeing my new laptop and worrying. It's not like they can replace the chip, like a desktop.
 
q974739 said:
Intel says that mobiles aren't impacted. I struggle to believe this, because they've not said what the problem is.

I'm eyeing my new laptop and worrying. It's not like they can replace the chip, like a desktop.
Click to expand...
Without them disclosing it, it is making buying anything with an Intel chip risky right now, doesn't seem smart on their part. Though, I suppose starting a recall that will potentially have to replace millions of CPUs might not seem very smart to their bean counters either :o
 
Tetras said:
Yeah and then they're replaced by more tray CPUs from Intel, which are again all from the same batch, hence the OEM has to sift through them to find some that actually function properly.

But..., that would suggest Intel didn't realise that the replacement batch was part of the same set of contaminated CPUs :o
Click to expand...
Any replacements not being an actual random sample is certainly one way that figures like 3%*, 20%**, and 50%*** could be reconciled.

Problem I see with that theory is, how many non-random samples from each tray batch would Intel support hold?

Only really makes sense if 1st CPU goes, 2nd (from a different batch) also goes bad, 3rd (this time from the same batch as the 2nd) goes bad. That way Intel support only have to send without testing and/or have no clue about how batches tie in with the problem.

* 3% - pretty bad but not end of world)
** 20% - very very bad
*** 50% - wind up the company bad
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom