Associate
![youtube.com](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/iTYbbThAkIU/oar2.jpg?sqp=-oaymwEkCJUDENAFSFqQAgHyq4qpAxMIARUAAAAAJQAAyEI9AICiQ3gB&rs=AOn4CLD6h8xrljtqUbESv1d6riMW-6lI7A)
Intel lied about Raptor Lake Failures Today
Intel lied about oxidation, and their Raptor Lake claims don’t add up...#shorts #short #intel #oxidation #instability MAJOR SPONSORS:Get BIG DEALS if you sup...
![youtube.com](https://www.youtube.com/s/desktop/10afb17a/img/favicon_32x32.png)
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 lied about Raptor Lake Failures Today
Intel lied about oxidation, and their Raptor Lake claims don’t add up...#shorts #short #intel #oxidation #instability MAJOR SPONSORS:Get BIG DEALS if you sup...youtube.com
Yeah head in sand at the moment. Any major announcement is likely to tank their stock price so I expect they'll be very passive.So I take it intel is doing nothing about this problem then.
He's got quiet a few sources feeding him info from both AMD and Bintel. Videocardz run with half the stuff he comes out with. Just more fuel for the fire really.MILD...
Also a good idea for anyone putting out statements, videos, etc. on this to put lied in alleged form, unless they have proof, so Intel can't sue for slander.
![]()
Intel lied about Raptor Lake Failures Today
Intel lied about oxidation, and their Raptor Lake claims don’t add up...#shorts #short #intel #oxidation #instability MAJOR SPONSORS:Get BIG DEALS if you sup...youtube.com
He's got quiet a few sources feeding him info from both AMD and Bintel. Videocardz run with half the stuff he comes out with. Just more fuel for the fire really.
So those of us who overclocked our cpu's and locked the voltages to say around 1.35v volts have saved out CPUS from death haha...
I knew seeing nearly 1.5v at stock wasn't right at the start and didn't sit well with me so I'm glad I stopped that from the start.
I'm thinking that MLID is questioning others for not giving all the infomation and being vague when this is what he does for a living so when he leaks information and it doesnt add up is that also an admission then that he's lying.Yes its MLID but lets be honest here is saying what a lot of are thinking.
By design, I think, I doubt we'll ever know the true scale of the problem and how many CPUs sit in each camp. Intel are claiming very few of their CPUs fall into the manufacturing fault category and most are just the result of a bug in an algorithm, which seems convenient, because as THG said, this is the least serious outcome for them and the least reputationally damaging.Feels like we aren't getting the whole picture.
I doubt any of his sources would back him up if he got sued, they'd all go quiet faster than a hungry kid in a sweet shop that realises they aren't free.He's got quiet a few sources feeding him info from both AMD and Bintel. Videocardz run with half the stuff he comes out with. Just more fuel for the fire really.
If my understanding is correct it is more complicated than that - the CPU would continue to run at voltages and frequencies outside of the envelope for the current thermal situation (and for long duration) and that doesn't mean in situations where the CPU is hot necessarily. Compounded probably by some overly optimistic binning of parts and the optimisations of some motherboards making the situation worse meaning in some cases that higher than intended voltage was considerably above what the silicon is designed for, even if only for brief periods.
Though reigning in the voltage will likely have at least mitigated the problem if not prevented it.
IMO Intel would probably have to introduce new SKUs with stricter binning like 100-200MHz lower clocks, ~200mV lower voltage target, with supply of the higher end parts at current specs much reduced to fully fix this problem, and that assumes there aren't other issues like manufacturing defects or an inherent design flaw/weakness.
For me, I run an offset of -0.13500 on my 14900k, PL1 & PL2 both 253W, ICCMax 400A.
I ran a test gaming in the Finals for around an hour, from memory my CPU averaged about 1.35V, max didn't see to go any higher either. When I first got my CPU I did a couple of benchmarks with unrestricted settings and I saw over 1.5V. That's when I decided to implement all of the intel default settings with the under-volt. Hopefully being prudent it will prevent premature CPU death! As it stands I get 95% of the performance versus unrestricted settings at much lower temperatures, voltage and power consumption.
Indeed, fingers crossed!Be interesting if we ever get the real story but the voltages I've seen don't sit well with my understanding of the likely limits of the node used.
My 14700K normally doesn't go above 1.42 very occasionally a couple of cores will hit 1.43, assuming the displayed voltage is correct. Most of the time sits below 1.4. So hoping mine will be OK.
To this day, we don't even know how extensive Nvidia Bumbgate was. A few parts from then are still - most be more than thermal stress as a pretty low power nForce chipset died on me and it was never hot (and not on the "official" lst of affected parts).By design, I think, I doubt we'll ever know the true scale of the problem and how many CPUs sit in each camp. Intel are claiming very few of their CPUs fall into the manufacturing fault category and most are just the result of a bug in an algorithm, which seems convenient, because as THG said, this is the least serious outcome for them and the least reputationally damaging.
I doubt any of his sources would back him up if he got sued, they'd all go quiet faster than a hungry kid in a sweet shop that realises they aren't free.
The 14700 chips currently start at just under £350 from a reputable retailer, the 7950X cheapest from somewhere reputable is £470, the X3D around £550.