Hardware performance just isn't progressing as fast as it used to. So the chip producers have been overclocking everything to it's limit to enable 'newer' products to be released, as the little architectural or node gains don't by themselves warrant a new product. It's not just intel who do it. However they may be guilty of doing it excessively.
The 13900k for example is a 100w part that by default runs at almost 300w. That is an issue. We knew it when these generations of chips were released, they required exotic cooling at default for marginal performance gains over running at sensible power limits. What we didn't know is how the chips would handle being pumped with excessive power over time at default. We do now. Most here know that ocing can reduce the life of your chips, however when you are not overclocking, and the life is reduced - there is a problem. Things were pushed too far by the manufacturer.
Let's be honest - we all love overclocking and getting the most out of our hardware - that's why we are here right. right... ? Or well we did (the overclocking sub forum is pretty much dead
). It's all about underclocking now, reducing the power, cooling things down, making things stable and more efficient out of the box. I am one of the converted.
A recall is needed/required. However the costs would maybe be in the double digits of billions. - Something that Intel cannot afford, especially as of this weeks financial reports.
Then what? What are the options to intel.
A) If replacing like for like your then just replacing something with inherent issues with the same product again.
So they replace faulty units as they come in (which will increase over time). - Do they still make them ? - Is there enough stock ? This is fine for regular warranty type support, not so much with something with a flaw.
B) Provide chips without the flaws. Nodes/architecture have advanced and I expect newer intel chips that could match performance of the effected range would be fine (especially not made by intels fabs). The issue is as intel's platforms change every generation new motherboards would also need to be supplied, maybe ram too. I can't see them doing it.
C) Refunds ? - It's been done before, however I can't see them doing it either. You'd get the money for the chip back and have a useless platform. They know people wouldn't likely buy a intel setup as a replacement.
So they are trying to go for option A) Replacing the flawed chips with the same item, in combination reducing performance of the chips with new bios's in a hope that it may stave off the degradation long enough to sweep it under the carpet. Which may or may not work, it does buy them time. Maybe, it's a risk.
It's a mess with no easy solution, and unfortunately the end users are not getting the clarity or treatment they deserve. Intel are clearly panicking as they know the insane potential costs & reputation issues are at stake. I do wonder how much of this is internet frenzy - It does make a good story. No doubt it's a potential issue, how big ? We don't know yet. Will all chips fail over time? 10% 20% 50%? and when, is 2-3-4-5 years life considered acceptable to them ?
All said I'm torn, I have a 13900k, undervolted and reduced the ppt to half from purchase. Is my chip damaged ? - I do not know. Does it crash ? Sometimes.. It's annoying finding the system rebooted during a 3 day render, however on the whole it's ok I guess. Every platform I have used does crash sometimes (it doesn't mean it's the cpu at fault either). Although my old thread ripper did do 8months before a reboot whilst being hammered pretty much 24/7.
I hope we get clearer messaging from Intel. As currently what has come out from them isn't reassuring or acceptable.