• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Intel Statement on 13th and 14th Gen Core Instability: Faulty Microcode Causes Excessive Voltages, Fix Out Soon

Don’t worry. Chips act $ will cover warranty claims. ;)
 
Vincero said:
But it happened... meanwhile where is that 1st gen LGA 1151 board running last gen 1151 CPU (unmodded)??
Click to expand...
But they never promised support bud. Do you get the difference?
 
Evrsr said:
There are reports even Supermicro boards are pushing voltages to very unsafe levels. Well, reading Intel's report it would be the CPU that is requesting them.
Click to expand...
It's AGESA, so yes any Mb Bios maker could fail to put correct(ed) numbers

fevgatos said:
But they never promised support bud. Do you get the difference?
Click to expand...
Yes, they are armed
 
b1k3rdude said:
If its a hardware issue like GN have suggested to by a failure analysis lab, then how exactly is a microcode update going to fix it? seem like a non-sequitur to me.
Click to expand...

The base clock is much lower than what is being pumped on the chips, so that will require lower voltages. But, less drastically, the Turbo Boost is 5.6GHz vs 6 on velocity, TB 3.0 and whatever else.

I guess Intel will change it so that we will see chips that perhaps stay below the 5.6GHz limit, possibly the 5.3 to 5.5GHz that some people have mentioned as a fix for these issues. Good silicon should be able to do 5.6GHz but not all.

They will probably avoid a mass recall this way but I think OEMs especially will not be happy. Users should be able to get a damaged CPU exchanged but will still end with lower performing parts than what was reviewed.

Klemc said:
It's AGESA, so yes any Mb Bios maker could fail to put correct(ed) numbers


Yes, they are armed
Click to expand...

Bar any wierd OS or atypical setup, the microcode will be delivered and then pushed to the CPU at every boot. You don't need EUFI updates.

Given Intel's latest release, this has gone from "board vendors fault" to "we messed up and are fixing what the CPU does".

Said Supermicro board seems to implement every Intel hardware recommendation regarding voltage, to spec. Still is having issues.
 
Intel is working on rolling out their next line of CPUs, would they even have inventory/stock to fulfill thousands (if not millions) of faulty CPUs if a recall was demanded?

They'd have to scramble to run more or be forced to issue refunds? Or....what would their next step actually be?

If this turns into a class action suit against them those impacted outside of being a big company that buys trays worth of these CPUs aren't going to see much in return. Maybe 3/4/5 years down the road once the suit is settled the everyday consumer might get $10 back in their pocket.
 
Evrsr said:
The base clock is much lower than what is being pumped on the chips, so that will require lower voltages. But, less drastically, the Turbo Boost is 5.6GHz vs 6 on velocity, TB 3.0 and whatever else.

I guess Intel will change it so that we will see chips that perhaps stay below the 5.6GHz limit, possibly the 5.3 to 5.5GHz that some people have mentioned as a fix for these issues. Good silicon should be able to do 5.6GHz but not all.

They will probably avoid a mass recall this way but I think OEMs especially will not be happy. Users should be able to get a damaged CPU exchanged but will still end with lower performing parts than what was reviewed.



Bar any wierd OS or atypical setup, the microcode will be delivered and then pushed to the CPU at every boot. You don't need EUFI updates.

Given Intel's latest release, this has gone from "board vendors fault" to "we messed up and are fixing what the CPU does".

Said Supermicro board seems to implement every Intel hardware recommendation regarding voltage, to spec. Still is having issues.
Click to expand...
Forget about AGESA i said, i mixed topic with another...
 
Why are you so concerned, there is a fail and that's all.
 
Here is how I see this.

1. AMD and Intel are embroiled in a War for users.
2. Intel could not just create a new socket and expect that users would pay for that after AM4.
3. The 12th Gen chip was safe.
4. When the 13th and 14th gen were released they were highly tuned chips from the same generation.

We started hearing about Intel issues from some Tech tubers like Tech Yes City when his 11th Gen chip was faster than his 13th gen chip. Then we had a real issue and Nvidia was quick to blame Intel. There was an update released that lowered the voltage and performance to the point where Reviewers started giving you results with and without the power limits removed. Then Wendell did his video and the flood gates opened. People that try to use AMD as a shield are not looking at the reality of this.

Now Intel have promised a chip with no E cores and no HT. I wonder if that one will support AVX 512.

This battle has been summarily lost by Intel. Let's hope they learn, just be glad the traditional Media is not fully aware of this yet. One thing it has really done is expose the Techtubers that are fanboys with their AMD is failing too videos. It is like how some people use the X3D chips to complain about AMD's heat. As Wattage is the biggest thing that leads to heat. These Intel chips seem to have too much wattage for the package size. I have seen theories like the substrate in construction of the chip but they just turned them up too high. I wonder if that chip that is just cores will be TSMC?
 
fevgatos said:
Yes, obviously. Do you think they accidentally said that they are not going to support zen 3 on x370
Click to expand...
You have been using this argument for like 5 years already. The sad thing is since X370 works with Zen3 this is a huge nothing burger.
 
At least there is a lot of written things about Intel past and AMD also infos now in this Intel fail threads, a true bible.

Event Horizon said:
VSoC was set too high by some motherboard vendors in expo resulting in socket and cpu damage. Kindly stop spamming misinformation.
Click to expand...
Don't try, it's perhaps a bot.
 
How does any go about the process of RMA-ing the CPU in this case? An invoice is needed? Just send in the CPU? Something else?
 
mahirzukic2 said:
How does any go about the process of RMA-ing the CPU in this case? An invoice is needed? Just send in the CPU? Something else?
Click to expand...

You tell Intel mail: i have problems i can't solve tied to the last infos known about CPU being buggy, the answer that's them, let us know.
 
Can anyone express their view on what they think a 13100 is affected? just ordered one and it will be used for gaming, not necessarily overclocking..
 
mahirzukic2 said:
How does any go about the process of RMA-ing the CPU in this case? An invoice is needed? Just send in the CPU? Something else?
Click to expand...
You send it in, you get a new one back within a few days.
 
Onyx Turbine said:
Can anyone express their view on what they think a 13100 is affected? just ordered one and it will be used for gaming, not necessarily overclocking..
Click to expand...
Shouldn't be. Mostly i9's and a few i7's were affected.
 
Onyx Turbine said:
Can anyone express their view on what they think a 13100 is affected? just ordered one and it will be used for gaming, not necessarily overclocking..
Click to expand...
It's microcode i think all CPU have the same, but don't use same settings.
 
Klemc said:
It's microcode i think all CPU have the same, but don't use same settings.
Click to expand...
i choose the 13100 because of needing not more than 100fps and low power draw etc. and expected longlivety, if it fails a big disappointment and newly acquired socket 1700 mb incl. ddr4 down the drain
 
RGAFL said:
The degradation is seemingly being sped up due to the amount of voltage of the i9 and i7. The whole range has that issue so it's a wait and see at the moment.
Click to expand...
now when im saying it myself it wouldnt be a bad advice, to skip the 13 and 14 range? when want 1700 take 12 range e.g. 12600 in my case..
 
There is far to much crap being posted to keep up with.

No more personal attacks.
No more derailing.
No more in-thread warnings.
If you step across the line, I'll delete your post, and if it's in bad faith, you're getting points.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top