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

[RGAFL]

Given this is a microcode fix, it will be delivered as a Windows update - no new BIOS version or end-user action needed. That's at least a relief for Intel and its board partners.

Pretty sure this will need to be a bios update.

 

[Dredi]

Given this is a microcode fix, it will be delivered as a Windows update - no new BIOS version or end-user action needed. That's at least a relief for Intel and its board partners.

In the reddit post by an intel rep, linked earlier to this thread, it was stated that you need the microcode patch as well as a bios update.

 

[Hecate91]

Please get this right, AMD did not release overvolted or faulty CPUS. Certain motherboard companies pumped a little to much SOC voltage to it which resulted in the CPUS not working. To put the blame on AMD is a bit desperate to divert blame away from Intel to say the least.

What is not at fault is that Intel have a major design problem and have stayed radio silent until called out on it while knowing there is a fault.

To put it as simply as these are crashing is also belittling the problem. These are crashing and degrading.

You want to see the extent of the problem look here.

They have no idea what they are talking about regarding AMD, just someone with a bias looking to distract from the topic.

On topic, Matt_AlderonGames also brings up some good questions in the Intel statement thread. One of the most important ones which Intel didn't answer on is will they promise to honor RMA's for those with degraded or failing cpu's, as people were getting denied and being told to run baseline specs before.

https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/1e9mf04/_/leg5umu

hm... I know some guys running i9 12900k at 1,56V for years now no issue, in my humble opinion 13 gen architectures changes caused CPUs to no longer tolerate high voltages.

Intel Alder Lake isn't experiencing any degradation, it seems 12th gen and lower end 13th gens that are rebranded 12th gen are more durable than Raptor Lake whether that is due to a smaller node or adding more ecores I think it would be interesting if there were more findings on why the architecture changes make 13th and 14th gen more prone to degradation.

 

[RGAFL]

If the AMD problem is a hand grenade this Intel issue is a global nuclear war. Honestly can't wait for the class actions and lawsuits.

 

[9087125]

No way in hell do I believe any of this from Intel, that some microcode will fix it, no, its a serious problem with their average mediocre product and this fix is just some clever trick that hides it. Its not a fab limitation but just their awful product. Bunch of corrupt arseholes being sponsored by the gov, sickens me, hope they get sued big time and are forced to pay everyone with a bad cpu.
Wont touch Intel ever again, unless they do something magical. But due to the harsh demise of moores law they cant do anything better than AMD. I would love to be able to say their product lacks innovation and is a turd, but everyone is feeling it, its getting so hard to progress further.

 

[GreiverBlade]

Can you stop talking about amds handgrenades and focus on the topic? Thanks.

my handgrenade is running 1.050v, 1.074v max while still putting up good perf even compared to 14th gen (well, enough to not make me regret not going AM5 and 7800X3D)... yeah yeah we know ... you love Intel no worries, it's fine, it's all fine.

on topic ... well last time i had a forced microcode update (via WU)... was on a 6600K which did not even OC afterward ... so, it's gonna be good? right?
imho, Intel is always like that ... : "optimisation" to make it run faster in bench=>fault found=>mitigation patch=>performances loss

and no, i am not a fan of either side ... but i had more happy time with the reds since the K6 2... and i gave Intel a fair share.

 

[Dr. Dro]

I suspect that is the goal of some of the comments with "whataboutism".
Get the discussion derailed and hopefully shield Intel from further discussion/critisim.

I don't think anyone here is trying to get a thread locked.

my handgrenade is running 1.050v, 1.074v max while still putting up good perf even compared to 14th gen (well, enough to not make me regret not going AM5 and 7800X3D)... yeah yeah we know ... you love Intel no worries, it's fine, it's all fine.

on topic ... well last time i had a forced microcode update (via WU)... was on a 6600K which did not even OC afterward ... so, it's gonna be good? right?
imho, Intel is always like that ... : "optimisation" to make it run faster in bench=>fault found=>mitigation patch=>performances loss

and no, i am not a fan of either side ... but i had more happy time with the reds since the K6 2... and i gave Intel a fair share.

Well, the Intel microcode library in Windows (mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll) always hotpatches over the microcode revision that is loaded from BIOS, given the nature of this specific issue, I think it is very advisable to initialize the CPU with a fix already in-place, so I would update my BIOS ASAP, especially if it's a machine to which stability is important.

If the AMD problem is a hand grenade this Intel issue is a global nuclear war. Honestly can't wait for the class actions and lawsuits.

It's just fanboys talking smack, lol. I'd make the case for the Ryzen fires to be a more accentuated problem since, y`know, an actual fireball inside your socket often taking the motherboard with it, but in the other hand, it didn't happen at stock. Both companies need to ensure this crap does not happen again in the future. Both of them resulted in instabilities and permanent hardware damage. Both are very much wrong.

 

[Vincero]

Intel Alder Lake isn't experiencing any degradation, it seems 12th gen and lower end 13th gens that are rebranded 12th gen are more durable than Raptor Lake whether that is due to a smaller node or adding more ecores I think it would be interesting if there were more findings on why the architecture changes make 13th and 14th gen more prone to degradation.

That's the thing though, the node is meant to be the same (Intel '7') so this most likely isn't a process issue specifically but may be a layout issue from some core changes.
This looks a lot like the nvidia bumpgate scenario, not in terms of picking the wrong packaging, but in terms of how exceeding the capacity of the chip current carrying interconnects and that repeated heat stress is killing off parts of the chip.

Ironically / luckily for Intel, they never bothered to release 2 Raptor Lake dies like they did with Alder Lake (where you had the 6P/0E die, and the 8P/8E die), and just stuck with the 6P only die from Alder Lake to complement the newer Raptor lake dies (Raptor lake added little to the performance per core so no real need to remake it I guess).

Considering the small IPC uplift and the issues that may stem from this, Raptor lake may be the worst ever release in the Intel 'Tick/Tock' release cycle once all these issues are eventually figured out and the cause is known. My point being that Intel didn't really 'need' Raptor Lake to stay competitive (you don't need to compete for the top spot all of the time as you can end up looking dumb, e.g. Pres'hot' P4 vs Athlon 64 X2, AMD FX 9000s vs any Intel i7, etc.) - they were doubling down on being behind and pushing the envelope more than AMD did with the FX series TDP but now using an even more intricate/fragile manufacturing process....

 

[Caring1]

Saying a "fix is out soon" is wrong, an update won't "fix" the CPUs, it's just another mitigation to try and delay and avoid the issue

 

[azrael]

Can you stop talking about amds handgrenades and focus on the topic? Thanks.

....aaaand there you go again.

I can't recall where I heard it, but someone mentioned that Raptor Lake came out of nowhere. There was also speculation that the design was rushed. Hard to tell without reliable sources but it makes you wonder.

 

[Assimilator]

Well, the Intel microcode library in Windows (mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll) always hotpatches over the microcode revision that is loaded from BIOS, given the nature of this specific issue, I think it is very advisable to initialize the CPU with a fix already in-place, so I would update my BIOS ASAP, especially if it's a machine to which stability is important.

Agreed, but most users don't spend all day in the BIOS, they spend it in Windows. So the microcode update will fix the issue for Windows users, and BIOS updates can come a little later.

 

[RGAFL]

Intel head office at the moment.

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

I have a funny feeling the microcode update will hammer performance like that exploit fix did ( downfall??).

\
EDIT: spectre was the one.

 

[RGAFL]

The American government must be thinking we chucked billions at the wrong company. Wonder if they can get their money back, unlike the consumers who bought an Intel CPU.

 

[JustBenching]

I have a funny feeling the microcode update will hammer performance like that exploit fix did ( downfall??).

\
EDIT: spectre was the one.

Realistically it won't. Worst case scenario it drops what, 100mhz on the pcores? Let's say 200? Heck let's make it 300 just for the sake. That's a 3% drop on the mt performance of the chip. It's so irrelevant you won't even notice.

 

[Vincero]

Realistically it won't. Worst case scenario it drops what, 100mhz on the pcores? Let's say 200? Heck let's make it 300 just for the sake. That's a 3% drop on the mt performance of the chip. It's so irrelevant you won't even notice.

No, but the benchmarkers will when comparing to the AMD 9000 series... or maybe it will release after that review cycle so Intel can milk all they can from whatever silicon killing higher performance there is before throwing the brakes on. Unless of course, reviewers just say "don't buy intel", but I doubt that is likely as too many shills - ironically some of Intel's best value CPUs will be unaffected by this.
3% difference can make a significant impact when comparing CPU limited performance scenarios...
And that's assuming the voltage tweaks are only impacting CPU core voltages - it could be something that impacts the rest of the package/uncore logic which could actually reduce potential ring bus performance or impact the other platform hub throughput. Intel info isn't specific as to what 'incorrect voltage requests' are for what chip logic group - i.e. there's multiple ways to hobble something.

 

[Klemc]

This is cheating

Also, poor guys will buy second hand 13 14 gen in the next years without knowing about the damage the CPU endured !.. bad business... then TPU will have more topics open about that (good business).

 

[Vincero]

This is cheating

Also, poor guys will buy second hand 13 14 gen in the next years without knowing about the damage the CPU endured !.. bad business... then TPU will have more topics open about that (good business).

That's one concern I already thought of, but actually a bigger issue more directly affecting enthusiasts will be if they start to experience issues where they expected to ebay / part-ex their existing kit but start to find it about as popular as used drug needles...
Intel typically have long-ish warranty windows so it may be worth claiming when you know there is a proper fix in place, preferably at the silicon level, and stick with the platform for the long haul... although realistically socket 1700 so far is unlikely to be looked back on with fondness due to the lack of efficiency alone.

 

[RGAFL]

Realistically it won't. Worst case scenario it drops what, 100mhz on the pcores? Let's say 200? Heck let's make it 300 just for the sake. That's a 3% drop on the mt performance of the chip. It's so irrelevant you won't even notice.

Alderon Games were clocking their CPUS down 500mhz and over and there was still degradation and crashes. This is an inherent problem in the design. Not an if but when timebomb.

 

[JustBenching]

Alderon Games were clocking their CPUS down 500mhz and over and there was still degradation and crashes. This is an inherent problem in the design. Not an if but when timebomb.

Oh good, if clockspeeds ain't the issue then there won't be a 3% performance penalty but a 0%? Even better

 

[Daven]

Can you stop talking about amds handgrenades and focus on the topic? Thanks.

Uh you brought it up dude. Don’t play cute with me.

On topic, Intel should not be given the Chips money now. It has not proven it can uses it to the benefit of the country but rather to subsidize lost profits.

Runaway voltage, oxidation and still playing anticompetitive games is the opposite of what the Chips Act is trying to do - secure high quality domestic chip manufacturing to all chip providers.

 

[Klemc]

When the MCode fix ?.. when, today ?

Also it can depend on BIOS settings, users that disable iGPU by exemple.... will have different CPU reaction.

 

[AusWolf]

I'm glad my suspicion of faulty e-cores (based on news that Intel is releasing e-core-free embedded CPUs soon) turned out to be false.

 

[Daven]

All the brand loyalty aside, all companies are rushing out products too fast in order to stay competitive. They need to slow down and give their engineers time to work out the kinks.

 

[Klemc]

All the brand loyalty aside, all companies are rushing out products too fast in order to stay competitive. They need to slow down and give their engineers time to work out the kinks.

They can't, since it's competition, there is more than one brand, so they can't have the full control.