hey yall, for me it is "why not both" -- on gaming boards The out of box defaults really are insane. linus' take overall is reasonable. and I looked over the script beforehand. the uncertainty on gaming boards is a big deal and why I went digging on more "conservative" boards like in the datacenter. which are also imperfect! should intel have caught any microcode issues sooner? absolutely yes. have motherboard makers pushed voltages directly or indirectly to ruination? also yes. Is it up to intel to make the situation right? yes I am hoping it wont take a lot of pressure and media attention to get Intel to do right by customers... how we got here is more nuanced than just saying intel pushed too far too hard..and its super important to see the whole picture of the situation ps update your bios!! and update it again mid august! even if you sont currently have issues. :)
@@incandescentwithrage 1.72 is how much voltage the VID register can encode. You're basically saying that a video game boss with 10,000 HP could randomly have 2,147,483,647 HP because it's encoded as a 32-bit integer and that's the highest value it can take on. Each sample of modern CPUs has it's own voltage versus frequency values programmed into it. The issue probably comes from Intel pushing those voltages too much.
@@incandescentwithrage Intel spec is also maximum of 400 Amps, and a ton of other power specs motherboards ignore by default. Motherboards & CPUs have to work together, and that has not been happening. Like Level1Techs said, plenty of blame to go around.
You are of course correct. He also addressed mfg problems towards the end: At 7:32, he says _"By the way, there is another wrinkle in all of this. Intel has said that some reports of instability can be traced back to Intel themselves; a manufacturing error that involved oxidation of some early 13th gen chips. If you bought your chip in early 2023, or prior, that could be part of your problem, and seeing as it's a physical issue with the chip that wouldn't be fixed with a micro code update so you will need to RMA to Intel."_
@@davidbetancourt4028 Worth noting that we don't know how many chips are affected by that manufacturing defect. It would be better if Intel released that information, but in the meanwhile we shouldn't be assuming the worst. They claim it's a small minority of the chips that are experiencing problems.
@@delvman83lol. Why are you saying that as if no one knows that? Are you a clown by profession? It doesn’t matter. People need to do their part. As long as Intel pays, it’s a win.
@@delvman83 It gets results. Money is the only language big business understands. So if gets them to change their policies or do better in future then it's a win for everyone.
I'm sorry this is 90% on Intel, poor microcodes, oxidation and poor definitions of "default" on the information released, so MB manufacturers still have room to push "default" settings.
At least twice there refer to intel sharing "some of the blame", however if Intel had actually put out strict guidelines from the beginning the MB manufacturer wouldn't have had any liberties to take, even now the guidelines from Intel are a joke and leave too many liberties on the table. Intel didn't care if the MB manufacturers were pushing the chips too hard as it made them, Intel, look more competitive against AMD. No two ways about it, Intel are responsible for not enforcing or even providing MB manufacturers with a clear and defined "default", even now. So no, Intel don't share "some" of the blame, they share most of the blame.
It's 100% on intel. If the chip is properly regulated it doesn't matter how much voltage the board wants to send to the chip, the chip won't take it has fails safes for that. These chips do not. This is literally no different than a phone that charges at 20w taking all the wattage of a 40w charger etc and blowing up then you blame the charging brick manufacturer because the phone manufacturer didn't properly regulate itself.
I'm glad somebody else said it too. This is NOT motherboard problem, this is a 100% an Intel problem. Sure, Intel have been blaming motherboard manufacturers as part of their "damage control", and the BIOSes have been playing a bit loose with their settings. However this is because Intel's specifications aren't exactly clear, so motherboard vendors in my opinion have been doing the best that they can. Intel, you should be ashamed and I'm just glad that I'm using an AMD CPU and don't have to deal with this shit. I also feel sorry for those that are going to suffer, most not even knowing if they have the problem or when it's going to rear it's ugly head on their system.
Why cant we just blame all companies for their behaviours? I think there is strong evidence that mb makers did set too aggressive settings, which compounded with the core issues. Just because one is worse does not excuse the other
@@mlsasd6494 Firstly and most importantly, there's is a hardware problem. Secondly, there's a microcode problem and Thirdly, Intel didn't produce accurate and specific specs that MOBO manufacturers needed to adhere to. None of these things are MOBO manufacturers issues. Okay, they did aggressive tuning, but the specs didn't say they couldn't and that it would cause instability problems. What would you have done if you made MOBOs? You'd do like they did, which is use the specs and do the best you could to make your MOBO as cool as possible. That's why it's firmly Intel that's at fault.
@@thewelder3538 you are wrong ... use google to understand things correctly pls ... hardware problem only hit early 13th gen batch... microcode problem is not a problem it's prevention to prevent motherboard from drawing too much power. not all motherboard have that problem. i have an aorus master x rev 1.2 and i'm not affected. my friend have the same mobo but rev 1.0 and when i put my cpu in his motherboard the computer crashed in less than 5 min in a bench. intel provide accurate and specific specs to motherboard manufactures ... customer rarely have access to such specs. if you have a unique product, would you give 100% details? of course no ... customer are your enemy, your goal is to protect your product against unattended use so providing full protocol only help these customer to edit/clone your product
You guys are playing softball here - Intel is absolutely responsible and you don't need to be nice about it. - They shipped a defective product with the voltage regulation being completely buggy. This would have been caught with the extensive testing Gamers Nexus, JayzTwoCents, Hardware Unboxed, several PC building companies, etc. performed. - Intel was clearly more interested in "number go up" in their implementations than figuring out if it was actually feasible and sustainable. - The oxidation issue is ridiculous - again, should have been caught and quality controlled long before it ever hit the market. - Not providing any real guidance to motherboard manufacturers - leaving them to their own nonsense of overvolting and blowing up systems. Let's not play games - these processors are hundreds of dollars and with all this news Intel completely went radio silent until their bottom line was under pressure. The C-Suite pushed out broken processors and expected the consumer to just deal with it. They might be fixing it now, but they knew about this for almost a year and are only now acting like this is a shocker. I see this as consumer abuse and neglect, and no one should stand for it.
Yeah it's not just that motherboards are pushing too much voltage, the CPU itself is requesting that voltage. You can see in Buildzoid's video that if you limit the voltage requested by the CPU, the actual voltage is capped exactly to that maximum request. So when an i9 gets 1,55V or more, it's not the motherboard forcing that voltage down the chip, but rather the chip asking for that voltage and getting exactly what it asked for. It's also why you can't just undervolt these CPUs with a negative voltage offset. If the CPU doesn't get the voltage it asks for, it will just ask for more until it gets what it needs. The only way to fix it is for the CPU to not request voltages too high.
The oxidation issue only affects CPUs produced in 2023. MB vendors weren't really overvolting either (except for the LLC changes), but they were allowing the CPUs to draw too much power and current. Even then, the processors should never ever request more voltage than they could handle though. AMD's Ryzen manages that quite nicely with its FIT monitor - the CPUs won't cook themselves even if the MB doesn't limit PWR and current… There's also a rumor that due to suboptimal yields, too many CPUs got binned as an i9 xx700 and xx900 parts or K editions. These specific chips are also more likely to not being able to handle high voltages as good while at the same time requiring more voltage to hit the target frequencies to begin with. Anyhow, I totally agree that it's unacceptable how Intel handled the situation, although today they released a press statement that says that all customers whose CPU degraded and became unstable due to the issue can get a replacement under warranty. The warranty period itself was also increased to 5 years, which is better than nothing. They also released their abysmal business performance numbers along with a sobering projection for the next quarter and a plan to cut at least 10bn USD in costs, wanting to lay off around 15000 employees (12% of the staff), aswell as reevaluate all business branches and products in order to weed out those that aren't profitable (dGPUs are in danger once again). That may be a contributing factor towards there not being a full product recall. All in all, Intel is currently an utter shitshow on multiple levels.
When your employer announces they're halting all "nonessential work" it's time to update your resumé. When your *supplier* announces they're halting all "nonessential work," you get a new supplier, and pronto.
Oddly defensive of intel. Fact is, Intel failed to produce clear guidance on how to run their chips safely. And considering the microcode issues, it seems that they didn't even understand it themselves. Sure the motherboard vendors also verged on recklessness, but that situation occured and then wasn't adequately fixed because of Intel's failure to make clear statements about safety criteria. And now they are using that lack of guidance as a smokescreen to distract from their responsibilities.
wrong ... intel and amd provide sheet to manufacture ONLY... customer like us usually do not have access to such data. linus talk globally by saying HE cannot access such data and this is true ... if you wanted to edit such curve it is difficult without such data but this isn't the case here .... the case is motherboard causing instability and not users causing instability
by any chance are you an AMD investor? jump off the intel hate bandwagon, maybe if you invest in intel stock you will actually benefit and be an intel fan soon enough.
We have around 50 production servers running on 13900 chips. Every other day we had unpredictable errors on most of them. Right now we are migrating to AMD-systems.
@@fampic7133 we Just migrated the first batch yesterday. So far we did not run in any unexpected error. Using Debian and comparing the output of `dmesg` i can tell, that the AMD systems we use are much more stable overall. The Intel systems show ECC-errors and warnings quite often, even with new hardware.
@@FO0TMinecraftPVP A few years ago this could be argued, but especially with Ryzen 9000 and in the enterprise space this just isn’t true anymore. I’m pulling for intel because competition is essential for improvements and innovation but they are objectively behind right now.
Glad I went with AMD when they released Ryzen instead of the shovelware Intel kept pushing out. Just because they are throwing more watts at it to increase performances, doesn't make it better.
Why is Linus placing the majority of the blame on the Motherboard manufacturers, when he says in the video that devs are replacing their Intel servers with AMD, and unlike retail MB's server motherboards follow much stricter guidelines and not overclock the CPU's. something Wendell went into quite extensively. I think the reality is very likely Intel knew this was a issue (though maybe not the extent of it) but because they also knew AMD's new chipsets would beat them in gaming performance, they allowed MB manufacturers to push the CPU's beyond acceptable limits, hoping the situation would not be as big of a issue as it turned out to be.
Intel's horrible, trust destroying, insanely anti-consumer behavior through all this is a much bigger long term issue. With all trust gone Intel is done with no fix.
@@Fattony6666 yes, but they may still honor it. It's rather on you though. Not in this case I guess... It's more on Motherboards this time, so you're all good.
not necessarily - if you've not had it long and got the microcode update, you'll probably be fine, but if you've been having these crashes for months (like mine) then there's probably permanent damage. Hopefully my RMA comes though fine *sad face*
This video seems weirdly focused on the mistakes of the motherboard manufacturers. Yes, it's true, especially Asus and Gigabyte had some fucked up load lines, but that's not the main issue causing the instability. The motherboards aren't delivering such high voltages because of some error, but because the CPUs are *requesting* them via their VID commands. Some other effects like overshoot and measurement inaccuracy are then pushing voltages to even higher peak values than the requested value, but those are always a thing. Intel must have known of those and should have accounted for them, but they didn't. Because the chips apparently needed to hit 6 GHz boost for marketing reasons or whatever, no matter how much voltage you need to ram into them to hit that target. In short, Intel flew too close to the sun and got burnt. Blaming the motherboard manufacturers for Intel's mistakes isn't fair. Even the mistakes they did make originated from Intel's poor specifications allowing for stock load lines that were unstable which should be an impossibility.
He addressed mfg problems towards the end of the video _(see below)._ These videos are meant to be quick hits, not deep dives. This was probably not a good topic to cover since we should have more mid-August, but then again they claimed it was figured out months ago. At 7:32, he says _"By the way, there is another wrinkle in all of this. Intel has said that some reports of instability can be traced back to Intel themselves; a manufacturing error that involved oxidation of some early 13th gen chips. If you bought your chip in early 2023, or prior, that could be part of your problem, and seeing as it's a physical issue with the chip that wouldn't be fixed with a micro code update so you will need to RMA to Intel."_
@@davidbetancourt4028 No, this is seperate from oxidation. There are three different issues in total which is why this whole thing is so confusing. You've got Gigabyte and Asus mainboards with incorrect settings, a large chunk of 13th gen is potentially affected by oxidation and both 13th and 14th gen are suffering from slow and permanent degradation, probably due to excessively high core voltages. That's what makes this such a calamity. It feels like everything that could go wrong did go wrong.
@@hammerth1421 I've been following the situation through various outlets, such MLID, GN & others. The issues are varied like you stated and didn't think it was well suited this early in the 'story' for a tech quickie. At this point, it does seem like Intel should shoulder most of the blame, but mobo partners do not appear blameless. I don't believe anyone knows the true extent % wise of affected units except Intel. Right now we just have speculation, probably reasonable speculation based on some data, but still just guesses w/o Intel confirming. It's a real shit situation. I'm glad my friend choose my recommendation of the 7800X3D vs a 14900k, as he was a die hard Intel guy. Weird to be loyal to a mfg.
oooofff. wow, Linus. This is a truly awful and incorrect take. This is absolutely an Intel problem and failure. Sure the motherboard issues may have or certainly did make them worse but this is still on Intel. You giving Intel a pass on this is just stupid and wrong.
Intel is soley to blame here. They long accepted motherboards pushing the limits by not giving strict guidelines and not validating what their partners implement to get that last bit of performance to beat AMD while keeping plausible deniability. But Intel said everything is within spec as long as the overclocking bit is not set… you can’t fault board partners if Intel says it’s within spec. Also 13th/14th gen CPUs fail in W680 boards which run conservative Intel baseline values, Supermicro does not tweak out the last bit of performance and yet CPUs still degraded and became unstable. Intel rushed out Raptor Lake within a year because they needed something to bridge over until Arrow Lake is ready, and they pushed the ring bus hard to get that last bit of performance. Which is where the CPUs now seem to break. That pushing 350W through a desktop chip can’t possibly be healthy was clear for every buyer with half decent knowledge.
It's obvious by now that this is exactly what's going on. And shifting the blame (or at least trying to) is just Intel doing Intel things. What else would you expect? They're basically lying to themselves by now, so what's another lie to customers?
@@curtissimmons1085 c'mon - if a microcode update is supposed to stop the degradation, that's the same as admitting it's not the MB's fault. The microcode is Intel's work and theirs alone. Asus/Gigabyte/MSI/AsRock/whoever did not do that. Their agressive settings might have exacerbated the problem, but it'd be a problem without agressive power settings nonetheless. Also, mandating how your CPUs should be powered should be mandated by Intel in the first place. Guess what they didn't do...
The problem is intel's guidance was almost 0 until this really became an issue. And now Intel is just "guessing" what Stock is, Which makes this worse.
Intel in true fashion after extending the warranty period is now shifting the onus back on the consumer that bought boxed chips only, to prove it is the CPU causing any instability.
You missed out a very important point: In most cases, the part of the CPU that degrades is the ringbus interconnect, rather than the CPU cores themselves. This seems to be caused by a design flaw in Raptor Lake CPUs, in which the ring bus is physically not robust enough to handle the rate of data transfer required for high core-count CPUs, rather than by load line or temperature limits. CPU core voltage does also affect the ringbus, and higher temperatures increase the rate of almost all types of processor degradation, so this doesn't mean that the factors mentioned in the video don't matter at all, but ringbus problems seem to be at least as significant and should not have been left out of the video. It therefore may be more useful to disable the CPU's efficiency cores in order to reduce the stress on the ringbus, or reduce the ring ratio, rather than reducing CPU core clock frequency. This is especially true for gaming, which typically doesn't benefit much from efficiency cores.
@@boldmeditations bro i got this shit a while ago and havent seen issues till now. i dont even know if i can get a refund how boout a little human sympathy lol. gonna cost me a fortune to replace this shit but its got to be done.
Unlimited power profile was IN SPEC for Intel all this years since 8th gen ! To quote Intel from an interveiw with Anandtech in 2019, about the out of the box unlimited power profile: "Even with those values, you're not running out of spec, I want to make very clear - you’re running in spec, but you are getting higher turbo duration." Noting "vague" here ! Just now when the issues startd suddenly the motherbord makers are the evil ones who "step over the line" ??!!
I work at Currys in the UK in the repair centre here. We've had so many 13th and 14th gen CPUs come in for these issues, and we can't do anything to fix them as Intel blames motherboard manufactures and they blame Intel. It's really shitty for us, and beyond that annoying given us as repair technicans know this is an Intel problem entirely. If people have anymore questions, more than willing to answer
@@g.i.l.l.e.sWe get some desktops through with CPU issues lower than I9s, and they have a similar issue. The majoroty are I7s and I9s of 13th and 14th gen tho, as on the whole they are pushed further for performance (from Intel themselves).
@@adex345 Yeah I know that. The biggest reason I'm not using Intel is because I don't like the way they are handling the situation. I will not support that.
6:43 'Prevent damage' ? You will never know what damage has already been done once you used the CPU before bios update. The statement should have been 'to prevent possibly further damaging your CPU' This statement makes consumers think their CPUs are ok once the bios update is undertaken when the damage could have already occured. You guys need to encorage RMA and not just this band aid solution.
Not knowing is the same as it suddenly being true. If the fix goes out and the CPU's never crash again (or never crashed to begin with), that doesn't automatically mean there was possibly some damage done.
no company in the world will accept RMA on a perfectly working product, at most you can extend warranty, even your favorite company will never accept RMA on a working part.
@@tmsphere Hmms, does the part works as intended, or in Intels case, does the part still works as presented? See, where I live, presenting something as it isn't in reality or advertising a part as it not is in reality is called "false advertising", "misleading information" and "falsifying competition" ... All 3 points are forbidden.
If it's not too damaged, going easy on an affected CPU by underclocking and undervolting it actually seems to "fix" the issue by never pushing it to the point where it trips over itself. That of course has quite a performance penalty attached to it, but a slow CPU is better than a dead one.
@@hammerth1421 There is no guarantee it won’t slowly degrade further anyway. Might work for a couple of years and then become unstable after the warranty expired.
@@hammerth1421 This is technically true, but not very useful. It "fixes" it in so far as it prevents crashing, but at the cost of lost performance, and you will never be able to undo the physical damage (electromigration etc) within the CPU's circuitry. It's like "fixing" a car with a broken 6th gear by just never using the 6th gear. You can do it, but you probably shouldn't unless you have no other option, because you lose performance and the damage could indirectly lead to further damage in the future.
You are of course correct. Also, he addressed mfg problems towards the end of the video: At 7:32, he says _"By the way, there is another wrinkle in all of this. Intel has said that some reports of instability can be traced back to Intel themselves; a manufacturing error that involved oxidation of some early 13th gen chips. If you bought your chip in early 2023, or prior, that could be part of your problem, and seeing as it's a physical issue with the chip that wouldn't be fixed with a micro code update so you will need to RMA to Intel."_
This video just is not accurate. The degradation of the Intel CPU's has been shown to be caused by the chips themselves requesting higher than 1.4 VID trying to anticipate Vdroop.
I got a failing 14700K. Ran for about a month on what I thought it was default settings, but turned out Gigabyte was OCing my CPU out of the box. One e-core fried completely - system won't work unless that core is disabled. Whether this was due to this on-going issue or I was just unlucky with a bad copy, or both, I will never know. Nevertheless, this was a retail boxed CPU and Intel offered replacement or refund based on my purchase price without any fuzz. I've chosen to get a new copy first, then send the old for refund. They sent me a pre-paid shipping label and the old CPU is on the way back. So far so good. Except installation the latest BIOS and applying Intel's recommended settings, I would also recommend people to run tests to determine if their CPU has developed any problems and if they confirm so, they can contact Intel for a replacement. While Intel didn't say in their announcement "send your CPU back and you'll get a new one" because they don't want to raise the issue to a general "recall", it seems that's pretty much what they mean with "contact customer support".
Honestly I put very little on motherboard manufactures here. Yes motherboards should be responsible with how they adjust settings to compete, but when intel is giving absolutely terrible guidance on what is and is not a clear default setting I feel the blame should be 10% motherboards 90% intel.
@lumiere3809 because it 100% is as well as the "voltage mistake" it was nothing more than Intel trying to cover up the oxidation. You will be RMAing till the end of time because it's a physical defect and no patch WILL EVER solve it.
So why did the workstation/server class motherboards used for game servers also get screwed up? They're specifically designed not to push the boat out too far for stability sake.
The whole “Board partners pushed CPUs too hard’ is just to deflect from the real problem of Intel pushing their CPUs way too hard and killing the ring bus in turn.
potentially, people getting servers and workstation boards would've upgraded to 13th gen early, getting those chips with oxidation issues? if you're running game servers, you probably do want the fastest chips possible as soon as possible to ensure your servers run as fast as possible, and if you have tons of money to spend on workstations, for you, time is money, so again you want the fastest possible as soon as possible. or of course, the writers might've just missed that detail when researching for this video, and the servers and workstations suffer from the exact same issue oxidation or not. seeing as they didn't mention it at all in the video, i'm inclined to think they just missed it in their research, but to give a fair chance to Intel, it's possible that all the server/workstation issues were only caused by oxidation, and any newer chips are fine, and the current issues only happen because of motherboards. we probably can't know for sure yet
yep, dont buy that excuse. they just didnt want to get owned by AMD and pushed their chips too hard. unfortunately for them, its going to cost them a lot of money
I'll give y'all some credit... But you've missed another major issue... Intel knew about this issue long before it ever came out... And was denying B2B (business to business) along with B2C (business to customer) RMAs while they knew about the oxidation issue. That's beyond excusable. They've been caught, they know it, and now they're scrambling to slap a bandaid on the situation. I'm not saying AMD hasn't done any sketchy practices, as practically every business has... But this has me questioning if I could recommend Intel right now.
hard disagree with intel having "some of the blame". they are the ones with very loose guidelines, they are the ones that sold defected cpu with oxidation, and ultimately the ones that decided to react only when there was a media out cry. That is Mostly on Intel almost every step of the way. Gamer Nexus viewpoint on this matter aligns more with mines on this subject. i could see why this video got heavily disliked.
Gamer Nexus, of course, did a good video on Intel's part. Intel's now recommended guidelines are terribly ambiguous and confusing if you really look at it.
Intel is the only one to blame here they are throwing the motherboard manufactures under the bus for doing what they gave them the green light to do only after it caused problems.
@@disturbedone3631 What the board partners did wasn’t even the root cause, their CPUs are requesting way too much voltage and cooking the ring bus in turn. That’s on Intel and Intel alone.
I'm not going to be surprised if the board manufacturers do something like a lawsuit for gaslighting them/throwing under the bus and lessen Intel motherboard production.
FACTUALLY INCORRECT on the part about motherboard vendors being at fault. When ANY processor manufacturer makes a product, they TELL the motherboard manufacturers the specs of the processor and how they want them to run.... So for example when AMD made the first ryzen series (1800x product example) they, via their microcode, told the motherboard how to auto-boost and do all the work. The motherboard vendors just ran the spec AMD gave them. THE SAME IS FOR INTEL. YES, motherboard vendors can have "overclock" modes that you can set which will auto-overclock products. THIS IS NOT WHAT IS CAUSING INTEL TO FAIL. You buy an intel 13th or 14th gen, run it completely stock, and it will fail on its own. INTEL ADMITTED TO HAVING TO UPDATE MICROCODE TO PREVENT THE ISSUE. And hardcore nerds have stated that this will cause the CPU's to lose about 10% performance. You are honestly going to tell me that EVERY motherboard manufacturer (intel's own boards, msi, asus, gigabyte, asrock, etc) all "worked together" to run these intel CPU's EXACTLY THE SAME in the EXACT same "out of spec" manor? GTFO. Truth is, INTEL was losing against AMD, and instead of having a slower product, they pushed it passed its limits in order to stay relevant. This bit them in the ass as chips are self destructing. It has NOTHING to do with motherboard vendors and 100% to do with intel being greedy and trying not to lose their ignorant customers that buy them "no matter what".... and when this microcode update rolls out fixing the cpu's and running them "as they should have been" in the first place.... they will all drop 10% performance.... And for the super ignorant that claim "intel rushed the product" no, they didn't "rush".... you honestly think they would scrap the entire cpu line because it didn't meet their speed goals just so they could get that 10% performance without destroying the chips? wake up and smell reality for once.... they didn't rush anything. they had a product and it couldn't compete vs amd.... they had three choices.... scrap it, redesign the chip, which would put them BEHIND AMD as 7000 series would be out, and by the time Intel had a new chip, AMD would be moving to an even faster chip.... option two being sell the chip as is, and lose against AMD (the most respectable one in my opinion) or option three, which is what they chose, was to overvolt the shit out of the chip to irk out 10% more performance so that they could stay relevant. they knew these chips would self destruct. THEY DIDN'T CARE. its not "rushing" when you don't give a shit about your customer. "our intel owners buy a new cpu every year anyway, so who cares if they self destruct, no one will notice" except people are more broke now than ever thanks to bidenomics.... so they are holding onto their cpu's for longer than they usually would. and they forgot that many intel owners are dedicated overclockers, who will run the cpu max speed 24/7 instead of simply using auto-boost. similar to how I ran my 1800x at 4.2ghz at 1.5v for 6 months until it degraded because i ran it over AMD's spec (amd said dont go over 1.45v and I went to 1.5v which was TSMC's "node" spec but AMD designed their chip in a way where 1.45 was max). so imagine how bad the degredation is for someone who legit OC's their intel product.... which is why people are getting fired. more than likely they simply didn't care about their job, and now they dont have one. good riddence. intel can grow and move on from this. its 100% their fault.
I ran my 1800x at 4.2ghz at 1.5v for 6 months until it degraded because i ran it over AMD's spec (amd said dont go over 1.45v and I went to 1.5v which was TSMC's "node" spec but AMD designed their chip in a way where 1.45 was max). 1800X was on Global Foundries' 16 nanometre process, I believe.
Yeah, you better believe they didn't just come together and decide to do the wrong thing. Motherboard manufacturers have a vested interest in not destroying people's hardware, and operating within the guidelines provided by Intel is a huge part of that. I'd believe maybe one or two motherboard vendors, but not most/all of them. Keep in mind that there are supposed to be safeguards in place to prevent a CPU from killing itself. There always used to be, so what changed? This is clearly an architecture issue, and if a 10% performance hit is required to fix it... That tells you all you need to know about what Intel tried to do here. AMD should have dominated performance this gen. If Intel had let them, at least they wouldn't be going through this fiasco. They'd be losing market share either way, but probably way less than they're losing now.
It's all Intel's fault - mostly - they admitted to it being microcode and manufacturing processes related - they're planning to put a patch out to fix it. We'll see how well that goes.
How did LTT take this as the mainboard manufacturers fault… this is literally the opposite of what everyone else is reporting. Likewise this could lead to intel taking the same road as NVIDIA and blocking messing with designs and overclocking
So far, MLID was spot on, so I'm just waiting for confirmation that this has little to do with mainboard manufacturers at all, but is squarely just Intel's design is shoddy and cooking the ring bus.
Not only MLID, but also Wendel from L1T. He showed CPUs getting cooked on workstation boards running at conservative settings. Blaming board partners is just a deflection from Intels attempts to beat AMD at any cost.
So glad I went with a 7800x3d on my latest upgrade but man this sucks for the consumer. Spending over 400 on a processor and then you have to buy a new mobo with it just for it to be faulty on arrival that ain't right
You were one of the lucky ones who didn't have their 7800X3D go pop on arrival? What uh... what previous gen did you migrate your 7800X3D from? The.... "6000 series" that was totally-for-real-a-thing on AM5? Oh no, *you* bought a new motherboard for AM5. The 13th and 14th gen Intel processors actually did *NOT* require a new motherboard, as they're cross-compatible between 12, 13, and 14th gen CPUs/Motherboards. When you have to lie to make your point, you've lost the argument.
@@jefferyG499 Nope everything worked outside the box. Funnily enough I've had the same motherboard from 2017 to 2024. I went from a Ryzen 5 1600 to a 3600 and then this year to a 7800x3d. There's no need to cope so hard dude everybody knows Intel changes their Motherboards every 2 years.
I would point out... there is blame to be put on the MOBO manufacturers but they are not the issue... It is 100% the Intel Microcode... The instability is 100% to do with Intel and not their partners, at best the manufacturers are to blame for shortened lifespans on the CPU but the crashing and instability is all Intel...
Wow, that was really heavy towards motherboard makers and pretty soft on Intel, along with actually being incorrect. At around 2:35 you claim it was the fault of some motherboards for not lowering the temperature till the CPU hit 100C. Yet on the Intel official spec pages, they list 100C as Max Operating Temperature for many of the CPU's that are now failing. So basically the motherboard was doing what Intel said it should, run the CPU as fast as possible (so that it can compete with AMD in benchmarks) and only slow it down if cooling isn't good enough to stop it going past 100C.
LTT is more casual than technical these days. 1: 13900T and 14900T are also having issues on non overclocking motherboards "W680", these are rated to hit 65watts.. 2: The real reason for the crashes is more to do with the IO layer which is why you get data corruption on PCIe SSDs, and why lowering DDR5 speeds and disabling Ecores sometimes helps 3: This is a fundamental flaw in the IO layer and ringbus design, which is why its slightly older brother "12900KS" goes vroom vroom at similar voltages for years without fail. So in Short, Intel made space for more Ecores and voltages but in doing so also made the ringbus and io layer far more fragile. The only sure way to fix this, is to set a fixed speedstep frequency, disable all C states, and if some of the lanes are damaged move to a South bridge SSD to prevent corruption, secondly lower your DDR5 speeds, and set the voltage to a max of 1.4v if you're still seeing problems contact intel but in the meanwhile disable Ecores if possible. The less your chip has to micro switch and the fewer vdroops from c states or wake up happen the better it is for that fragile io ringbus. Good luck and good night from an actual Tech Lead, not some crypto scammer 🫡
It's always funny to see guys like you here in the comments but not making videos. Idc if linus is wrong, I care about the fact that there's loads of intelligent people like yourself that rather type paragraph with loads of useful information that no one is gonna digest because you rather put all your effort in a youtube comment, instead of putting effort into putting the right information out there the proper way. This is why a lot of people are uneducated with tech, it's due to people who are very intelligent like you, just gatekeeping the info and judging people for at least trying to educate others and gain their interest in the niche. You can hate on linus as much as you want but he actually gets people interested in the subject of tech and gets the ball rolling for a lot of the problems the industry face. And while he's doing that, all the smart people like yourself just sit in the comments talking crap, when your energy is best put into educating others the right way. AND THATS NOT YOUR RESPONSIBILITY But how do you expect anyone to care about your opinion when you don't even want to upload a video at all filled with valuable tech information??? Cause a big ass youtube paragraph is just annoying to read. I bet you're pretty pissed that you had to go through all of this text just to find out that you're wasting other people's time... you're not passionate, you don't care, you just want someone to notice you and compliment you for your comment.
@@BlackApathyy unfortunately I have a day job running 27 sites across Europe, also I can't publicly come out with whistleblower information without endangering contracts, as most large volume suppliers are only Intel based. I'm therefore unable to make videos, but the sad reality is. Linus has indeed a team and perhaps a few insiders himself telling him this, but he kept his mouth shut while Bryan from Tech yes city actually broke the real truth into this space. If you have read and understood my information you know it's true and thus your shilling just disappoints me.
@@BlackApathyy At least 10 people seem to have read it, judging by upvotes. Why are you complaining about this? What do you think is "the proper way" to communicate corrections to a youtube video?
@@nathangamble125 Excellent point, I agree, but didn't want to enflame him anymore than he already was. The internet is great when it comes to sharing information and data to get to the heart of things, hopefully my advise might save even more i9's out there, which is why I posted it. All though my criticism seems harsh towards the creator of this video, I felt I needed to spread more detailed information in the hopes of helping others, if it only is one is saved, than at least I know my efforts didn't go to waste. P.S the Linus I grew up with use to show hacked chinese motherboards that supported cross generational intel cpu's that where not suppose to mix, which is why I perhaps come across a bit harsh towards the lack of real substans, Also all the information that was rehashed came from Wendell over at Level1 Tech and Steve from Gamersnexus, which combined do not have the same resources by a milion miles as LMG, but if I offended anyone, I duly apologize.
@@BlackApathyyYou start with complaining that they're writing too much in comments and not making videos and then proceed to write an even longer response...you think anyone is going to read your contribution?
Intel should recall all the cpu affected. Even if you have no issue you had a certain amount of degradation and the lifetime is compromised. This is ridiculous, usually in the chip industry you have to respect a certain mission profile that includes the lifetime expected in certain conditions.
Quite honestly it feels this script was wrote before Intel investigated the issue further and realised it was their CPUs and micro code at fault . Not what was initially blamed on the motherboard manufacturer. I feel the blame on intel was not fully understood and our knowledge of the issue has developed on from what appears to be focused on in this video. In my humble opinion
My POV: MB manufacturers were tricking the user with Extreme Performance CPU profiles set as default while they simultaneously charged settings higher than it was specified by Intel. Users were not aware they use some settings out of Intel specs. On the other hand Intel eng made some microcode mistakes that led to 1) overvoltage 2) instability. There may also be damaged processors whose damage root cause is not fully investigated. It may be Oxidation problem that has gone to the market or it may be something else.
I've had 5 BSOD's today within 10 minutes on a 14900K on a MSI Z690 board. Had to turn it off and go do something else. Experienced unexplained software crashing too over the last year. I've got press sample CPUs too so they're not retail.
It's also happening on server motherboards, I highly doubt they are squishing performance like the mainstream motherboards do, so I wouldn't blame the motherboards vendors for this
@@mlsasd6494I think supermicro was used as an example considering they mainly make server stuff… server mobos don’t push the same way and they are still dying is the point.
@@darktrexcz you notice how he says some? He is creating speculation (just like intel) that it’s not directly their fault. I guess listening comprehension ain’t your thing.
The most recent Intel chip I bought was 11th gen. Based on this, the next chip I buy will be AMD. I don't even really care that they effed up. I'm more concerned about them shifting the blame and being so silent on the matter for so long. As a consumer, that is incredibly frustrating because there is nothing you can do about it other than waiting for a class-action lawsuit.
Making it sound like 75% of the fault is the MB manufacturers is rather misleading. If that was the case we would be seeing the same issue on AMD. Intel knew what it was doing by not giving adequate guidelines to manufaturers, thankfully it didn't end up being the get out of jail free card intel was hoping it would be.
I'm super frustrated. I built my new pc with a 13700k a year or so ago, and have noticed that my PC has been much more unstable than my old one (especially with certain games). I initially thought that it was a problem with my RTX 4070ti because graphics drivers, etc. have been blamed by almost every crash report that I've gotten even though I make sure to keep my drivers up to date. Recently it seems like it's been getting worse, with some files on my PC actually becoming corrupted. I don't want to have to be dealing with this crap. When I spend several hundred dollars on a CPU I shouldn't have to worry about there being issues with said CPU out of the box. Needless to say I have been thoroughly convinced by Intel that I should go with an AMD chip next time I upgrade.
@@adelgubaishi I've never owned an AMD processor before. I have heard nothing about AMD having this issue. What I have experienced, however, is my current PC having tons of stability issues. I've also seen Intel refuse to do anything substantial like issue a recall or offer refunds to anyone affected by this (only if you have the original box, I guess). From what I've seen recently, AMD has been killing it and Intel has been killing itself. But I guess not fanboying over and defending a billion dollar corporation makes me an AMD bot? Whatever.
@@adelgubaishiamd didnt have that problem Asus did. it's not AMD fault if Asus goes over the voltage limit on their high end boards to push more performance out of AMD Chips without testing it first.
I would LOVE to listen to the phone call happened between Linus and Pat Gelsinger (the CEO of Intel) right before this video :D I really don't buy it Linus, you say every motherboard manufacturer is uncapable to degrade an AMD CPU? All you say is invalid, why doesn't you apply the same logic to AMD or any other Intel CPU prior to 13th gen? Because those chips are faulty. And Intel should replace them. End of story.
Intel: Linus can you run a video to help us not look so bad? Linus: How much money you got? Intel: MY Maaaaan! Gamers Nexus:We’re releasing a video about Intel. Intel: No no no no no no no no no wait wait wait noooo
You do realise that LMG in general reaches a more casual audience which is not too deeply involved in the tech news. Thus any information about intel issues is a big net negative as they probably did not hear about it before. Companeis would pay you to not make such a video, but they did to inform the more casual audience to update their bios. No tinfoil hat needed
@@mlsasd6494 this video minimizes intels role in the issues they are having and puts the bulk of the blame on board manufacturers. I AM a casual viewer, but as an electrician I know the load determines how much power it pulls. The source has fail safes to prevent too much power from being pulled. In this case the MAIN issue is that Intels chips are pulling too much power at too high a voltage causing early degradation. That’s a design issue on the chip side NOT the board side. Yes the board could be updated with a bios to prevent it feeding crazy voltages, but that doesn’t change the fact the chips design is causing it to want to pull that power.
@@mlsasd6494 You've been posting in dozens of comments which are suggesting - accurately - that LTT are misplacing the proportion of responsibility here. I sure hope you're being compensated for that, because doing it for free is just....weird.
Can confirm.... was shocked to see a value of "22" for CPU Lite Load (maximum was 23 btw.) after BIOS update, which immediately explained the high temperatures... I did not want to overclock the CPU and use stock settings until I decide to overclock but now, thanks to this, I had to go through all this trouble to figure out how to resolve the issue... With very little information online about what all these settings mean, do, and how to configure them properly. My customer experience is really not that great after many days and hours of research and still no clue if it is set up correctly now :/
5:25 it doesn't affect my 65W i5 13500 , it only affects i5 13600K and above because the processors below that are on an Alder Lake Dye. Minor correction :) . Big fan.
To be fair, I just bought Intel stock recently, after their plummet. Now is the time to get in on it. Intel isn't going out of business anytime soon I think, and they're probably going to bounce back at some point in the future.
To those reading, W680 boards are server class motherboards that do not prioritize performance. It's focused on stability rather than overclocking or performance, maybe even just operating at or below stock specs. See GN's video on how intel tech support is 10X more than AMD, why a company decides to switch all of their servers to AMD, and why motherboards doesn't share the blame here (although in general they can, but not today)...
@@giovannyc.1724 I more belive Linus, GN only drama. Even GN doesn't know undervolt will solve Intel issue from his drama, and why for longtime ago many Hardware reviewer always suggest to undervolt intel CPU. But yes, W & H chipset doesn't have ability to undervolt CPU, that's why they need microcode.
You are shitting me. This is why my games have been crashing. Swapped my 13900ks for my old 12th gen 12900k. Dead ass stable in games now. Thought my gpu was dying.
Not the first time Linus doesn’t know what is talking about xD. It’s not about load lines from mb manufacturing. It’s intel PL states and how they wanted to maintain higher clocks for 10 second to have better CB scores than AMD. Intel is providing everything to MB manufactures, there is literally zero fault on them.
Intel's horrible anti-consumer behavior in this matter is becoming more of an issue than the CPU failures themselves. A broken CPU can be fixed, broken trust on this level is fatal for a company.
@@robbo_ Well, hammering MB manufacturers for 4 min. and 47 sec. in an 8 min. video before even mentioning Intel might be somewhat responsible is a strange way of "not doing that" - don't you think? More so if it's also on Intel to comprehensively mandate how their CPUs should be powered? *And* it's now clear and confirmed by Intel themselves that the issue is there regardless? They didn't mention this in the video *at all* .
@@robbo_dude, the video is literally saying Intel's fault lies solely on them not being strict to the MB vendors. Did you watch the video from the start to the end?
Just BIOS limiting the PL in watts doesn't tame the microcode's boosting voltages to get the single core to hit the out of box targets Intel was promising customers. They are the ones who went out of spec of their 10nm silicon. The microcode wasn't behaving incorrectly either, they made these boosting algorithms on purpose to eek out benchmark victories for their over-extended 13th and 14th gen products that they should have just not released until they had a viable product taped out on a better node. First they blamed their motherboard partners, now they have Linus shilling for people to nerf their CPUs before the problem (which they won't admit to) causes them more financial harm while they validate some new method of f*ckery to boost voltages in some different manner. They probably want to make the CPU touch 6Ghz for 1.5 seconds or something just so people can't sue them.
You got it, man. I admit this video finally made me dislike linus' "public figure". There was just too much tippy topping around the idea of blaming Intel for selling silicon that, unfortunately to them, looks like fried chips just before warranty expires. There's nothing else to say about corporate business, linus does it, intel does it, and that's it. The best outcome would be intel solving it via bios update, not likely. The next best thing would be Intel releasing a useful bios update, plus extended warranty, but it is not on the cards.. I only expect Intel to be as rude and careless for their customers' interests as any major corporation, its nature. What really sucks about this, is the profound impact of corporate greed thru and thru the food chain. From milking out a great product for a decade whilst there's no competition to worry about, to releasing out a product some sector of you most likely knew was flawed, up to the lies spurred out in your defense by your partners and associates, alike.
This is way too soft on intel. So all the board partners happened to get it wrong simultaneously? The fact that it isn’t contained to specific motherboard partners tells you this is 100% intel’s fault. Watch the Gamer’s Nexus video for more info on how bad intel messed this one up
Yup, my 14900K from November 2023 made it up until April of this year. Had to RMA it. Haven’t had any problems with the new one nor with the one my wife has had since February of this year. I will probably switch to AMD for my next CPU though, after having been an Intel fan boy for years
this seems like a moderately dishonest announcement as an intel sponsored company, much better to watch steve for any real and honest information about the situation.
This is a clear example of how you need to manage/navigate the relationship with a big sponsor of yours business. If you are harsh and lethal you will burn a bridge 100%. There's always a tradeoff with big things, remember.
This video does not look like the other: "All 13 and 14 gen are damaged/exploded/imploded. RMA does not accept them. Intel is sh.t. And their processors were hyperoxidized to get rusted tomorrow evening."
I'm on my 4th 13900K, 2 of them RMA'd through retailer, one is currently being RMA'd with Intel. I've been telling them for nearly 2 years that there's a problem and sent in all my investigations and experiences.
@mlsasd6494 yes, because the W680 workstation class motherboards which are very conservative on their settings, prioritizing reliability and stability, pushed the chips too hard... yeah....
@@jaredamos5064 two things can be true at once, a) Raptorlake has a critical flaw that leads to rapid degradation and b) if pushed with more voltage by the mb the degradation increases. Why would we not blame mb makers for making the problem worse?
@mlsasd6494 it was the microcode, the CPU instructions from intel themselves that was requesting such high voltages as 6V, not the BIOS. While it is true mbs like to push the envelope, in this instance, even the default safe intel settings would have the MB being controlled by the CPU itself, and so if the CPU requests 6V it'll give the 6V
My 14700k has crashed multiple times when playing games like helldivers 2 and even slime rancher 2. I have also has crashes during cinebench, prime-95, and just while browsing on google. Not nearly as frequently as some others have claimed, but still way more than I find acceptable on a $400 cpu.
Before this was a well known issue, I told everyone I knew that was having issues to turn their Power Option setting in control panel to power saver even when it wasn't a laptop. Kept mine and others cpus from using boosted clock speeds for no reason. Also lower temps in the summer.
Intel also is to blame here, because they were ok when motherboard makers pushed higher than base settings, because that also made intel processor look better in reviews. And this has been happening for more than a decade. But what is breaking chips this time is a design flaw in the chips, coupled with intel raising the fequencies and voltages to levels that design couldn't handle, except for a subset of really good bined chips that are doing ok. And thats another side of the problem, they bined chips as being able to support a tier of performance that in reality they couldn't. If you are wondering where is the design flaw, it's in the ring bus design, it's coupled with the core voltage, and it has less tolerance to voltage than the cores, but Intel kept pushing Frequency and voltage, so yea, the processor runs faster, but the ring bus cooks itself. Then theres the microcode issue, and the oxidation issue, which also weren't handled properly.
my 14900kf started to have issues around a month ago. The first descendant wouldn't even launch. I would get crashes & BSOD playing league of legends and I'm crashing every other map in Path of Exile. Thankfully, IBuyPower is issuing an RMA for my processor. The pc is only 3 months old as well.
This is like the 5th time in a week I randomly read a 14th gen fail in 3 months. Isn't that a little too fast for voltage degradation ? Wow. Hopefully your replacement will be from the good batch.
Board designer & engineer here LL was meant to mitigate the voltage lossess you have when delivering hundreds of amps across the board. One milliohm of impedance means a voltage drop of 0.2V when deliviring 200 amps in the cpu. The problem is when you set the LL above the actual impedance of the board. If you do, and you can since nobody bothered to set the maximum value specifically for each manufacturer/model, then you are frying your cpu. Mobo manufacturers have an advantage doing so, because you get better perfomance for a while.
hey yall, for me it is "why not both" -- on gaming boards The out of box defaults really are insane.
linus' take overall is reasonable. and I looked over the script beforehand.
the uncertainty on gaming boards is a big deal and why I went digging on more "conservative" boards like in the datacenter. which are also imperfect!
should intel have caught any microcode issues sooner? absolutely yes. have motherboard makers pushed voltages directly or indirectly to ruination? also yes.
Is it up to intel to make the situation right? yes
I am hoping it wont take a lot of pressure and media attention to get Intel to do right by customers...
how we got here is more nuanced than just saying intel pushed too far too hard..and its super important to see the whole picture of the situation
ps update your bios!! and update it again mid august! even if you sont currently have issues. :)
Intel spec is up to 1.72v. Been like that for a while.
If the in-spec voltage ruins the CPU, it's on them.
Thanks Wendel
@@incandescentwithrage 1.72 is how much voltage the VID register can encode. You're basically saying that a video game boss with 10,000 HP could randomly have 2,147,483,647 HP because it's encoded as a 32-bit integer and that's the highest value it can take on. Each sample of modern CPUs has it's own voltage versus frequency values programmed into it. The issue probably comes from Intel pushing those voltages too much.
Thank you for being the voice of reason.
@@incandescentwithrage Intel spec is also maximum of 400 Amps, and a ton of other power specs motherboards ignore by default. Motherboards & CPUs have to work together, and that has not been happening. Like Level1Techs said, plenty of blame to go around.
The problem if your chip is damaged, no amount of bios fixes or anything short of a new chip will fix it.
Thanks a lot intel!
Let‘s not get distracted from the hair issue.
@@Slithermotion 🤣
You are of course correct. He also addressed mfg problems towards the end:
At 7:32, he says _"By the way, there is another wrinkle in all of this. Intel has said that some reports of instability can be traced back to Intel themselves; a manufacturing error that involved oxidation of some early 13th gen chips. If you bought your chip in early 2023, or prior, that could be part of your problem, and seeing as it's a physical issue with the chip that wouldn't be fixed with a micro code update so you will need to RMA to Intel."_
@@davidbetancourt4028 Worth noting that we don't know how many chips are affected by that manufacturing defect. It would be better if Intel released that information, but in the meanwhile we shouldn't be assuming the worst. They claim it's a small minority of the chips that are experiencing problems.
LSS - Linus Slim Shady
😆😆😆
Will the real Linus Slim Shady please stand up?
The LTT won't let me be. Or let me be me or write in C. They tried to shut me down like PowerPC, but it feels so empty without me.
rarther lesbian slim shaby
Lil’ Slim Shady also works 😂
No recall, replacements, returns? Gonna be a class action over this.
Probably but Class Actions suck the only people who get anything out of them are the Lawyers
Intel actually has now announced a warranty extension, so that's at least something. OEM buyers can't go to Intel directly though 🙁
@@delvman83lol. Why are you saying that as if no one knows that? Are you a clown by profession? It doesn’t matter. People need to do their part. As long as Intel pays, it’s a win.
@@delvman83 It gets results. Money is the only language big business understands. So if gets them to change their policies or do better in future then it's a win for everyone.
Yeah class action sucks too. You don’t get much. Intel may PREFER that.
I'm sorry this is 90% on Intel, poor microcodes, oxidation and poor definitions of "default" on the information released, so MB manufacturers still have room to push "default" settings.
Does the video state otherwise?
At least twice there refer to intel sharing "some of the blame", however if Intel had actually put out strict guidelines from the beginning the MB manufacturer wouldn't have had any liberties to take, even now the guidelines from Intel are a joke and leave too many liberties on the table. Intel didn't care if the MB manufacturers were pushing the chips too hard as it made them, Intel, look more competitive against AMD. No two ways about it, Intel are responsible for not enforcing or even providing MB manufacturers with a clear and defined "default", even now. So no, Intel don't share "some" of the blame, they share most of the blame.
Yeah, LTT is basically whitewashing Intel and the most expensive CPU recall in history to come.
@@mlsasd6494 yeah, video basically blame mb instead
It's 100% on intel. If the chip is properly regulated it doesn't matter how much voltage the board wants to send to the chip, the chip won't take it has fails safes for that. These chips do not.
This is literally no different than a phone that charges at 20w taking all the wattage of a 40w charger etc and blowing up then you blame the charging brick manufacturer because the phone manufacturer didn't properly regulate itself.
I'm glad somebody else said it too. This is NOT motherboard problem, this is a 100% an Intel problem. Sure, Intel have been blaming motherboard manufacturers as part of their "damage control", and the BIOSes have been playing a bit loose with their settings. However this is because Intel's specifications aren't exactly clear, so motherboard vendors in my opinion have been doing the best that they can.
Intel, you should be ashamed and I'm just glad that I'm using an AMD CPU and don't have to deal with this shit. I also feel sorry for those that are going to suffer, most not even knowing if they have the problem or when it's going to rear it's ugly head on their system.
Why cant we just blame all companies for their behaviours? I think there is strong evidence that mb makers did set too aggressive settings, which compounded with the core issues. Just because one is worse does not excuse the other
@@mlsasd6494 Firstly and most importantly, there's is a hardware problem. Secondly, there's a microcode problem and Thirdly, Intel didn't produce accurate and specific specs that MOBO manufacturers needed to adhere to. None of these things are MOBO manufacturers issues. Okay, they did aggressive tuning, but the specs didn't say they couldn't and that it would cause instability problems.
What would you have done if you made MOBOs? You'd do like they did, which is use the specs and do the best you could to make your MOBO as cool as possible.
That's why it's firmly Intel that's at fault.
eventho linus said this was MOSTLY motherboard manufacturers fault, but some of the blame also goes to intel for not enforcing certain things.
@@thewelder3538 you are wrong ... use google to understand things correctly pls ... hardware problem only hit early 13th gen batch... microcode problem is not a problem it's prevention to prevent motherboard from drawing too much power. not all motherboard have that problem. i have an aorus master x rev 1.2 and i'm not affected. my friend have the same mobo but rev 1.0 and when i put my cpu in his motherboard the computer crashed in less than 5 min in a bench.
intel provide accurate and specific specs to motherboard manufactures ... customer rarely have access to such specs. if you have a unique product, would you give 100% details? of course no ... customer are your enemy, your goal is to protect your product against unattended use so providing full protocol only help these customer to edit/clone your product
Which is odd because a bios update for my MB fixed the problem...
You guys are playing softball here - Intel is absolutely responsible and you don't need to be nice about it.
- They shipped a defective product with the voltage regulation being completely buggy. This would have been caught with the extensive testing Gamers Nexus, JayzTwoCents, Hardware Unboxed, several PC building companies, etc. performed.
- Intel was clearly more interested in "number go up" in their implementations than figuring out if it was actually feasible and sustainable.
- The oxidation issue is ridiculous - again, should have been caught and quality controlled long before it ever hit the market.
- Not providing any real guidance to motherboard manufacturers - leaving them to their own nonsense of overvolting and blowing up systems.
Let's not play games - these processors are hundreds of dollars and with all this news Intel completely went radio silent until their bottom line was under pressure. The C-Suite pushed out broken processors and expected the consumer to just deal with it. They might be fixing it now, but they knew about this for almost a year and are only now acting like this is a shocker.
I see this as consumer abuse and neglect, and no one should stand for it.
@@arztje Exactly, and they still continued to sell CPUs they knew were going to degrade as soon as the customer puts them into their board.
Lmao Intel is downplaying the instability issues to prevent mass recalls.
Yeah it's not just that motherboards are pushing too much voltage, the CPU itself is requesting that voltage. You can see in Buildzoid's video that if you limit the voltage requested by the CPU, the actual voltage is capped exactly to that maximum request. So when an i9 gets 1,55V or more, it's not the motherboard forcing that voltage down the chip, but rather the chip asking for that voltage and getting exactly what it asked for.
It's also why you can't just undervolt these CPUs with a negative voltage offset. If the CPU doesn't get the voltage it asks for, it will just ask for more until it gets what it needs. The only way to fix it is for the CPU to not request voltages too high.
Class action inc
The oxidation issue only affects CPUs produced in 2023. MB vendors weren't really overvolting either (except for the LLC changes), but they were allowing the CPUs to draw too much power and current. Even then, the processors should never ever request more voltage than they could handle though. AMD's Ryzen manages that quite nicely with its FIT monitor - the CPUs won't cook themselves even if the MB doesn't limit PWR and current…
There's also a rumor that due to suboptimal yields, too many CPUs got binned as an i9 xx700 and xx900 parts or K editions. These specific chips are also more likely to not being able to handle high voltages as good while at the same time requiring more voltage to hit the target frequencies to begin with.
Anyhow, I totally agree that it's unacceptable how Intel handled the situation, although today they released a press statement that says that all customers whose CPU degraded and became unstable due to the issue can get a replacement under warranty. The warranty period itself was also increased to 5 years, which is better than nothing.
They also released their abysmal business performance numbers along with a sobering projection for the next quarter and a plan to cut at least 10bn USD in costs, wanting to lay off around 15000 employees (12% of the staff), aswell as reevaluate all business branches and products in order to weed out those that aren't profitable (dGPUs are in danger once again). That may be a contributing factor towards there not being a full product recall.
All in all, Intel is currently an utter shitshow on multiple levels.
With 15,000 fewer employees, I don't think that oversight of the motherboard is going to improve anytime soon.
When your employer announces they're halting all "nonessential work" it's time to update your resumé. When your *supplier* announces they're halting all "nonessential work," you get a new supplier, and pronto.
*fewer
... fewer... fewer employees.
@@jefferyG499 aight we get it
We gotta fire the employees to cover the cost of the executives failing up.
I fixed the problem 4 months ago, I bought an AMD chip 😊
Congrats on your upgrade.
I have a 13700k, if it dies, I go back to AMD and never buy Intel ever again
AMD bots detected, opinions rejected🤚🏼🫵🏼👊🏼
yeah sorry amd would have tot cover my 600 bucks motherboard but they wont so staying intel.
@@adelgubaishi Cringe
Oddly defensive of intel.
Fact is, Intel failed to produce clear guidance on how to run their chips safely. And considering the microcode issues, it seems that they didn't even understand it themselves.
Sure the motherboard vendors also verged on recklessness, but that situation occured and then wasn't adequately fixed because of Intel's failure to make clear statements about safety criteria.
And now they are using that lack of guidance as a smokescreen to distract from their responsibilities.
Underrated comment
He said this in the video.
wrong ... intel and amd provide sheet to manufacture ONLY... customer like us usually do not have access to such data. linus talk globally by saying HE cannot access such data and this is true ... if you wanted to edit such curve it is difficult without such data but this isn't the case here .... the case is motherboard causing instability and not users causing instability
by any chance are you an AMD investor? jump off the intel hate bandwagon, maybe if you invest in intel stock you will actually benefit and be an intel fan soon enough.
This sounds to me more like an Intel Problem than a Motherboard Builders Problem.
We have around 50 production servers running on 13900 chips.
Every other day we had unpredictable errors on most of them.
Right now we are migrating to AMD-systems.
How are the AMD systems going? Im curious how They both compare.
@@fampic7133 we Just migrated the first batch yesterday. So far we did not run in any unexpected error.
Using Debian and comparing the output of `dmesg` i can tell, that the AMD systems we use are much more stable overall.
The Intel systems show ECC-errors and warnings quite often, even with new hardware.
STAY ON INTEL!
They are still better in EVERY WAY.. They are CHEAPER, have more performance and are energy efficient unlike amd who are so behind
Yes and this video is made to shift the blame from Intel to MB brands....
@@FO0TMinecraftPVP A few years ago this could be argued, but especially with Ryzen 9000 and in the enterprise space this just isn’t true anymore. I’m pulling for intel because competition is essential for improvements and innovation but they are objectively behind right now.
Can the Real Slim Linus, fix my pc, fix my pc, fix my pc?
Lmfao
No, he will drop your PC.
hes gonna drop ur chip faster than hes gonna a beat though.....
“Hi! My name is.. who? My name is.. what? My name’s - wikka wikka - Slim Linus!”
looks like we got a problem here 😮
Glad I went with AMD when they released Ryzen instead of the shovelware Intel kept pushing out. Just because they are throwing more watts at it to increase performances, doesn't make it better.
Same here. My house went from all Intel/Nvidia to all AMD, it's saved a ton of money, and I don't think I'll ever go back. I'm Team RED forever.
I still remember Intel dominance and being stuck with 4 cores, AMD gave cores to the masses.
@@hubris6567 now they're stuck with those cores for newer generations. Whyth is Ryzen 5 9600x is still 6 cores
@@hubris6567 exactly
@@azzamali3686 performs better than a 14 core i5 13600..
The oxydation issues cannot be fixed by a bios update.
Sure they can! That's why BIOS stands for Brutally Isolating Oxidation Surpluses of course!
/s
@@Coonotafoo mind blown 🤯
Why is Linus placing the majority of the blame on the Motherboard manufacturers, when he says in the video that devs are replacing their Intel servers with AMD, and unlike retail MB's server motherboards follow much stricter guidelines and not overclock the CPU's. something Wendell went into quite extensively.
I think the reality is very likely Intel knew this was a issue (though maybe not the extent of it) but because they also knew AMD's new chipsets would beat them in gaming performance, they allowed MB manufacturers to push the CPU's beyond acceptable limits, hoping the situation would not be as big of a issue as it turned out to be.
You literally cannot fix it. Intel has stated that if you are already experiencing crashes, there is nothing that can be done. Your chip is done.
Intel also said that overclocking voids your warranty, right?
Intel's horrible, trust destroying, insanely anti-consumer behavior through all this is a much bigger long term issue. With all trust gone Intel is done with no fix.
@@hkgamma no
@@Fattony6666
yes, but they may still honor it. It's rather on you though.
Not in this case I guess... It's more on Motherboards this time, so you're all good.
not necessarily - if you've not had it long and got the microcode update, you'll probably be fine, but if you've been having these crashes for months (like mine) then there's probably permanent damage. Hopefully my RMA comes though fine *sad face*
Ngl, intel sounds like the boeing of the cpu market
And Linus is blonde gay
Big companies play big company games.
@@Eren-da-Jaeger wtf 😂
😂😂@@Eren-da-Jaeger
This video seems weirdly focused on the mistakes of the motherboard manufacturers.
Yes, it's true, especially Asus and Gigabyte had some fucked up load lines, but that's not the main issue causing the instability. The motherboards aren't delivering such high voltages because of some error, but because the CPUs are *requesting* them via their VID commands. Some other effects like overshoot and measurement inaccuracy are then pushing voltages to even higher peak values than the requested value, but those are always a thing. Intel must have known of those and should have accounted for them, but they didn't. Because the chips apparently needed to hit 6 GHz boost for marketing reasons or whatever, no matter how much voltage you need to ram into them to hit that target.
In short, Intel flew too close to the sun and got burnt. Blaming the motherboard manufacturers for Intel's mistakes isn't fair. Even the mistakes they did make originated from Intel's poor specifications allowing for stock load lines that were unstable which should be an impossibility.
100% agreed! The whole video completely missed what's really going on.
He addressed mfg problems towards the end of the video _(see below)._ These videos are meant to be quick hits, not deep dives. This was probably not a good topic to cover since we should have more mid-August, but then again they claimed it was figured out months ago.
At 7:32, he says _"By the way, there is another wrinkle in all of this. Intel has said that some reports of instability can be traced back to Intel themselves; a manufacturing error that involved oxidation of some early 13th gen chips. If you bought your chip in early 2023, or prior, that could be part of your problem, and seeing as it's a physical issue with the chip that wouldn't be fixed with a micro code update so you will need to RMA to Intel."_
@@davidbetancourt4028 No, this is seperate from oxidation. There are three different issues in total which is why this whole thing is so confusing. You've got Gigabyte and Asus mainboards with incorrect settings, a large chunk of 13th gen is potentially affected by oxidation and both 13th and 14th gen are suffering from slow and permanent degradation, probably due to excessively high core voltages. That's what makes this such a calamity. It feels like everything that could go wrong did go wrong.
@@hammerth1421 I've been following the situation through various outlets, such MLID, GN & others. The issues are varied like you stated and didn't think it was well suited this early in the 'story' for a tech quickie. At this point, it does seem like Intel should shoulder most of the blame, but mobo partners do not appear blameless.
I don't believe anyone knows the true extent % wise of affected units except Intel. Right now we just have speculation, probably reasonable speculation based on some data, but still just guesses w/o Intel confirming.
It's a real shit situation. I'm glad my friend choose my recommendation of the 7800X3D vs a 14900k, as he was a die hard Intel guy. Weird to be loyal to a mfg.
@@hammerth1421It's almost like Intel has been pushing the margins on every front until things broke...
You are being way too nice to intel
intel pays well.
oooofff. wow, Linus. This is a truly awful and incorrect take. This is absolutely an Intel problem and failure. Sure the motherboard issues may have or certainly did make them worse but this is still on Intel. You giving Intel a pass on this is just stupid and wrong.
Intel is soley to blame here. They long accepted motherboards pushing the limits by not giving strict guidelines and not validating what their partners implement to get that last bit of performance to beat AMD while keeping plausible deniability. But Intel said everything is within spec as long as the overclocking bit is not set… you can’t fault board partners if Intel says it’s within spec.
Also 13th/14th gen CPUs fail in W680 boards which run conservative Intel baseline values, Supermicro does not tweak out the last bit of performance and yet CPUs still degraded and became unstable.
Intel rushed out Raptor Lake within a year because they needed something to bridge over until Arrow Lake is ready, and they pushed the ring bus hard to get that last bit of performance. Which is where the CPUs now seem to break. That pushing 350W through a desktop chip can’t possibly be healthy was clear for every buyer with half decent knowledge.
Yes they are shifting the blame!
It's obvious by now that this is exactly what's going on. And shifting the blame (or at least trying to) is just Intel doing Intel things. What else would you expect? They're basically lying to themselves by now, so what's another lie to customers?
Stick to the facts, must be a Gamers Nexus sensationalist.
no they arent solely to blame. They do didnt write the bios for Asus (and others). They are however more guilty for not stomping on this way sooner
@@curtissimmons1085 c'mon - if a microcode update is supposed to stop the degradation, that's the same as admitting it's not the MB's fault. The microcode is Intel's work and theirs alone. Asus/Gigabyte/MSI/AsRock/whoever did not do that. Their agressive settings might have exacerbated the problem, but it'd be a problem without agressive power settings nonetheless. Also, mandating how your CPUs should be powered should be mandated by Intel in the first place. Guess what they didn't do...
Why should the customer try to fix the crashing CPU? If the CPU is unable to hold its Stock spec Intel has to provide a replacement.
The problem is intel's guidance was almost 0 until this really became an issue. And now Intel is just "guessing" what Stock is, Which makes this worse.
Intel in true fashion after extending the warranty period is now shifting the onus back on the consumer that bought boxed chips only, to prove it is the CPU causing any instability.
You missed out a very important point:
In most cases, the part of the CPU that degrades is the ringbus interconnect, rather than the CPU cores themselves. This seems to be caused by a design flaw in Raptor Lake CPUs, in which the ring bus is physically not robust enough to handle the rate of data transfer required for high core-count CPUs, rather than by load line or temperature limits. CPU core voltage does also affect the ringbus, and higher temperatures increase the rate of almost all types of processor degradation, so this doesn't mean that the factors mentioned in the video don't matter at all, but ringbus problems seem to be at least as significant and should not have been left out of the video.
It therefore may be more useful to disable the CPU's efficiency cores in order to reduce the stress on the ringbus, or reduce the ring ratio, rather than reducing CPU core clock frequency. This is especially true for gaming, which typically doesn't benefit much from efficiency cores.
🙄 Some people are Way smarter than ME😉
We need a tutorial about that
efficiency but disaster..
Why are you pushing blame onto board partners for Intel's fuckup?
If you dont like intel go buy AMD.
@@boldmeditations bro i got this shit a while ago and havent seen issues till now. i dont even know if i can get a refund how boout a little human sympathy lol. gonna cost me a fortune to replace this shit but its got to be done.
Unlimited power profile was IN SPEC for Intel all this years since 8th gen !
To quote Intel from an interveiw with Anandtech in 2019, about the out of the box unlimited power profile: "Even with those values, you're not running out of spec, I want to make very clear - you’re running in spec, but you are getting higher turbo duration." Noting "vague" here !
Just now when the issues startd suddenly the motherbord makers are the evil ones who "step over the line" ??!!
I work at Currys in the UK in the repair centre here. We've had so many 13th and 14th gen CPUs come in for these issues, and we can't do anything to fix them as Intel blames motherboard manufactures and they blame Intel. It's really shitty for us, and beyond that annoying given us as repair technicans know this is an Intel problem entirely. If people have anymore questions, more than willing to answer
What about the Alder Lake based ones like i5-13500? Are they returned too? Any insight?
@@g.i.l.l.e.sWe get some desktops through with CPU issues lower than I9s, and they have a similar issue. The majoroty are I7s and I9s of 13th and 14th gen tho, as on the whole they are pushed further for performance (from Intel themselves).
@@binowoo6268That doesn't answer the question at all.
Some i9 & i7 are returned is all you know my man
@@incandescentwithrage How so?
@@binowoo6268 Didn't answer whether any i5-13500 returned
I was planning on my next PC build to be Intel. Yeah that's out the window now.
ARM might be a better bet in the near future.
Thank god for competition. AMD for the win
@@xavier2946 Truer words have never been spoken before lol
Lower end cpus like i5 or i3 are as good as or better than 10th gen i9 and they are unaffected by this.
@@adex345 Yeah I know that. The biggest reason I'm not using Intel is because I don't like the way they are handling the situation. I will not support that.
6:43 'Prevent damage' ? You will never know what damage has already been done once you used the CPU before bios update. The statement should have been 'to prevent possibly further damaging your CPU'
This statement makes consumers think their CPUs are ok once the bios update is undertaken when the damage could have already occured.
You guys need to encorage RMA and not just this band aid solution.
Not knowing is the same as it suddenly being true. If the fix goes out and the CPU's never crash again (or never crashed to begin with), that doesn't automatically mean there was possibly some damage done.
@@hang10wannabe Then an RMA is still the best solution regardless. No guessing games required.
no company in the world will accept RMA on a perfectly working product, at most you can extend warranty, even your favorite company will never accept RMA on a working part.
@@tmsphere Hmms, does the part works as intended, or in Intels case, does the part still works as presented? See, where I live, presenting something as it isn't in reality or advertising a part as it not is in reality is called "false advertising", "misleading information" and "falsifying competition" ... All 3 points are forbidden.
@@surftbut what to do with motherboard?? Most of them are same prices as cpu those days
Sounds like LTT next video will contain 'segue to our sponsor Intel' 🙂
Nice damage control, Intel, but it's your fault
It is not possible to fix a physically degraded cpu.
If it's not too damaged, going easy on an affected CPU by underclocking and undervolting it actually seems to "fix" the issue by never pushing it to the point where it trips over itself. That of course has quite a performance penalty attached to it, but a slow CPU is better than a dead one.
@@hammerth1421 There is no guarantee it won’t slowly degrade further anyway. Might work for a couple of years and then become unstable after the warranty expired.
If you want to fix millions of 3 nanometer transistors with your hands... Sure go ahead, I wish ou good luck
@@hammerth1421 This is technically true, but not very useful. It "fixes" it in so far as it prevents crashing, but at the cost of lost performance, and you will never be able to undo the physical damage (electromigration etc) within the CPU's circuitry. It's like "fixing" a car with a broken 6th gear by just never using the 6th gear. You can do it, but you probably shouldn't unless you have no other option, because you lose performance and the damage could indirectly lead to further damage in the future.
You are of course correct. Also, he addressed mfg problems towards the end of the video:
At 7:32, he says _"By the way, there is another wrinkle in all of this. Intel has said that some reports of instability can be traced back to Intel themselves; a manufacturing error that involved oxidation of some early 13th gen chips. If you bought your chip in early 2023, or prior, that could be part of your problem, and seeing as it's a physical issue with the chip that wouldn't be fixed with a micro code update so you will need to RMA to Intel."_
This video just is not accurate. The degradation of the Intel CPU's has been shown to be caused by the chips themselves requesting higher than 1.4 VID trying to anticipate Vdroop.
My CPU (i9 14900K) just died on me 2 days ago. There's dark spots, that I take as burn traces on it.
It had less than 6 months of use.
Buy more intel. The more you buy, the more you save.
@@florin604This reference is funny
Damn, can you share a pic of that?
@@florin604 He forgot his tshirt, and stock to get the more you buy the more you save discount.
Return it.
I got a failing 14700K. Ran for about a month on what I thought it was default settings, but turned out Gigabyte was OCing my CPU out of the box. One e-core fried completely - system won't work unless that core is disabled. Whether this was due to this on-going issue or I was just unlucky with a bad copy, or both, I will never know. Nevertheless, this was a retail boxed CPU and Intel offered replacement or refund based on my purchase price without any fuzz. I've chosen to get a new copy first, then send the old for refund. They sent me a pre-paid shipping label and the old CPU is on the way back. So far so good. Except installation the latest BIOS and applying Intel's recommended settings, I would also recommend people to run tests to determine if their CPU has developed any problems and if they confirm so, they can contact Intel for a replacement. While Intel didn't say in their announcement "send your CPU back and you'll get a new one" because they don't want to raise the issue to a general "recall", it seems that's pretty much what they mean with "contact customer support".
Honestly I put very little on motherboard manufactures here. Yes motherboards should be responsible with how they adjust settings to compete, but when intel is giving absolutely terrible guidance on what is and is not a clear default setting I feel the blame should be 10% motherboards 90% intel.
Why does this video felt like a damage control in intel part? 😅
Linus is a shill
@@iyadkamhiyeh527 and here you both are!
@@hang10wannabe Which means... what exactly?.. are you capable of actually thinking my guy?
@lumiere3809 because it 100% is as well as the "voltage mistake" it was nothing more than Intel trying to cover up the oxidation. You will be RMAing till the end of time because it's a physical defect and no patch WILL EVER solve it.
@@jacobgaysawyer337 No hang is an NPC that took 5 pokes in 2021
So why did the workstation/server class motherboards used for game servers also get screwed up? They're specifically designed not to push the boat out too far for stability sake.
The whole “Board partners pushed CPUs too hard’ is just to deflect from the real problem of Intel pushing their CPUs way too hard and killing the ring bus in turn.
Because its BS, its on Intel .. but he wont get any more tech upgrades or factory tours if he calls them out. And everyone knows that LTT is sellout.
potentially, people getting servers and workstation boards would've upgraded to 13th gen early, getting those chips with oxidation issues?
if you're running game servers, you probably do want the fastest chips possible as soon as possible to ensure your servers run as fast as possible, and if you have tons of money to spend on workstations, for you, time is money, so again you want the fastest possible as soon as possible.
or of course, the writers might've just missed that detail when researching for this video, and the servers and workstations suffer from the exact same issue oxidation or not.
seeing as they didn't mention it at all in the video, i'm inclined to think they just missed it in their research, but to give a fair chance to Intel, it's possible that all the server/workstation issues were only caused by oxidation, and any newer chips are fine, and the current issues only happen because of motherboards. we probably can't know for sure yet
Intel moved the ring bus to use core voltage for the 13 and 14k, that kills the chips.
yep, dont buy that excuse. they just didnt want to get owned by AMD and pushed their chips too hard. unfortunately for them, its going to cost them a lot of money
I'll give y'all some credit... But you've missed another major issue... Intel knew about this issue long before it ever came out... And was denying B2B (business to business) along with B2C (business to customer) RMAs while they knew about the oxidation issue. That's beyond excusable. They've been caught, they know it, and now they're scrambling to slap a bandaid on the situation.
I'm not saying AMD hasn't done any sketchy practices, as practically every business has... But this has me questioning if I could recommend Intel right now.
Don't put AMD in this mess 😂
hard disagree with intel having "some of the blame". they are the ones with very loose guidelines, they are the ones that sold defected cpu with oxidation, and ultimately the ones that decided to react only when there was a media out cry. That is Mostly on Intel almost every step of the way. Gamer Nexus viewpoint on this matter aligns more with mines on this subject.
i could see why this video got heavily disliked.
Gamer Nexus, of course, did a good video on Intel's part. Intel's now recommended guidelines are terribly ambiguous and confusing if you really look at it.
Intel is the only one to blame here they are throwing the motherboard manufactures under the bus for doing what they gave them the green light to do only after it caused problems.
@@disturbedone3631 What the board partners did wasn’t even the root cause, their CPUs are requesting way too much voltage and cooking the ring bus in turn. That’s on Intel and Intel alone.
I'm not going to be surprised if the board manufacturers do something like a lawsuit for gaslighting them/throwing under the bus and lessen Intel motherboard production.
@@LordApophis100 ya i know its was just saying intel tried placing all the blame on them is how it sounded.
FACTUALLY INCORRECT on the part about motherboard vendors being at fault.
When ANY processor manufacturer makes a product, they TELL the motherboard manufacturers the specs of the processor and how they want them to run.... So for example when AMD made the first ryzen series (1800x product example) they, via their microcode, told the motherboard how to auto-boost and do all the work. The motherboard vendors just ran the spec AMD gave them. THE SAME IS FOR INTEL. YES, motherboard vendors can have "overclock" modes that you can set which will auto-overclock products. THIS IS NOT WHAT IS CAUSING INTEL TO FAIL. You buy an intel 13th or 14th gen, run it completely stock, and it will fail on its own. INTEL ADMITTED TO HAVING TO UPDATE MICROCODE TO PREVENT THE ISSUE. And hardcore nerds have stated that this will cause the CPU's to lose about 10% performance. You are honestly going to tell me that EVERY motherboard manufacturer (intel's own boards, msi, asus, gigabyte, asrock, etc) all "worked together" to run these intel CPU's EXACTLY THE SAME in the EXACT same "out of spec" manor? GTFO.
Truth is, INTEL was losing against AMD, and instead of having a slower product, they pushed it passed its limits in order to stay relevant. This bit them in the ass as chips are self destructing. It has NOTHING to do with motherboard vendors and 100% to do with intel being greedy and trying not to lose their ignorant customers that buy them "no matter what".... and when this microcode update rolls out fixing the cpu's and running them "as they should have been" in the first place.... they will all drop 10% performance....
And for the super ignorant that claim "intel rushed the product" no, they didn't "rush".... you honestly think they would scrap the entire cpu line because it didn't meet their speed goals just so they could get that 10% performance without destroying the chips? wake up and smell reality for once.... they didn't rush anything. they had a product and it couldn't compete vs amd.... they had three choices.... scrap it, redesign the chip, which would put them BEHIND AMD as 7000 series would be out, and by the time Intel had a new chip, AMD would be moving to an even faster chip.... option two being sell the chip as is, and lose against AMD (the most respectable one in my opinion) or option three, which is what they chose, was to overvolt the shit out of the chip to irk out 10% more performance so that they could stay relevant. they knew these chips would self destruct. THEY DIDN'T CARE. its not "rushing" when you don't give a shit about your customer. "our intel owners buy a new cpu every year anyway, so who cares if they self destruct, no one will notice" except people are more broke now than ever thanks to bidenomics.... so they are holding onto their cpu's for longer than they usually would. and they forgot that many intel owners are dedicated overclockers, who will run the cpu max speed 24/7 instead of simply using auto-boost. similar to how I ran my 1800x at 4.2ghz at 1.5v for 6 months until it degraded because i ran it over AMD's spec (amd said dont go over 1.45v and I went to 1.5v which was TSMC's "node" spec but AMD designed their chip in a way where 1.45 was max). so imagine how bad the degredation is for someone who legit OC's their intel product.... which is why people are getting fired. more than likely they simply didn't care about their job, and now they dont have one. good riddence. intel can grow and move on from this. its 100% their fault.
the video will start making more sense when you understand its made to save future sponsorships with intel.
I ran my 1800x at 4.2ghz at 1.5v for 6 months until it degraded because i ran it over AMD's spec (amd said dont go over 1.45v and I went to 1.5v which was TSMC's "node" spec but AMD designed their chip in a way where 1.45 was max).
1800X was on Global Foundries' 16 nanometre process, I believe.
Yeah, you better believe they didn't just come together and decide to do the wrong thing. Motherboard manufacturers have a vested interest in not destroying people's hardware, and operating within the guidelines provided by Intel is a huge part of that. I'd believe maybe one or two motherboard vendors, but not most/all of them. Keep in mind that there are supposed to be safeguards in place to prevent a CPU from killing itself. There always used to be, so what changed? This is clearly an architecture issue, and if a 10% performance hit is required to fix it... That tells you all you need to know about what Intel tried to do here. AMD should have dominated performance this gen. If Intel had let them, at least they wouldn't be going through this fiasco. They'd be losing market share either way, but probably way less than they're losing now.
@@Gogoasa86 ya... this vid wreaks of chasing sponsorship
It's all Intel's fault - mostly - they admitted to it being microcode and manufacturing processes related - they're planning to put a patch out to fix it. We'll see how well that goes.
No it's not.
How did LTT take this as the mainboard manufacturers fault… this is literally the opposite of what everyone else is reporting. Likewise this could lead to intel taking the same road as NVIDIA and blocking messing with designs and overclocking
How much Intel paid Linus to blame MB manufacturers?
So far, MLID was spot on, so I'm just waiting for confirmation that this has little to do with mainboard manufacturers at all, but is squarely just Intel's design is shoddy and cooking the ring bus.
Not only MLID, but also Wendel from L1T. He showed CPUs getting cooked on workstation boards running at conservative settings. Blaming board partners is just a deflection from Intels attempts to beat AMD at any cost.
Intel is still better in EVERY WAY.. They are CHEAPER, have more performance and are energy efficient unlike amd who are so behind
@@FO0TMinecraftPVP are you paid by intel?
@@FO0TMinecraftPVP They even disintegrate themselves and providing you a reason to upgrade. Poor AMD buyers have to find good reasons to upgrade.
@@MrSethGrlooks like a shitty bot made by intel in order to deter naive buyers from AMD
So glad I went with a 7800x3d on my latest upgrade but man this sucks for the consumer. Spending over 400 on a processor and then you have to buy a new mobo with it just for it to be faulty on arrival that ain't right
@@1996connor Can’t really feel sorry for people choosing a CPU that pulls 350W just because it is 5% faster in some benchmarks
You were one of the lucky ones who didn't have their 7800X3D go pop on arrival?
What uh... what previous gen did you migrate your 7800X3D from?
The.... "6000 series" that was totally-for-real-a-thing on AM5?
Oh no, *you* bought a new motherboard for AM5.
The 13th and 14th gen Intel processors actually did *NOT* require a new motherboard, as they're cross-compatible between 12, 13, and 14th gen CPUs/Motherboards.
When you have to lie to make your point, you've lost the argument.
@@jefferyG499 Nope everything worked outside the box. Funnily enough I've had the same motherboard from 2017 to 2024. I went from a Ryzen 5 1600 to a 3600 and then this year to a 7800x3d. There's no need to cope so hard dude everybody knows Intel changes their Motherboards every 2 years.
@@1996connorAMD bot detected🫵🏼, opinion rejected 🙅♂️ 👊🏼
@@jefferyG499 It's pretty easy to keep them cross compatible when they're the same chips but slightly overclocked. 13th and 14th gen are the same gen.
I would point out... there is blame to be put on the MOBO manufacturers but they are not the issue... It is 100% the Intel Microcode... The instability is 100% to do with Intel and not their partners, at best the manufacturers are to blame for shortened lifespans on the CPU but the crashing and instability is all Intel...
This video sounds more like Intel sponsored.
This!
Sounds like they are either partners or have stock in intel that they are trying to protect
Wow, that was really heavy towards motherboard makers and pretty soft on Intel, along with actually being incorrect. At around 2:35 you claim it was the fault of some motherboards for not lowering the temperature till the CPU hit 100C. Yet on the Intel official spec pages, they list 100C as Max Operating Temperature for many of the CPU's that are now failing. So basically the motherboard was doing what Intel said it should, run the CPU as fast as possible (so that it can compete with AMD in benchmarks) and only slow it down if cooling isn't good enough to stop it going past 100C.
LTT is more casual than technical these days.
1: 13900T and 14900T are also having issues on non overclocking motherboards "W680", these are rated to hit 65watts..
2: The real reason for the crashes is more to do with the IO layer which is why you get data corruption on PCIe SSDs, and why lowering DDR5 speeds and disabling Ecores sometimes helps
3: This is a fundamental flaw in the IO layer and ringbus design, which is why its slightly older brother "12900KS" goes vroom vroom at similar voltages for years without fail.
So in Short, Intel made space for more Ecores and voltages but in doing so also made the ringbus and io layer far more fragile.
The only sure way to fix this, is to set a fixed speedstep frequency, disable all C states, and if some of the lanes are damaged move to a South bridge SSD to prevent corruption, secondly lower your DDR5 speeds, and set the voltage to a max of 1.4v if you're still seeing problems contact intel but in the meanwhile disable Ecores if possible.
The less your chip has to micro switch and the fewer vdroops from c states or wake up happen the better it is for that fragile io ringbus.
Good luck and good night from an actual Tech Lead, not some crypto scammer 🫡
It's always funny to see guys like you here in the comments but not making videos. Idc if linus is wrong, I care about the fact that there's loads of intelligent people like yourself that rather type paragraph with loads of useful information that no one is gonna digest because you rather put all your effort in a youtube comment, instead of putting effort into putting the right information out there the proper way. This is why a lot of people are uneducated with tech, it's due to people who are very intelligent like you, just gatekeeping the info and judging people for at least trying to educate others and gain their interest in the niche.
You can hate on linus as much as you want but he actually gets people interested in the subject of tech and gets the ball rolling for a lot of the problems the industry face.
And while he's doing that, all the smart people like yourself just sit in the comments talking crap, when your energy is best put into educating others the right way.
AND THATS NOT YOUR RESPONSIBILITY
But how do you expect anyone to care about your opinion when you don't even want to upload a video at all filled with valuable tech information??? Cause a big ass youtube paragraph is just annoying to read. I bet you're pretty pissed that you had to go through all of this text just to find out that you're wasting other people's time... you're not passionate, you don't care, you just want someone to notice you and compliment you for your comment.
@@BlackApathyy unfortunately I have a day job running 27 sites across Europe, also I can't publicly come out with whistleblower information without endangering contracts, as most large volume suppliers are only Intel based. I'm therefore unable to make videos, but the sad reality is. Linus has indeed a team and perhaps a few insiders himself telling him this, but he kept his mouth shut while Bryan from Tech yes city actually broke the real truth into this space. If you have read and understood my information you know it's true and thus your shilling just disappoints me.
@@BlackApathyy At least 10 people seem to have read it, judging by upvotes.
Why are you complaining about this? What do you think is "the proper way" to communicate corrections to a youtube video?
@@nathangamble125 Excellent point, I agree, but didn't want to enflame him anymore than he already was. The internet is great when it comes to sharing information and data to get to the heart of things, hopefully my advise might save even more i9's out there, which is why I posted it. All though my criticism seems harsh towards the creator of this video, I felt I needed to spread more detailed information in the hopes of helping others, if it only is one is saved, than at least I know my efforts didn't go to waste. P.S the Linus I grew up with use to show hacked chinese motherboards that supported cross generational intel cpu's that where not suppose to mix, which is why I perhaps come across a bit harsh towards the lack of real substans, Also all the information that was rehashed came from Wendell over at Level1 Tech and Steve from Gamersnexus, which combined do not have the same resources by a milion miles as LMG, but if I offended anyone, I duly apologize.
@@BlackApathyyYou start with complaining that they're writing too much in comments and not making videos and then proceed to write an even longer response...you think anyone is going to read your contribution?
Intel have been pushing their chips too hard the last few generations with their boost behaviour and the resulting voltages needed.
Intel should recall all the cpu affected. Even if you have no issue you had a certain amount of degradation and the lifetime is compromised. This is ridiculous, usually in the chip industry you have to respect a certain mission profile that includes the lifetime expected in certain conditions.
Quite honestly it feels this script was wrote before Intel investigated the issue further and realised it was their CPUs and micro code at fault . Not what was initially blamed on the motherboard manufacturer. I feel the blame on intel was not fully understood and our knowledge of the issue has developed on from what appears to be focused on in this video. In my humble opinion
My POV: MB manufacturers were tricking the user with Extreme Performance CPU profiles set as default while they simultaneously charged settings higher than it was specified by Intel. Users were not aware they use some settings out of Intel specs.
On the other hand Intel eng made some microcode mistakes that led to 1) overvoltage 2) instability.
There may also be damaged processors whose damage root cause is not fully investigated. It may be Oxidation problem that has gone to the market or it may be something else.
Two possibilities:
1. Weasel
2. Chicken
"The problem affects 13 and 14th gen chips"
Me with 12th gen smiling.
Real my i7-12700kf has been splendid and no issues have occurred :)
By far the most stable since Gen 11 (which also had issues).
I feel you from my own 12700k working great.
still on a 8700k
still sittin on 8th gen not feeling any need to upgrade.
I've had 5 BSOD's today within 10 minutes on a 14900K on a MSI Z690 board. Had to turn it off and go do something else. Experienced unexplained software crashing too over the last year. I've got press sample CPUs too so they're not retail.
It's also happening on server motherboards, I highly doubt they are squishing performance like the mainstream motherboards do, so I wouldn't blame the motherboards vendors for this
Why cant there be one that one company to blame? Both had bad practices, even if intel is accountable in the end
@@mlsasd6494 it could, but it's very unlikely to me supermicro is trying to get every last mhz boost to sell better like they portrait in the video.
@@itr00ow93 supermicro was not mentioned
@@mlsasd6494I think supermicro was used as an example considering they mainly make server stuff… server mobos don’t push the same way and they are still dying is the point.
Intel itself admitted their VID microcode was faulty, that's not the board manufacturer's fault
Thanks Steve.
Is this out of date? Did you record this 2 weeks ago?
Haha, yeah. More like 6 months ago. I can't believe I am seeing this video. They're like the only channel who's not saying "WTF Intel"?
Did either of you watch past the midpoint? Did you think the midroll ad is the end of the video?
@@darktrexczyou mean the section where Linus says it’s unclear who is at fault? 😂
@@JosePineda-jn8jk so 4:45 didn't happen?
@@darktrexcz you notice how he says some? He is creating speculation (just like intel) that it’s not directly their fault. I guess listening comprehension ain’t your thing.
The most recent Intel chip I bought was 11th gen. Based on this, the next chip I buy will be AMD.
I don't even really care that they effed up. I'm more concerned about them shifting the blame and being so silent on the matter for so long. As a consumer, that is incredibly frustrating because there is nothing you can do about it other than waiting for a class-action lawsuit.
The whole video sounds like "Intel CPU is not good but isnt THAT bad, trust me bro."
Making it sound like 75% of the fault is the MB manufacturers is rather misleading. If that was the case we would be seeing the same issue on AMD. Intel knew what it was doing by not giving adequate guidelines to manufaturers, thankfully it didn't end up being the get out of jail free card intel was hoping it would be.
I'm super frustrated. I built my new pc with a 13700k a year or so ago, and have noticed that my PC has been much more unstable than my old one (especially with certain games). I initially thought that it was a problem with my RTX 4070ti because graphics drivers, etc. have been blamed by almost every crash report that I've gotten even though I make sure to keep my drivers up to date. Recently it seems like it's been getting worse, with some files on my PC actually becoming corrupted. I don't want to have to be dealing with this crap. When I spend several hundred dollars on a CPU I shouldn't have to worry about there being issues with said CPU out of the box. Needless to say I have been thoroughly convinced by Intel that I should go with an AMD chip next time I upgrade.
AMD bot, didn’t you know that AMD faced a similar issue a year ago and then fixed it? Well Intel is no different now.
@@adelgubaishi I've never owned an AMD processor before. I have heard nothing about AMD having this issue. What I have experienced, however, is my current PC having tons of stability issues. I've also seen Intel refuse to do anything substantial like issue a recall or offer refunds to anyone affected by this (only if you have the original box, I guess). From what I've seen recently, AMD has been killing it and Intel has been killing itself. But I guess not fanboying over and defending a billion dollar corporation makes me an AMD bot? Whatever.
@@Dragonofshame Don't mind them, they're spamming that response on practically any comment not praising Intel
@@adelgubaishiamd didnt have that problem Asus did. it's not AMD fault if Asus goes over the voltage limit on their high end boards to push more performance out of AMD Chips without testing it first.
@@coffee7180 oh so with amd it's the board manufacturer's fault, but with Intel it's Intel problem event though it was proven otherwise, got it.
I would LOVE to listen to the phone call happened between Linus and Pat Gelsinger (the CEO of Intel) right before this video :D I really don't buy it Linus, you say every motherboard manufacturer is uncapable to degrade an AMD CPU? All you say is invalid, why doesn't you apply the same logic to AMD or any other Intel CPU prior to 13th gen? Because those chips are faulty. And Intel should replace them. End of story.
step 1: understand you bought a defective product that the company likely knew about.
step 2: proceed in the next steps however you deem fit.
Step 3: Buy AMD or ARM.
Intel: Linus can you run a video to help us not look so bad?
Linus: How much money you got?
Intel: MY Maaaaan!
Gamers Nexus:We’re releasing a video about Intel.
Intel: No no no no no no no no no wait wait wait noooo
You do realise that LMG in general reaches a more casual audience which is not too deeply involved in the tech news. Thus any information about intel issues is a big net negative as they probably did not hear about it before. Companeis would pay you to not make such a video, but they did to inform the more casual audience to update their bios. No tinfoil hat needed
@@mlsasd6494 this video minimizes intels role in the issues they are having and puts the bulk of the blame on board manufacturers.
I AM a casual viewer, but as an electrician I know the load determines how much power it pulls. The source has fail safes to prevent too much power from being pulled. In this case the MAIN issue is that Intels chips are pulling too much power at too high a voltage causing early degradation. That’s a design issue on the chip side NOT the board side. Yes the board could be updated with a bios to prevent it feeding crazy voltages, but that doesn’t change the fact the chips design is causing it to want to pull that power.
@@mlsasd6494 You've been posting in dozens of comments which are suggesting - accurately - that LTT are misplacing the proportion of responsibility here.
I sure hope you're being compensated for that, because doing it for free is just....weird.
Can confirm.... was shocked to see a value of "22" for CPU Lite Load (maximum was 23 btw.) after BIOS update, which immediately explained the high temperatures...
I did not want to overclock the CPU and use stock settings until I decide to overclock but now, thanks to this, I had to go through all this trouble to figure out how to resolve the issue...
With very little information online about what all these settings mean, do, and how to configure them properly.
My customer experience is really not that great after many days and hours of research and still no clue if it is set up correctly now :/
5:25 it doesn't affect my 65W i5 13500 , it only affects i5 13600K and above because the processors below that are on an Alder Lake Dye. Minor correction :) . Big fan.
Is the i5 13400T affected ?
RIP to the guy who invested 700k into this mess of a company
rip his grandma
To be fair, I just bought Intel stock recently, after their plummet. Now is the time to get in on it. Intel isn't going out of business anytime soon I think, and they're probably going to bounce back at some point in the future.
If you have 700k. You have 700k more. Dont worry for rich people
@@fillsbury8304 Wow, honestly never looked at it this way
@@Blackbirdone11that 700k was his inheritance lol
"13th/14th gen CPUs fail in W680 boards"
.
That sentence alone disregards this video.
Thanks to @LordApophis100 in comments, reminding us of the W680 boards :)
To those reading, W680 boards are server class motherboards that do not prioritize performance. It's focused on stability rather than overclocking or performance, maybe even just operating at or below stock specs. See GN's video on how intel tech support is 10X more than AMD, why a company decides to switch all of their servers to AMD, and why motherboards doesn't share the blame here (although in general they can, but not today)...
@@giovannyc.1724
I more belive Linus, GN only drama.
Even GN doesn't know undervolt will solve Intel issue from his drama, and why for longtime ago many Hardware reviewer always suggest to undervolt intel CPU.
But yes, W & H chipset doesn't have ability to undervolt CPU, that's why they need microcode.
@@mizrachayityou didnt even watch gamers nexus video on Intel if you think the only issue is cpu degradation.
@@mizrachayit If you have to tune anything in a CPU straight out of the box to prevent it from destroying itself then it's a defective product
You are shitting me. This is why my games have been crashing. Swapped my 13900ks for my old 12th gen 12900k. Dead ass stable in games now. Thought my gpu was dying.
Not the first time Linus doesn’t know what is talking about xD.
It’s not about load lines from mb manufacturing. It’s intel PL states and how they wanted to maintain higher clocks for 10 second to have better CB scores than AMD.
Intel is providing everything to MB manufactures, there is literally zero fault on them.
Yeah, that makes me think why people still sub... Nowadays Linus is good for entertainment only.
Whenever I watch a video about this intel issue I can't help but wonder how many users out there have no idea.
Found out about this today through a random youtube short ☠... I am happy my pc atleast runs stable yet...
Intel's horrible anti-consumer behavior in this matter is becoming more of an issue than the CPU failures themselves. A broken CPU can be fixed, broken trust on this level is fatal for a company.
Its good to see you referenced Gamers Nexus. No hard feelings, that's the best way to improve, to take criticism, learn from it and improve.
Now if they had also understood what this is all about instead of throwing mainboard manufacturers under the bus instead of the real culprit...
@@danieloberhofer9035they didn’t do that, maybe watch again and listen this time
@@robbo_ Well, hammering MB manufacturers for 4 min. and 47 sec. in an 8 min. video before even mentioning Intel might be somewhat responsible is a strange way of "not doing that" - don't you think? More so if it's also on Intel to comprehensively mandate how their CPUs should be powered? *And* it's now clear and confirmed by Intel themselves that the issue is there regardless? They didn't mention this in the video *at all* .
@@danieloberhofer9035 "hammering" lmao. you have a future in writing articles for clickbait websites
@@robbo_dude, the video is literally saying Intel's fault lies solely on them not being strict to the MB vendors. Did you watch the video from the start to the end?
Just BIOS limiting the PL in watts doesn't tame the microcode's boosting voltages to get the single core to hit the out of box targets Intel was promising customers. They are the ones who went out of spec of their 10nm silicon. The microcode wasn't behaving incorrectly either, they made these boosting algorithms on purpose to eek out benchmark victories for their over-extended 13th and 14th gen products that they should have just not released until they had a viable product taped out on a better node.
First they blamed their motherboard partners, now they have Linus shilling for people to nerf their CPUs before the problem (which they won't admit to) causes them more financial harm while they validate some new method of f*ckery to boost voltages in some different manner. They probably want to make the CPU touch 6Ghz for 1.5 seconds or something just so people can't sue them.
You got it, man. I admit this video finally made me dislike linus' "public figure". There was just too much tippy topping around the idea of blaming Intel for selling silicon that, unfortunately to them, looks like fried chips just before warranty expires.
There's nothing else to say about corporate business, linus does it, intel does it, and that's it. The best outcome would be intel solving it via bios update, not likely. The next best thing would be Intel releasing a useful bios update, plus extended warranty, but it is not on the cards.. I only expect Intel to be as rude and careless for their customers' interests as any major corporation, its nature.
What really sucks about this, is the profound impact of corporate greed thru and thru the food chain.
From milking out a great product for a decade whilst there's no competition to worry about, to releasing out a product some sector of you most likely knew was flawed, up to the lies spurred out in your defense by your partners and associates, alike.
Looking for this comment. There you go 👑
God, that pronunciation of VAGUE was weird 😂
This is way too soft on intel. So all the board partners happened to get it wrong simultaneously? The fact that it isn’t contained to specific motherboard partners tells you this is 100% intel’s fault. Watch the Gamer’s Nexus video for more info on how bad intel messed this one up
Yup, my 14900K from November 2023 made it up until April of this year. Had to RMA it.
Haven’t had any problems with the new one nor with the one my wife has had since February of this year.
I will probably switch to AMD for my next CPU though, after having been an Intel fan boy for years
Yes, both my 13th and the replacement14th gen from micro center have had stability issues at “stock” settings even after bios updates
thats for sure an interesting way of putting this...
Linus trying to cover up what is clearly Intel's fault.
Its a good coverup if he is saying „intel is responsible for this and this“
this seems like a moderately dishonest announcement as an intel sponsored company, much better to watch steve for any real and honest information about the situation.
There's no fixing it if it's oxidized. Only replacing.
This is a clear example of how you need to manage/navigate the relationship with a big sponsor of yours business. If you are harsh and lethal you will burn a bridge 100%. There's always a tradeoff with big things, remember.
but here Linus is LYING
@@Benman2785 no he's not. They are choosing an informative side of the story, avoiding directly blaming Intel.
@@Benman2785show me the lie
The root cause part of this video is just straight up false based on current information
Thankyou Intel for sponsoring this video.
This video does not look like the other: "All 13 and 14 gen are damaged/exploded/imploded. RMA does not accept them. Intel is sh.t. And their processors were hyperoxidized to get rusted tomorrow evening."
I'm on my 4th 13900K, 2 of them RMA'd through retailer, one is currently being RMA'd with Intel.
I've been telling them for nearly 2 years that there's a problem and sent in all my investigations and experiences.
The problem is architectural. Not bios.
A combination of bad architecture and bad microcode. But yes, both purely Intel.
@@jaredamos5064exacerbated by bad bios which was poorly overseen by intel. Why would we NOT blame MB manufacturers as well for their bad practices?
@mlsasd6494 yes, because the W680 workstation class motherboards which are very conservative on their settings, prioritizing reliability and stability, pushed the chips too hard... yeah....
@@jaredamos5064 two things can be true at once, a) Raptorlake has a critical flaw that leads to rapid degradation and b) if pushed with more voltage by the mb the degradation increases. Why would we not blame mb makers for making the problem worse?
@mlsasd6494 it was the microcode, the CPU instructions from intel themselves that was requesting such high voltages as 6V, not the BIOS. While it is true mbs like to push the envelope, in this instance, even the default safe intel settings would have the MB being controlled by the CPU itself, and so if the CPU requests 6V it'll give the 6V
Linus and UserBenchmark sitting in a tree, s-h-i-l-l-i-n-g
My 14700k has crashed multiple times when playing games like helldivers 2 and even slime rancher 2. I have also has crashes during cinebench, prime-95, and just while browsing on google. Not nearly as frequently as some others have claimed, but still way more than I find acceptable on a $400 cpu.
Better watch Gamers Nexus video than this, Linus sold his soul to Intel
it was literally wrote my level1techs
Before this was a well known issue, I told everyone I knew that was having issues to turn their Power Option setting in control panel to power saver even when it wasn't a laptop. Kept mine and others cpus from using boosted clock speeds for no reason. Also lower temps in the summer.
Will the real slim shady please stand up, we're gonna have a problem here.
Intel also is to blame here, because they were ok when motherboard makers pushed higher than base settings, because that also made intel processor look better in reviews.
And this has been happening for more than a decade.
But what is breaking chips this time is a design flaw in the chips, coupled with intel raising the fequencies and voltages to levels that design couldn't handle, except for a subset of really good bined chips that are doing ok. And thats another side of the problem, they bined chips as being able to support a tier of performance that in reality they couldn't.
If you are wondering where is the design flaw, it's in the ring bus design, it's coupled with the core voltage, and it has less tolerance to voltage than the cores, but Intel kept pushing Frequency and voltage, so yea, the processor runs faster, but the ring bus cooks itself.
Then theres the microcode issue, and the oxidation issue, which also weren't handled properly.
not "also". they are the only ones to blame here
@@jacobgaysawyer337 Both Intel and motherboard makers are to blame, but yea Intel played a much bigger part here.
my 14900kf started to have issues around a month ago. The first descendant wouldn't even launch. I would get crashes & BSOD playing league of legends and I'm crashing every other map in Path of Exile. Thankfully, IBuyPower is issuing an RMA for my processor. The pc is only 3 months old as well.
This is like the 5th time in a week I randomly read a 14th gen fail in 3 months. Isn't that a little too fast for voltage degradation ? Wow. Hopefully your replacement will be from the good batch.
Why i9 for league of legends??😭 You could buy i5 that is better than i9 10gen and it would be nearly no diference
Board designer & engineer here
LL was meant to mitigate the voltage lossess you have when delivering hundreds of amps across the board.
One milliohm of impedance means a voltage drop of 0.2V when deliviring 200 amps in the cpu.
The problem is when you set the LL above the actual impedance of the board. If you do, and you can since nobody bothered to set the maximum value specifically for each manufacturer/model, then you are frying your cpu.
Mobo manufacturers have an advantage doing so, because you get better perfomance for a while.
Lessons from this. Dont rely on Intel OR Linus.