Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

July 2024 Update on Instability Reports on Intel Core 13th/14th Gen Desktop CPUs

community.intel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 216 posts

Re: July 2024 Update on Instability Reports on Intel Core 13th/14th Gen Desktop CPUs

#151

Post by LtdJorge »

giantg2 wrote: post #143
Dylan16807 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not sure what we're comparing them to. They should be capable of higher clock than the E cores. Oh, just higher clocked than the E cores. Yeah that's true, but if you're using that many cores at once you probably only care about total speed. You said 12 core with higher clock versus 8, so I thought you were comparing to the performance cores. > I thought all the AMD cores had the ability to hit the max frequenc…

"The cores under the 3D cache have a notable clock penalty on existing CPUs." Interesting. I can't find any info on that. It seems that makes sense though since the 7900X is 50 TDP higher than the 7900X3D. "Right, but my point is it's misleading to call out higher core count and the advantages of 3D stacking" Yeah, that makes sense. I didn't realize there was a clock penalty on some of the cores with the 3D cache and…

It's due to the stacked cache being harder to cool and not supporting as high of a voltage. So the 3D CCD clocks lower, but for some workloads it's still faster (mainly ones dealing with large buffers, like games, most compute heavy benchmarks fit in normal caches and the non 3D V-Cache variants take the win).

Re: July 2024 Update on Instability Reports on Intel Core 13th/14th Gen Desktop CPUs

#152

Post by LtdJorge »

J_Shelby_J wrote: post #115
salamo wrote: post #108

Is there any info on how to diagnose this problem? Having just put together a computer with the 14900KF, I really don't want to swap it out if not necessary.

OCCP burn in test with AVX and XMP disabled. Tbh, XMP is probably the cause of most modern crashes on gaming rigs. It does not guarantee stability. After finding a stable cpu frequency, enable xmp and roll back the memory frequency until you have no errors in occp. The whole thing can be done in 20 minutes and your machine will have 24/7/365 uptime.

This is good advice for overclocking, but how does it help with the 13th/14th Gen issue? The issue is not due to clocks, or at least doesn't appear to be.

Re: July 2024 Update on Instability Reports on Intel Core 13th/14th Gen Desktop CPUs

#153

Post by ploek »

nullindividual wrote: post #65
giantg2 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was recently looking at building and buying a couple systems. I've always liked Intel. I went AMD this time. It seemed like the base frequencies vs boost frequencies were much farther apart on Intel than with most of the AMDs. This was especially true on the laptops were cooling is a larger concern. So I suspect they were pushing limits. Also, the performance core vs efficiency core stuff seemed kind of gimmicky wi…

> It seems AMD had an issue supporting ECC with the current chipsets. AMD has the advantage with regards to ECC. Intel doesn't support ECC at all on consumer chips, you need to go Xeon. AMD supports it on all chips, but it is up to the motherboard vendor to (correctly) implement. You can get consumer-class AM4/5 boards that have ECC support.

> AMD supports it on all chips

Unfortunately not. I can't say for current gen, but the 5000 series APUs like the 5600G do not support ECC. I know, I tried...

But yes, most Ryzen CPUs do have ECC functionality, and have had it since the 1000 series, even if not officially supported. Official support for ECC is only on Ryzen PRO parts.

Re: July 2024 Update on Instability Reports on Intel Core 13th/14th Gen Desktop CPUs

#154

Post by nahnahno »

dboreham wrote: post #37
pitaj wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are they saying that their CPUs are signaling the mainboards to give them too much voltage? Yes that's exactly what they said.

So it's a 737 MAX problem: the software is running a control loop that doesn't have deflection limits. So it tells the stabilizer (or voltage reg in this case) to go hard nose down.

lol what a stretch of an analogy

Re: July 2024 Update on Instability Reports on Intel Core 13th/14th Gen Desktop CPUs

#155

Post by cesarb »

Pet_Ant wrote: post #150
chmod775 wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> can cause physical degradation of the chip in some cases. Not in some cases. Chips always physically degrade regardless of voltage. Higher voltages will make it happen faster.

Why do chis degrade? Is this due to the whiskers I’ve heard about?

> Why do chis degrade? Is this due to the whiskers I’ve heard about?

No, tin whiskers are a separate issue, which happens mostly outside the chips. The keyword you're looking for is electromigration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromigration).

Re: July 2024 Update on Instability Reports on Intel Core 13th/14th Gen Desktop CPUs

#157

Post by ChoGGi »

starspangled wrote: post #148
phire wrote: post #100

I find it hard to believe that it actually is a microcode issue. Mostly because Intel has way too much motivation to pass it off as a microcode issue, as they can fix a microcode issue for free, by pushing out a patch. If it's an actual hardware issue, then Intel will be forced to actually recall all the faulty CPUs, which could cost them billions. The other reason, is that it took them way too long to give details.…

All modern CPUs come out of the factory with many many bugs. The errata you see published are only the ones that they find after shipping (if you're lucky, they might not even publish all errata). Many bugs are fixed in testing and qualification before shipping. That's how CPU design goes. The way that is done is by pushing as much to firmware as possible, adding chicken switches and fallback paths, and all sorts of…

I agree with most of what you said, so cherry picking one thingy to reply to isn't my intention, but

"And some bugs just take a while to find and fix."

I think it's less that it took awhile to find the bug/etc, more so that they've been pretty much radio silent for six months. AMD had the issue with burning 7 series CPUs, they were quick to at least put out a statement that they'll make customers whole again.

Re: July 2024 Update on Instability Reports on Intel Core 13th/14th Gen Desktop CPUs

#158

Post by mackal »

jwond wrote: post #70
nullindividual wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It seems AMD had an issue supporting ECC with the current chipsets. AMD has the advantage with regards to ECC. Intel doesn't support ECC at all on consumer chips, you need to go Xeon. AMD supports it on all chips, but it is up to the motherboard vendor to (correctly) implement. You can get consumer-class AM4/5 boards that have ECC support.

Actually some of the 13th and 14th gen Intel Core processors support ECC.

Intel has always had randomly supported ECC on desktop CPUs. Sometimes it was just a few low end SKUs, sometimes higher end SKUs. 14th gen it appears i9s and i7s do, didn't check i5s, but i3s did not.

Re: July 2024 Update on Instability Reports on Intel Core 13th/14th Gen Desktop CPUs

#159

Post by officeplant »

yieldcrv wrote: post #72
HeliumHydride wrote: post #61

https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/mickens/files/theslowwinte... "Unfortunately for John, the branches made a pact with Satan and quantum mechanics [...] In exchange for their last remaining bits of entropy, the branches cast evil spells on future genera- tions of processors. Those evil spells had names like “scaling- induced voltage leaks” and “increasing levels of waste heat” [...] the branches, those vanquished foe…

> According to my dad, flying in airplanes used to be fun... Everybody was attractive .... this is how I feel about electric car supercharging stations at the moment. There is a definitely a privilege aspect, which some attractive people are beneficiaries of in a predictable way, as well as other expensive maintenance for their health and attraction. so I could see myself saying the same thing to my children

I'm ruining that trend by charging my E-Transit in nice places and dressing poorly.

Re: July 2024 Update on Instability Reports on Intel Core 13th/14th Gen Desktop CPUs

#160

Post by smolder »

nullindividual wrote: post #65
giantg2 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was recently looking at building and buying a couple systems. I've always liked Intel. I went AMD this time. It seemed like the base frequencies vs boost frequencies were much farther apart on Intel than with most of the AMDs. This was especially true on the laptops were cooling is a larger concern. So I suspect they were pushing limits. Also, the performance core vs efficiency core stuff seemed kind of gimmicky wi…

> It seems AMD had an issue supporting ECC with the current chipsets. AMD has the advantage with regards to ECC. Intel doesn't support ECC at all on consumer chips, you need to go Xeon. AMD supports it on all chips, but it is up to the motherboard vendor to (correctly) implement. You can get consumer-class AM4/5 boards that have ECC support.

ECC support wasn't good initially on AM5, but there are now Epyc branded chips for the AM5 socket which officially support ECC DDR5. They come in the same flavors as the Ryzen 7xx0 chips, but are branded as Epyc.
Post reply on HN