Thursday, March 28th 2024
Developers of Outpost Infinity Siege Recommend Underclocking i9-13900K and i9-14900K for Stability on Machines with RTX 4090
Outpost: Infinity Siege developers recommend underclocking Intel's current and previous flagship desktop processors, the Core i9-14900K and i9-13900K, to prevent the game from crashing. This recommendation goes out to those with a GeForce RTX 4090 paired with either a Core i9-13900K or i9-14900K, we're fairly sure that the recommendation even extends to those with i9-14900KS and i9-13900KS. Team Ranger, the developers of the game, just released their second patch in just a week following the game's launch. In the patch notes, they ask users to use Intel Extreme Tuning Utility (XTU), to lower the P-core clock speeds down to at least 5.00 GHz (maximum boost). This development closely follows a February 2024 report which says that game stability issues of high-end "Raptor Lake" processors are linked to power limit unlocks.
Source:
Tom's Hardware
85 Comments on Developers of Outpost Infinity Siege Recommend Underclocking i9-13900K and i9-14900K for Stability on Machines with RTX 4090
wccftech.com/intel-13th-14th-gen-cpu-gaming-stability-investigated-chips-being-returned-in-korea/
Running chips out of spec can of course cause problems, but that applies to all chip vendors, as an example if I try to even bump my 2600X by 100mhz its unstable, its stock settings are "right at the limit". Its not faulty as at spec its stable.
I do not think that Intel is enforcing specs well enough, and it does not matter much, if the specs themselves are pushed to the edge.
You can see in the above screenshot from the Korean site, that even a small numbers of failing chips can cause problems to customers and vendors, because even customers with at the moment fully functional chips want to get rid of them, when they lost confidence that they can run reliably.
BTW even when we talk about a special variant of the CPU - fully unlocked and user configurable K model - such special CPU should be in no way less reliable, while running in specs, than the normal CPUs.
It is really painful to see, what Intel does to their own products. For example 14900K limited to 180W power draw runs under an air cooler with the worst Cinebench load really cool - after few minutes the absolute maximum temperature over all cores was 73°C (average temperature much lower, P cores running at 4900 MHz), I just tested it quickly this morning before I left to work.
When you also run limited frequency (lower than specs), you never see even that temperature, when I loaded the P cores with heavy load and let them run at 5200 Mhz, their max temp was lower than what I mentioned.
I would like to know the comparison of actual electric currents running in the silicon in the two variants of 14900K - my 14900K limited to 5200/4200 MHz and 180W and a stock 14900K placed in the motherboard that does not even enforce the Intel specs power limits. The strain each silicon chip endures in these two scenarios should be somehow quantifiable.
It should be also noted that temperature sensors are not everywhere in the silicon and the differences in REAL MAXIMAL temperatures reached in the chips could be dramatically between the above mentioned settings.
I just learned, that according to Blacks equation for electromigration doubling current density can mean reducing mean time to failure up to a fourth, with higher temperature making it even worse.
EDIT:
I tried to calculate Blacks equation for the activation energy 0,9 eV, current density exponent 1,2, doubling current density and increasing temperature from 60°C (333K) to 100°C (373K), and I got 66 times shorter time before failure. Did I make a mistake in the calculation? It seems wrong.
Increasing temperature by 57/60°C caused tenfold decrease of the time to reach the same amount of failures.
BTW I cannot find ANY white papers or documentation from Intel about current CPUs.
Intel 14th Gen Mass Failures Leak, AMD Zen 7, Nvidia RTX 5090 & 5080, TSMC 2nm | Broken Silicon 254 (youtube.com)
quoted a retailer: