Friday, July 26th 2024

Intel Will Not Recall Failing 13th and 14th Gen CPUs

It's official, Intel will not issue a recall for its failing 13th and 14th gen CPUs, despite the problem being much bigger than initially thought. The company was approached by The Verge and the answers to the questions asked, are not looking great. First of all, it appears that at least all 65 W or higher base power Intel 13th and 14th gen CPUs are affected—regardless of SKU and lettering—by the so-called elevated Voltage issue. To be clear, it doesn't mean all these CPUs will start to fail and Intel claims that its microcode update will solve the issue for CPUs that haven't shown any signs of stability issues. However, Intel is not promising that the microcode update will solve the stability issues of CPUs that are experiencing problems, but rather state that "It is possible the patch will provide some instability improvements", but it's asking those with stability issues to contact customer support. The patch is on the other hand expected to solve it for new CPUs, but that doesn't help those that are already experiencing stability issues.

Intel does appear to be swapping out degraded chips, but there's no guarantee that the replacement CPUs will come with the microcode update installed, as Intel is only starting to apply it to products that are currently being produced. The company has also asked all of its OEM partners to apply the update before shipping out new products, but this isn't likely to happen until sometime in early to mid-August according to Intel. It's also unclear when BIOS/UEFI updates will be available for end users from the motherboard manufacturers, since this is the only way to install the microcode update as a consumer. Intel has not gone on record to say if it'll extend the warranty of the affected products, nor did the company provide any details about what kind of information consumers have to provide to their customer support to be able to RMA a faulty CPU. Intel will not halt sales of the affected CPUs either, which means that if you're planning to or are in the middle of building a system using said CPUs, you might want to wait with using it, until a BIOS/UEFI with the microcode update in it, is available for your motherboard. There are more details over at The Verge for those that want to read the full questions and answers, but it's clear that Intel isn't considering the issue as anything more than a regular support issue at this point in time.
Source: The Verge
Add your own comment

270 Comments on Intel Will Not Recall Failing 13th and 14th Gen CPUs

#76
oxrufiioxo
thesmokingmanWhat you need to do is stop justifying this shit. :rolleyes:
I'm kinda with him on that at this point at least wait 6-12 months, Both AMD and Nvidia had gpu issues this past generation regardless of how big or small, and both intel and amd had cpu issues.....

This is the worst of the 4 by far but that doesn't change the fact that stuff seems like it is being rushed to market these days.

I really just want to see how intel handles RMA's at this point before I ever buy a CPU from them again.
Posted on Reply
#77
phanbuey
P4-630I don't care much, my own 12th gen CPU runs fine, no issues for me.
I'm still waiting for Arrow Lake, I'm sure they don't want to happen this again with their next gen CPU's.
I mean i've had no stability issues with a day 1 13700KF and MSI mobo -- easily one of the most stable platforms / nicest platforms i've had so far.

Really curious to see what the actual numbers of the issue are after the OMFG ZOMG 100% FAIL RATE techtuber clickbaits die down. I doubt these issues are as widespread as they are made out to be.
Posted on Reply
#78
kondamin
eidairaman1The 13 line is a generation behind.
in name, 14gen is 13gen
Posted on Reply
#79
Chaitanya
ymdhisDon't worry about that, they just changed the CEO in charge of their foundry manufacturing from a big nosed person to an indian person. I'm expecting them to get stuck on a node again pretty soon, like how they couldn't jump away from 14nm for like six generations.
That person with big nose has leeched millions from tax payers and now is taking his business across the ocean as Made in 'murica chips are destroying themselves.

Intel did recall both cpus and chipsets in past so this is puzzling move.

On a serious note Gelsinger has been a disaster for Intel and this new saga of failing chips just after getting subsidies should call for an investigation by US govt.
Posted on Reply
#80
Caring1
Testsubject01Arc is unaffected! :p
As far as we know so far :pimp:
Posted on Reply
#81
InVasMani
Arc could be dead on arrival with the hill Intel is choosing to die on.
Posted on Reply
#82
InVasMani
A lot is riding on how well the microcode addresses the issues and/or how much damage is already done to hardware and how Intel handles it all.
Posted on Reply
#83
R0H1T
ymdhisDon't worry about that, they just changed the CEO in charge of their foundry manufacturing from a big nosed person to an indian person. I'm expecting them to get stuck on a node again pretty soon, like how they couldn't jump away from 14nm for like six generations.
So then all the OEM BS during the 2004-06 era or contra revenues bribes a decade back & this sh!t is on who exactly? The American in charge right, not the Indian (American) leading the foundry :rolleyes:

Really subtle that, good job :wtf:
Posted on Reply
#84
JustBenching
Dr. DroDisastrous handling of the situation... Intel can and should do better. They don't have an universal, or hell, a lead at all over the competition. Best not to get complacent.
It would be impossible to do a recall 2 years after release. How many units are we actually talking about? Hundreds of thousands? Millions maybe?

But seems like the issue is the single rail that feeds pcores / ecores / cache. Remember a couple of weeks ago I said that my 12900k gets immediate degradation on the cache at or above 1.4v? Well, since over 1.4v is kinda common for 13 and 14th gen, it looks like it's the cache that goes kaput.

Probably the microcode update will cap the cache at 4ghz instead of the stock 4.5 and that's it


Nevermind, they said their microcode won't fix the issue. So they will just make sure new chips don't degrade and RMA the problematic ones.
Posted on Reply
#85
R0H1T
And how are measuring it's just degradation of the cache? Is that even possible without "degrading" other parts of the core? You're just speculating much like the rest of us o_O
Posted on Reply
#86
JustBenching
R0H1TAnd how are measuring it's just degradation of the cache? Is that even possible without "degrading" other parts of the core? You're just speculating much like the rest of us o_O
Testing on my alderlake it's exactly what happened, P and ecores are still fine, but I have to downclock the cache to work at my previous stable settings. This seems to align with the rumors / leaks MLID (im not posting links cause i don't want to give clicks) is posting on his latest video.

EG1. Also crashes are usually connected to the memory / cache subsystem. A degraded core will usually result in clock_watchdog BSOD.
Posted on Reply
#87
Dr. Dro
fevgatosIt would be impossible to do a recall 2 years after release. How many units are we actually talking about? Hundreds of thousands? Millions maybe?

But seems like the issue is the single rail that feeds pcores / ecores / cache. Remember a couple of weeks ago I said that my 12900k gets immediate degradation on the cache at or above 1.4v? Well, since over 1.4v is kinda common for 13 and 14th gen, it looks like it's the cache that goes kaput.

Probably the microcode update will cap the cache at 4ghz instead of the stock 4.5 and that's it
Reducing spec after the product launched is not an acceptable solution, IMO. Especially for SKUs targeted at the enthusiast segment. But I don't think it'll come down to that. And well, may be millions - but Intel is still responsible for replacing every damaged chip.
Posted on Reply
#88
john_
Vayra86That would be true in the quad core era, but there are excellent competitor chips now.
It doesn't really matter. People have preferences. People who are used to Intel platforms will remain to Intel platforms. The same for people who are used to AMD. Logic suggests that Intel will not mess for a second time in a row so people will rush to get the next Intel model.

I don't expect Intel to suffer much from this, even when seemingly mishandling this case so much by not accepting RMAs. And they know it, that's why they aren't going to do RMAs or recalling the whole bunch of CPUs sold. A recall will remain in history and get much more press coverage, RMAs will cost them greatly and probably drag the problem for years because CPUs will probably keep failing. Saying that "we throw out a microcode and we are done", makes it look like a typical case and nothing more. They react as politicians where being honest and admitting something is sometimes much worst than pretending publicly that it doesn't exist.
Posted on Reply
#89
JustBenching
Dr. DroReducing spec after the product launched is not an acceptable solution, IMO. Especially for SKUs targeted at the enthusiast segment. But I don't think it'll come down to that. And well, may be millions - but Intel is still responsible for replacing every damaged chip.
Yeah I was wrong, just read their statement more closely, microcode won't change clocks since it won't fix the problematic cpus. They will just RMA those on demand.
john_I don't expect Intel to suffer much from this, even when seemingly mishandling this case so much by not accepting RMAs. And they know it, that's why they aren't going to do RMAs
???

Who said they are not doing RMAs? The article literally says that they are in fact replacing the problematic products.
Posted on Reply
#90
R0H1T
Si level degradation will rarely be limited to just that part of the chip. Pretty sure it will spread, now whether you can measure that accurately or not is a different topic.
Dr. DroReducing spec after the product launched is not an acceptable solution, IMO.
Huh? Pretty sure that's a legal case in 99% of the countries out there!
Posted on Reply
#91
usiname
Beside the already damaged CPUs, the micro code update most likely will reduce the performance of every existing Raptor Lake well bellow what was advertised in the reviews
Posted on Reply
#92
remixedcat
usinameBeside the already damaged CPUs, the micro code update most likely will reduce the performance of every existing Raptor Lake well bellow what was advertised in the reviews
Imagine paying for an i7 or i9 and getting an i5...
Posted on Reply
#93
stimpy88
Wow Intel, the balls on you!!! With a near 50% failure rate, you dig in... Such inspire, much BS.
Posted on Reply
#94
Gatt
Somewhere I've read that even some non-K CPU are affected. Is that true?
Posted on Reply
#95
R0H1T
Possibly & quite likely, K chips are the same just OCed & OVed siblings.
Posted on Reply
#96
john_
fevgatosWho said they are not doing RMAs? The article literally says that they are in fact replacing the problematic products.
Not for everyone and I am expecting their policy after the new firmware is out to change to
"User Error, because the user didn't applied the new firmware on time to prevent degradation".
Posted on Reply
#97
Gatt
Thank you. I stress tested my i9-14900 with and without any limit. So far so good. But, who knows ...
Posted on Reply
#98
Nostras
GattSomewhere I've read that even some non-K CPU are affected. Is that true?
You can check the linked source, in the article it is mentioned that all 65W and up chips are affected. 13th and 14th gen of course.

(It's also mentioned in this post @ TPU lol)
Posted on Reply
#99
Sora
whats with this news post?

microcode is not installed on the cpu, it is etched in at fab time
the bios side module that reprograms the behaviors of the chip from altering svid scale to patching / delaying ops in the instruction translator and faciliating the full function of the processor is not installed on the cpu, but updates the microprograms run on it.

if you rma a bad cpu and put a new one of the same stepping into a motherboard that hasn't been flashed, of course it'll suffer the same fate
Posted on Reply
#100
Dr. Dro
remixedcatImagine paying for an i7 or i9 and getting an i5...
This is not going to happen. If anything, an undervolt may slightly increase performance, especially on Core i9, as the formula for eTVB is essentially lower volts = lower watts = lower heat = higher clocks
GattSomewhere I've read that even some non-K CPU are affected. Is that true?
Yes. Every SKU. Intel claims "65 W and up" on consumer-facing material, but there's evidence the T-series (35W spec) SKUs are also affected. If you wanna double on being safe, go on your BIOS and set a negative core voltage offset of something like -0.050. Should be enough to keep it safe until this blows over and likely won't be an unstable undervolt.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 26th, 2024 05:34 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts