Monday, August 5th 2024
Puget Systems Releases CPU Failure Report: AMD CPUs Achieve Higher Failure Rate Than Intel 13th and 14th Generation
A fleet of recent reports have highlighted stability issues affecting Intel's 13th and 14th-generation desktop processors, raising concerns among consumers and industry professionals. The problem, which has gained significant attention over the past few months, is related to the processors' physical degradation over time. Custom PC builder Puget Systems has shared insights from its experience with these processors, revealing a nuanced perspective on the issue. While it has observed an increase in CPU failures, particularly with the 14th-generation chips, its failure rates remain notably lower than those reported by some game development studios and cloud gaming providers, who have cited failure rates as high as 50%. An interesting observation is that Puget Systems recorded a higher failure rate with AMD Ryzen 5000 and Ryzen 7000 series than Intel's 13/14th generation, with most failures happening at Puget's shop rather than the "field" in customers' hands.
Puget Systems attributes their more modest failure rates of Intel processors to their conservative approach to power management settings. By adhering strictly to Intel's specifications and developing their own power settings that don't hurt performance, they've managed to mitigate some of the stability issues plaguing other users. Intel has acknowledged the problem and announced plans to release a microcode patch by mid-August, with extended warranty program. This update is expected to prevent further degradation but may not reverse existing damage. Despite the elevated failure rates, Puget Systems' data shows that the issue, while concerning, still needs to be at critical levels for their operations. The company reports that failure rates for 13th and 14th gen Intel processors, while higher than ideal, are still lower than those they experienced with Intel's 11th gen chips and some AMD Ryzen processors. In response to the situation, Puget Systems is taking several steps, including maintaining its current power management practices, promptly validating Intel's upcoming microcode update, and extending warranties for affected customers. Below, you can see failure rates by month, by Intel's Core generation, as well as by "shop" vs "field" testing.
Source:
Puget Systems
Puget Systems attributes their more modest failure rates of Intel processors to their conservative approach to power management settings. By adhering strictly to Intel's specifications and developing their own power settings that don't hurt performance, they've managed to mitigate some of the stability issues plaguing other users. Intel has acknowledged the problem and announced plans to release a microcode patch by mid-August, with extended warranty program. This update is expected to prevent further degradation but may not reverse existing damage. Despite the elevated failure rates, Puget Systems' data shows that the issue, while concerning, still needs to be at critical levels for their operations. The company reports that failure rates for 13th and 14th gen Intel processors, while higher than ideal, are still lower than those they experienced with Intel's 11th gen chips and some AMD Ryzen processors. In response to the situation, Puget Systems is taking several steps, including maintaining its current power management practices, promptly validating Intel's upcoming microcode update, and extending warranties for affected customers. Below, you can see failure rates by month, by Intel's Core generation, as well as by "shop" vs "field" testing.
75 Comments on Puget Systems Releases CPU Failure Report: AMD CPUs Achieve Higher Failure Rate Than Intel 13th and 14th Generation
May I ask someone who can dig this information up please?
I just wondered how long the warranty period or bring in time is for that hardware?
I doubt someone bring in a device which costs your own money to fix. I assume that 10th/11th Generation Intel is long out of warranty. That's why it does not show up anymore in 2023 / 2024 basically.
If it were my own 9th or 10th generation Intel platform, I would maybe sell the mainboard and the RAM and move on.
I think those graphs miss some important information. How long is the maintenance / service / warranty period for the hardware in question. (applies to all of those graphs)
Because there are Raptor Lake CPUs that have degraded even when ran well within Intel's spec.
I don't get why this post was made, the issue at hand is even with Puget using their own settings there is still an increase of failures in their graphs. And the whole point of GN bringing up the graph was to show higher than normal failure rates.
side note: 11th gen seems like an absolute dumpster fire.Don't know what the situation is on the amd side, but I can attest to intel board manufacturers pushing way more volts than needed. My 490 board applies 1.37v to stock 10700 in normal/auto modes, but the cpu only needs 1.25v manual voltage to pass stress tests.
Surprise, surprise. Nothing wrong with 14th gen, definitely nothing to see here, move along... /s
I'm suprised the OP does not mention Puget's other statements, like:
'The concern for the future reliability of those CPUs is much more the issue at hand, rather than the failure rates we are seeing today.'
'We're seeing ALL of these failures happen after 6 months, which means we do expect elevated failure rates to continue for the foreseeable future and possibly even after Intel issues the microcode patch.'
They havent claimed this is out of the box experience, it is data "after" they have applied their own adjustments.
So yeah, damage control.
Wonder why.
Better yet, if their claims are true, how come nobody else experienced such a huge number of issues with their AMD cpus outside Puget?
I will admit, this intel collapse (thank you karma!) is really showing the rabid fanbois, bribed influencers and especially, the white knights which are out in full force doing damage control.
Adding the DOJ investigation on Ngreedia plus the conveniently and sudden delay on their new AI chips, the other side will also be super busy.
Meanwhile … :)
I came across some stats from Puget systems on r/hardware, Puget sold about 70-80% Intel systems in 2023.
www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/puget-systems-hardware-trends-of-2023/#CPU_ProcessorYes they should have, but didn't and chose to push their cpu's past the limit to beat AMD, according to Buildzoid talking to someone hosting Minecraft severs with 14900K cpu's, the failure rates drop from around 30% to 5% by disabling TVB, though by disabling TVB the CPU is no longer running at the specs Intel claims its capable of but that is a whole other issue.
From Intel's own public materials
Intel only enforce minimum and max values,
The 'Recommended value' is always 'N/A'
Some even had their minimum values 'N/A'
So there is basically no 'guideline' from Intel regarding CPU voltage, anything below maximum are 'in-spec'
Intel's mistake was giving them the freedom to do that.
Companies push more voltage to be sure that the CPUs that will get on consumers hands will be stable. I think almost everything can be undervolted and still work just fine, except in case it is a mediocre sample.