Alderon Games claims that substantial numbers of Intel 13th Gen and 14th Gen chips are defective

[Rabit]

Main points from above video
13gen expected returns will touch 10% to 25% on i9, i7, and i5 13600k models
Based on data from a company that sold 8 million units of these processors
14gen a higher return rate is expected due to higher voltages.
For example, one of the largest PC integrators in the US uses longer decompression and y-cruncher tests to limit warranty returns, thereby rejecting 12% of new Intel processors as defective.
One of the large companies affected by Intel's CPU failures is the hedge fund Citadel.

 

[Ruru]

This is literally the same situation what happens when you overclock manually and it's unstable. No wonder this happens when you push your chips to 6GHz+

The FX 9590s have a much stronger tendency to fail! My buddy's FX 9590 failed extremely fast! Seems that FX 8350s were reliable, OTOH. I didn't even have to increase the Vcore for 4.4 GHz on mine (date code 14xx) with x.264, before giving it away.

In fact, the 13th-gen and 14th-gen, starkly reminds me of my buddy's FX 9590! IIRC, there were other reports of FX 9590s failing, too!

FFS, he don't even OC! And, he couldn't even Skype without his PC going down! (That incident was in 2014, which was before we switched to Discord, when it was the Hammer&Chisel era!)
(Which we switched to, by 2017, possibly just within some months later in 2016) (We were still using Skype in 2015)

There were practically a handful of de facto supported motherboards for those FX9000 series heaters. Maybe your friend's mobo just wasn't one of those?

 

[Vario]

Hmm, wonder if my i9 12900KS becomes long term endgame for LGA 1700 now, the last of the not failing line.

 

[freeagent]

Ooof...

Anything to make a buck these days

Sell some garbage to our customers, but its ok, they will be back to buy another CPU, and chipset to go with it, no questions asked.

 

[Ruru]

Ooof...

Anything to make a buck these days

Sell some garbage to our customers, but its ok, they will be back to buy another CPU, and chipset to go with it, no questions asked.

I wouldn't even be surprised if Intel users will give them an another chance without even thinking about it.

 

[ShrimpBrime]

I wouldn't even be surprised if Intel users will give them an another chance without even thinking about it.

For sure. I'd definitely purchase Intel again.

FX was a major flop like a mother fucker and everyone buys AMD still.....

 

[P4-630]

I mean I haven't seen it in any headlines yet of my goto trustworthy tech sites, also it hasn't even made the TPU news...

 

[Ruru]

For sure. I'd definitely purchase Intel again.

FX was a major flop like a mother fucker and everyone buys AMD still.....

Comparing the shitty FX to even 1st gen Ryzen is like comparing summer and winter. We all know that it was ass.

We also buy Nvidia even after the FX series flopped. Wait, FX? Can't be a coincidence...

 

[BoggledBeagle]

If confirmed true.....God Damn this is gonna be expensive for intel as basically all 13 and 14th gen CPUs are going to die

Not all, just some depending how hard you stress them.

I just lowered RAM frequency from 6000 to 5600 MHz, maximal core frequencies from 5200/4200 to 5000/4000 MHz and power limit from 180 to 160W. If my 14900K is not affected too badly, I should get plenty life from it at these settings.

This explains Intel being silent about this, because they knew already that have a huge problem.

 

[JustBenching]

I wouldn't even be surprised if Intel users will give them an another chance without even thinking about it.

If we are not going to buy intel again because of this, and we are not going to buy amd because of the self immolation issues (that also took the mobo along with them), what the heck are we going to buy?

 

[Ferrum Master]

I didn't like the fact that they were so hell bent on that T series CPU, like those also do not boost and use the same voltages. It means nothing. They are just tested to be capable at wider range of it and stable at lower clocks/voltages. In normal motherboards they behave the same, you unlock the boost times and limits and they clock like mad. I have 11900T also, I slapped that CPU in my NAS server lol.

 

[JustBenching]

I didn't like the fact that they were so hell bent on that T series CPU, like those also do not boost and use the same voltages. It means nothing. They are just tested to be capable at wider range of it and stable at lower clocks/voltages. In normal motherboards they behave the same, you unlock the boost times and limits and they clock like mad. I have 11900T also, I slapped that CPU in my NAS server lol.

If the issue is just degradation due to voltages then that's great, I don't really care, I never run any CPU out of the box so whatever, doesn't make a difference to me. If it's due to oxidation then that is goddamn serious and depending on how widespread it is (could be the entire 13/14th gen lineup? lol) intel is ****ed.

 

[evernessince]

For sure. I'd definitely purchase Intel again.

FX was a major flop like a mother fucker and everyone buys AMD still.....

There's a pretty big difference between selling a product with subpar performance vs selling a defective product that kills itself covering two CPU generations. Mind you it's not the product itself that Intel is primarily catching flak for, it's how it's handling it. It hasn't done anything but point fingers at others. There's still no official solution months after this issue had been made public and god knows how long they've been aware of it internally and by server partners.

Not all, just some depending how hard you stress them.

I just lowered RAM frequency from 6000 to 5600 MHz, maximal core frequencies from 5200/4200 to 5000/4000 MHz and power limit from 180 to 160W. If my 14900K is not affected too badly, I should get plenty life from it at these settings.

This explains Intel being silent about this, because they knew already that have a huge problem.

This doesn't fix the issue. Wendell worked with server partners and found that lowering RAM frequency just delays death. Server partners already limit frequencies down to 5.3 GHz and again it only delays death. Alderon games posted on the Intel reddit that this even impacts Intel mobile CPUs that run at much lower voltages.

I recommend you watch the video:

 

[AusWolf]

If we are not going to buy intel again because of this, and we are not going to buy amd because of the self immolation issues (that also took the mobo along with them), what the heck are we going to buy?

It's probably best to buy a rock. It's cheap, it doesn't require a lot of power or cooling, and it doesn't degrade. Its computing power isn't the best, but what the heck.

 

[Ferrum Master]

If the issue is just degradation due to voltages then that's great, I don't really care, I never run any CPU out of the box so whatever, doesn't make a difference to me. If it's due to oxidation then that is goddamn serious and depending on how widespread it is (could be the entire 13/14th gen lineup? lol) intel is ****ed.

Well, I am old enough to remember MTH i820... Phenom TLB bug... things happen time to time... any CPU is full of erratas and workarounds really... on top of it now we have secuirity plaster patches slowing down the CPU's.

Wait for new stepping...

 

[nomdeplume]

Hmm, wonder if my i9 12900KS becomes long term endgame for LGA 1700 now, the last of the not failing line.

Exactly why I started looking at them. Knowing what was done to them is why I stopped.

 

[Hecate91]

If we are not going to buy intel again because of this, and we are not going to buy amd because of the self immolation issues (that also took the mobo along with them), what the heck are we going to buy?

There is a difference though, AMD admitted to an issue right away and fixed it, Intel has shifted the blame onto mobo companies and blaming users for setting voltages too high, even though default settings were in spec. Intel refusing to RMA cpu's is also concerning, it possibly means they don't have any fixed revision, or just want to ignore the issue.
I have very little trust for Intel as they've been quiet on this issue for way too long, either knowing what the issue was thinking lower power levels would fix it, or knew there were fabrication issues because theres rumors of Intel rushing Raptor Lake to market to compete with AMD. In my opinion the ILM and power consumption issues at default settings were bad enough to prefer an AMD system, however I prefer stability rather than oc'ing, AMD just seems like the more stable option right now, not sure I would trust Arrow Lake either as that is a new architecture.

 

[JustBenching]

There is a difference though, AMD admitted to an issue right away and fixed it, Intel has shifted the blame onto mobo companies and blaming users for setting voltages too high, even though default settings were in spec. Intel refusing to RMA cpu's is also concerning, it possibly means they don't have any fixed revision, or just want to ignore the issue.
I have very little trust for Intel as they've been quiet on this issue for way too long, either knowing what the issue was thinking lower power levels would fix it, or knew there were fabrication issues because theres rumors of Intel rushing Raptor Lake to market to compete with AMD. In my opinion the ILM and power consumption issues at default settings were bad enough to prefer an AMD system, however I prefer stability rather than oc'ing, AMD just seems like the more stable option right now, not sure I would trust Arrow Lake either as that is a new architecture.

AMD responded quickly because users ended up with a burned up CPU and motherboard. I don't think it's analogous to this but since we don't know what's causing this thing on intel and how widespread it is it's pointless to speculate and argue about it.

Intel rushing Raptor Lake to market to compete with AMD.

Why the double standards? Did AMD rush the 3d to market to compete with intel and that's what caused their cpus to immolate?

In my opinion the ILM and power consumption issues at default settings

There are no power consumption issues, you are just looking at the wrong products. If you care about power draw stop looking at K cpus and Z mobos. I keep hearing this and it always blows my mind why are people saying this kind of things. Here you go, peak CPU power 106w, sustain cpu power 35w, put in on the cheapest mobo you can find and you won't have any power consumption issues at default. Please, this mindless intel bashing needs to stop.

Intel® Core™ i9 processor 14900T (36M Cache, up to 5.50 GHz) - Product Specifications | Intel

Intel® Core™ i9 processor 14900T (36M Cache, up to 5.50 GHz) quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.

www.intel.com

 

[ShrimpBrime]

Comparing the shitty FX to even 1st gen Ryzen is like comparing summer and winter. We all know that it was ass.

We also buy Nvidia even after the FX series flopped. Wait, FX? Can't be a coincidence...

Yes first gen Ryzen was shit. And so was second. And third. And also 4th....

There's a pretty big difference between selling a product with subpar performance vs selling a defective product that kills itself covering two CPU generations. Mind you it's not the product itself that Intel is primarily catching flak for, it's how it's handling it. It hasn't done anything but point fingers at others. There's still no official solution months after this issue had been made public and god knows how long they've been aware of it internally and by server partners.



This doesn't fix the issue. Wendell worked with server partners and found that lowering RAM frequency just delays death. Server partners already limit frequencies down to 5.3 GHz and again it only delays death. Alderon games posted on the Intel reddit that this even impacts Intel mobile CPUs that run at much lower voltages.

I recommend you watch the video:

Ryzen gen 3 had failure rates recorded as high as 5%....

AMD promised 2000mhz and up IF speeds. Didn't happen.

People making claims and posting links to others making claims is not evidence of failures.

Has any one here actually RMA an Intel chip? 1 person out of 150 thousand users isn't a major flop.

 

[evernessince]

Yes first gen Ryzen was shit. And so was second. And third. And also 4th....


Ryzen gen 3 had failure rates recorded as high as 5%....

AMD promised 2000mhz and up IF speeds. Didn't happen.

People making claims and posting links to others making claims is not evidence of failures.

Has any one here actually RMA an Intel chip? 1 person out of 150 thousand users isn't a major flop.

Says the guy claiming Ryzen 3000 series had 5% failure rate without even providing a source at all. Talk about hypocritical.

 

[Vario]

Exactly why I started looking at them. Knowing what was done to them is why I stopped.

They are pretty cheap at Microcenter and other places.
If I was on 13th or 14th gen I might consider getting a 12th gen as an insurance policy or even selling off early if this is a real thing.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Main points from above video
13gen expected returns will touch 10% to 25% on i9, i7, and i5 13600k models
Based on data from a company that sold 8 million units of these processors
14gen a higher return rate is expected due to higher voltages.
For example, one of the largest PC integrators in the US uses longer decompression and y-cruncher tests to limit warranty returns, thereby rejecting 12% of new Intel processors as defective.
One of the large companies affected by Intel's CPU failures is the hedge fund Citadel.

I think the company with 8 million is Dell.

You left out one of the most important parts. GN is sending a couple of CPUs to a failure analysis lab. It is extremely expensive at 5 figures each. If it is oxidation of the copper vias the lab will confirm that. Or any other physical defects for that matter.

Says the guy claiming Ryzen 3000 series had 5% failure rate without even providing a source at all. Talk about hypocritical.

I have seen that statistic before too. I don't know if it was only certain SKUs, or if that was based on a single source providing their failure rates. I can say when I had a few Ryzen 3600s and saw my boards were pumping 1.5v+ through them, is when I started manually setting everything in the UEFI again. Many AMD and Intel boards are too aggressive OOB IMO. Both Bryan of techyescity and his friend Greg Salazar have both had batches of degraded Ryzen 3600s and reported on it. Evidently not enough viewers reported similar experiences encouraging them to pursue it any further.

 

[Hecate91]

AMD responded quickly because users ended up with a burned up CPU and motherboard. I don't think it's analogous to this but since we don't know what's causing this thing on intel and how widespread it is it's pointless to speculate and argue about it.

It must be analogous since I keep seeing people comparing this to Ryzen 7000 cpu's burning up because Asus set voltages too high. So far we do know what the issue with Intel cpu's are as the evidence seems to be reputable with plenty of game companies citing cpu failures or games crashing, and a major SI claiming they have cpu's failing.

My point was AMD fixed the issue quickly, while Intel has remained quiet on the issue, even if this problem of degradation affects millions of cpu's they should at least admit what it is and promise their consumers that it will be fixed, because they are losing a lot of trust over this.

Why the double standards? Did AMD rush the 3d to market to compete with intel and that's what caused their cpus to immolate?

It isn't double standards because AMD wasn't at fault for cpu's burning up.

There are no power consumption issues, you are just looking at the wrong products. If you care about power draw stop looking at K cpus and Z mobos. I keep hearing this and it always blows my mind why are people saying this kind of things. Here you go, peak CPU power 106w, sustain cpu power 35w, put in on the cheapest mobo you can find and you won't have any power consumption issues at default. Please, this mindless intel bashing needs to stop.

Intel® Core™ i9 processor 14900T (36M Cache, up to 5.50 GHz) - Product Specifications | Intel

Intel® Core™ i9 processor 14900T (36M Cache, up to 5.50 GHz) quick reference with specifications, features, and technologies.

www.intel.com

Bringing up factual issues isn't "mindless intel bashing" as reputable tech reviewers such as GN and HUB have both discussed high power consumption at out of the box settings, which is what most people are going to use with their cpu's.
And no, I don't want a low clocked OEM variant, it's ironic you claim there are no issues with power consumption then you bring up the T version of the 14900.
I want something with performance and efficiency, which is what AMD delivers with the 5000 and 7000 series cpu's. I don't care about tinkering with the settings to get a 200W+ cpu to use less power, I just want stability out of the box because overclocking is effectively dead when you get 1-2% performance over what the cpu will boost to by default.

 

[Panther_Seraphin]

Intels problems is different to what AMD experience with SoC and 7xxx series.

The AMD issues were very lax limits being pushed by Mobo mnufactuers trying to differentiate themselves and some aspects of the firmware being almost beta/alpha in execution leading to situations where SoC voltage went from already high to beyond insane in certain circumstances. (Look at GNs testing with Asus Mobo)

Intels problem with the manufacturing defect if its like it is being portrayed/suggested basically means that the CPUs have a set time limit before expiry basically. Yes you can lower voltages to mitigate SOME of the degredation but the degredation is there basically from Day 1 and it will only get worse. This is sort of similar to the silly 9xxx series FX parts from AMD which were basically cooking themeselves at "stock" settings.

What surprises me is when you watch the LTT video going around the labs of intel you see they have a lot of test benches up trying to do longevity testing etc. I am surprised they didnt see these in the 13th gen let alone the 14th gen testing.

 

[evernessince]

I have seen that statistic before too. I don't know if it was only certain SKUs, or if that was based on a single source providing their failure rates. I can say when I had a few Ryzen 3600s and saw my boards were pumping 1.5v+ through them, is when I started manually setting everything in the UEFI again. Many AMD and Intel boards are too aggressive OOB IMO.

The statistic you are referring to was posted by PowerPC and was taken down because it was contradicted by every other source at the time. Tech outlets like HWUB put feelers out to see if there was any brevity to PowerPC's claims and found no evidence to support them. Mind factory data at the time showed that Ryzen 3000 series had a failure rate of 0.56% with a sample size of 26,920 units.

On the flipside Nvidia, EPIC, Digital Extremes (warframe), fatshark (warhammer vermintide 2 and others), and Alderon games have all come publically and stated that Intel's current issue is in fact real. Some links to back that up:

Nvidia advises crash-prone gamers to look to Intel for assistance

Nvidia's latest graphics drivers for GeForce GPUs include some interesting release notes, which the company is sharing on its official forums as well. The GeForce Game Ready...

www.techspot.com

Instability on recent Intel Processors

While investigating crashes in Warframe we came across a particular series that were not crashing in our code (they were crashing in nvgpucomp64.dll, a component of Nvidia drivers). After aggregating hundreds of reports from helpful players we discovered a pattern: almost all were coming from sys...

forums.warframe.com

https://support.fatshark.se/hc/en-us/articles/360021425793--PC-How-to-Resolve-Data-Corruption-Errors

Of course there's also wendell's investigation with Gaming server providers and anyone else who relies on Intel that cannot afford to come out publically against them.

Both Bryan of techyescity and his friend Greg Salazar have both had batches of degraded Ryzen 3600s and reported on it. Evidently not enough viewers reported similar experiences encouraging them to pursue it any further.

TechYesCity didn't get a defective batch of AMD CPUs. If you watch his video on the topic he states his theory was that some of his 3600's were crashing due to overheating as games become more optimized over time thus pushing the CPU more:

If you look at the timing of the video, he posted it right in the thick of Australlia's summer months (which is where he mostly lives). I can't say I blame you for your conclusion though given the video title. Like most clickbait YouTube titles, the name is wholly misleading to the content.

Perhaps one specific company did have a 5% failure rate but given the information and contradictory reports that's all it was, one company at best. AMD's failure rates overall seem to be extremely normal while Intel's 13th and 14th gen are 44.6 times higher than the 3000 series. That's a world of difference and that assumes that the 50% of reported Intel 13th and 14th with abnormally high crash rates don't degrade to the point of failure as well.