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

[ShrimpBrime]

This isn't about one game dev. Going to need a much bigger magazine if you are going to rely on the shoot the messenger fallacy. Because the number of messengers is constantly growing. Better have a load for kaiju too, because Nvidia was the messenger back in April - https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-com...-gen-cpu-instability-to-contact-intel-support

Survivorship bias is powerful stuff. But this is well beyond the stage where it carries much weight. For those of us that have been following this since early this year, all that is left now is - Intel concluding the investigation, explaining the problem/s and providing solutions. Including a customer care program to service affected users.

Raptor Lake was not released earlier this year....

It was released 2022. Refresh 2023.

All of a sudden issues 2024.

Lol.

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

Raptor Lake was not released earlier this year....

It was released 2022. Refresh 2023.

All of a sudden issues 2024.

Lol.

October 10, 2022, to be precise. And 1 year and 4 months later, Toms hardware reports on:

Increasing numbers of users of the Core i9-13900K and Core i7-13700K have reported crashes

And mentions that Nvidia has been aware of the issue long enough to figure out that the crashes are CPU related.

Not 100% failure rate inside a year for sure, but these ain't running 24/7 either. These are regular gamers who might run them 8 hours a day at the most.

 

[64K]

Not 100% failure rate inside a year for sure, but these ain't running 24/7 either. These are regular gamers who might run them 8 hours a day at the most.

Just for gaming I would say average 4 hours a day at most unless it's someone that doesn't go to school, have a job, or have some kind of a life so we're probably looking at around 1,500 hours over a years time. Probably used some for surfing, emails, Youtube etc. but that's not taxing on a CPU.

1,500 hours a year of somewhat heavy use isn't much to be degrading a CPU of this supposed caliber.

 

[mkppo]

I don't need to provide anything unless you have a humble request vs posting bullshit of your own.

Here's a site "claiming" up to 16% failure rates on AMD processors.

Are AMD Ryzen 5000 CPUs Failing at Higher-Than-Usual Rates?

A report has been going around online that AMD CPUs are suffering much higher than normal failure rates after PC builder PowerGPU shared an alarming tweet.

www.extremetech.com

But so far in this forum, using simple statistics like registered users vs amount of threads with Intel Raptor lake chips being RMA'd, like actually sent out... is bad odds on your part.

Your statistic has already been debunked here. It was one claim from one vendor with no other tech media or analyst being able to corroborate that data. The sample size was tiny, and many other analysis done with much bigger sample sizes show that their failure rate is extremely low and in line with what's expected. Unlike 13/14900K..

Maybe stick to the topic at hand which is Intel CPU's degrading faster than usual rather than try to spew random AMD BS.

Edit: You already see a larger sample size of people reporting issues - we are talking system integrators, gave devs etc. I'm not sure why you are trying to take this sample size, it'll be extremely small considering we are talking about running these on full load 24/7.

All of a sudden issues 2024.

Lol.

Nah, it was around a year later and took even longer to diagnose because initially the blame was on the GPU, then motherboard, and now CPU. And yeah it is the CPU, intel had to admit as much.

 

[Caring1]

it seems to me that Alderon is claiming a 100% failure rate. This seems far in excess of the other developers, but AFAIK Alderon was the only studio using them as a server.

This is why I speculated that Alderon's code, specifically their server-side code, was putting an unusual load on a weak link in the CPU. A weak link that most factory stress tests would not load, or QA would have seen this.

It is possible that QA saw it coming and the beancounters said to ship it anyways, but that can only remain speculation on our part. Personally I kind of doubt it.

The GN video speculated that putting a server style load on consumer chips merely accelerated the degradation.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Nvidia, Oodle, Epic games, these are some extremely heavy hitters all confirming raptor lake CPUs are experiencing instability issues. For those still incredulous, wait for the financials. The number of bad CPUs OEMs and S.I.s are going through is going to be too big to hide from investors.

I think Wendell put it well. When there is a problem, there is a problem. They happen. It is how you handle it that is more important. And so far there has been no "We are going to make you whole." statement, and there needs to be. Every day that passes that Intel fails to take control of the narrative, things will just get worse. I have been saying for months Intel legal is why this is taking so long. And it is a smart play. Have to shield yourself from as much liability as possible.

 

[R0H1T]

I don't need to provide anything unless you have a humble request vs posting bullshit of your own.

Here's a site "claiming" up to 16% failure rates on AMD processors.

Are AMD Ryzen 5000 CPUs Failing at Higher-Than-Usual Rates?

A report has been going around online that AMD CPUs are suffering much higher than normal failure rates after PC builder PowerGPU shared an alarming tweet.

www.extremetech.com

But so far in this forum, using simple statistics like registered users vs amount of threads with Intel Raptor lake chips being RMA'd, like actually sent out... is bad odds on your part.

Hint ~ don't use any "source" that ends a headline with a question

The GN video speculated that putting a server style load on consumer chips merely accelerated the degradation.

The issue's that this is almost certainly a class action lawsuit territory & a massive one at that ~ hence the dead silence till now

It is how you handle it that is more important. And so far there has been no "We are going to make you whole." statement, and there needs to be. Every day that passes that Intel fails to take control of the narrative, things will just get worse. I have been saying for months Intel legal is why this is taking so long. And it is a smart play. Have to shield yourself from as much liability as possible.

If the US FTC handles this like they've indicated going after megacorps in the recent years then I would expect it to possibly be the single biggest payout Intel had to cough up in their entire history!

Oh & if this is a manufacturing defect what happens to Intel foundry services

 

[pressing on]

I know nothing about programming but the game uses Unreal Engine 4 which has been used in hundreds and hundreds of games. Possibly they are doing something to bork the engine?

They are now using Unreal Engine 5 apparently.

I note that In their support section they comment on this BSOD issue

"Unhandled Exception: EXCEPTION_ACCESS_VIOLATION

Possible Solution:
This crash is most likely caused by programs such as MSI Afterburner, EVGA or Riva Tuner Statistics or similar programs that alter the computer fans which may intercept the game, causing the game to crash. We recommend uninstalling the program causing the crash to avoid the issue."

Is this a normal Unreal Engine issue or is just their game code? Why are they not fixing their code and instead telling users not to use programs like MSI Afterburner. What does "alter the computer fans which may intercept the game, causing the game to crash" mean?

 

[Steevo]

ITT: Intel made a poo. Fanbois; no they didn’t and if they did it’s your fault for handling grandpas poo wrong!!

meanwhile, the rest of us piss ant peons game on AMD hardware. Sorry, been busy playing games that don’t crash.

Didn’t Intel license X86-64 from AMD?

 

[R0H1T]

Is this a normal Unreal Engine issue or is just their game code? Why are they not fixing their code and instead telling users not to use programs like MSI Afterburner. What does "alter the computer fans which may intercept the game, causing the game to crash" mean?

Because running these programs adds an additional layer of complexity & variables to possible system instability! If you're doing this on a work machine you're clearly doing it wrong ~ you should always run them as close to bare-bones/stock as possible & that includes no OC/3p applications modifying the system behavior. The most I'd do is a mild undervolt & that too only because the mobos often juice up the voltage too much.

 

[64K]

They are now using Unreal Engine 5 apparently.

I note that In their support section they comment on this BSOD issue

"Unhandled Exception: EXCEPTION_ACCESS_VIOLATION

Possible Solution:
This crash is most likely caused by programs such as MSI Afterburner, EVGA or Riva Tuner Statistics or similar programs that alter the computer fans which may intercept the game, causing the game to crash. We recommend uninstalling the program causing the crash to avoid the issue."

Is this a normal Unreal Engine issue or is just their game code? Why are they not fixing their code and instead telling users not to use programs like MSI Afterburner. What does "alter the computer fans which may intercept the game, causing the game to crash" mean?

If they are recommending to turn off Afterburner then that doesn't make sense to me because that app controls the GPU fan speeds etc. The issue is supposed to be about the CPU and not the GPU.

 

[thesmokingman]

EXCEPTION_ACCESS_VIOLATION I think that's a Windows issue.

If they are recommending to turn off Afterburner then that doesn't make sense to me because that app controls the GPU fan speeds etc. The issue is supposed to be about the CPU and not the GPU.

The problem with AB isn't AB itself but RTSS' overlay. Quite a few games have had issues with overlays in general with respect to RTSS. That said its really a nothing burger.

 

[InVasMani]

I think some of the instability could've just been on my end with with power limits and V/F curve need a bit of a readjust. Seems like it's behaving a bit better now after slightly adjust thing and running P cores at x49/x50 along with E cores back at stock x43 and as well ring at stock/auto which seems to be x46 from what I can tell on 14700K. The memory is lower than I had been running at 5000MT/s for now, but trying to rule that out of the equation to test the cache/ring with 7zip since that's been a problematic test.

I need to get a better gauge on stability with general stability with memory set more tame. It's probably just because dialed back power limits and amperage a bit as a precautionary measure as well a little bit of the V/F curve and vid offset. It was more stable prior to dialing things back surrounding degradation concerns. I think the V/F was probably undervolted in and/or power limits not high enough at full load for 7zip.

I probably just had a bit of panic moment. I'll try to narrow down what's causing the error and if it's simply memory settings or something else like too low voltage or power limit at load.

So ring was suppose to x46, but Asus auto's to x50 because I don't know why just because it's Asus. 4DPC is 4400MT/s so I'm gonna try dropping that down a bit and seeing if it helps actually run like intended or not.

 

[evernessince]

Here's a site "claiming" up to 16% failure rates on AMD processors.

Are AMD Ryzen 5000 CPUs Failing at Higher-Than-Usual Rates?

A report has been going around online that AMD CPUs are suffering much higher than normal failure rates after PC builder PowerGPU shared an alarming tweet.

www.extremetech.com

But so far in this forum, using simple statistics like registered users vs amount of threads with Intel Raptor lake chips being RMA'd, like actually sent out... is bad odds on your part.

I already pointed out the flaws of the PowerPC post in my last comment so this had already been discussed. In addition, from the article you linked:

"ExtremeTech has spoken with a US boutique vendor and confirmed that it had seen no problems with AMD versus Intel return rates. Our own test samples continue to perform perfectly, with no issues."

"up to 16% failure rates on AMD processors" That's not what the data says in the linked article. PowerPC claims they got a 16% failure rate for the 5950X over a sample size of 50. That's a single CPU model, not all AMD processors as you claim. Also note the extremely small sample size of 50. As I pointed out in my last post it's feasible that a single source may get such a failure rate with a sample size that small but it's not statistically significant enough to extrapolate to overall RMA rates and the information is contradicted by every other source available inclduing within the very article you linked.

 

[ty_ger]

Can the off topic fanboy discussion end?

 

[ShrimpBrime]

I already pointed out the flaws of the PowerPC post in my last comment so this had already been discussed. In addition, from the article you linked:

"ExtremeTech has spoken with a US boutique vendor and confirmed that it had seen no problems with AMD versus Intel return rates. Our own test samples continue to perform perfectly, with no issues."

"up to 16% failure rates on AMD processors" That's not what the data says in the linked article. PowerPC claims they got a 16% failure rate for the 5950X over a sample size of 50. That's a single CPU model, not all AMD processors as you claim. Also note the extremely small sample size of 50. As I pointed out in my last post it's feasible that a single source may get such a failure rate with a sample size that small but it's not statistically significant enough to extrapolate to overall RMA rates and the information is contradicted by every other source available inclduing within the very article you linked.

That's exactly my point. GN vs LTT. whos gonna have the juiciest story?

Link was requested, link is provided. It's not my job to define truth of someone else's testing.

1 model, all models, a few models. It doesn't matter.

I've found Raptor Lake to be very robust and solid. This will be my opinion until my Raptor Lake cpu dies. I hope it doesn't, it seems really stable. It only has to pass default settings. OC is simply a perk.

 

[InVasMani]

I think it was mostly just power limit settings and voltages were a bit low and memory pushed aggressively. I'll try some more 7zip testing tomorrow and to see if I can better pin point what was causing the crashing itself. It's seems to be at load issue.

 

[JustBenching]

ITT: Intel made a poo. Fanbois; no they didn’t and if they did it’s your fault for handling grandpas poo wrong!!

meanwhile, the rest of us piss ant peons game on AMD hardware. Sorry, been busy playing games that don’t crash.

Didn’t Intel license X86-64 from AMD?

Hope you said the same 10 months ago with the amd chips that thought they were hand grenades.

 

[mkppo]

Hope you said the same 10 months ago with the amd chips that thought they were hand grenades.

Why do you ignore that they handled the hand grenades really well and has been solved, done and dusted in less time than it took Intel to even put out their first incorrect statement. AMD handled the situation a million times better than Intel did and continues to do. It's frankly pathetic the way Intel is handling this.

Don't constantly keep bring AMD's resolved situation here. Contrary to what you might think, it only makes Intel looks worse

That's exactly my point. GN vs LTT. whos gonna have the juiciest story?

Link was requested, link is provided. It's not my job to define truth of someone else's testing.

1 model, all models, a few models. It doesn't matter.

I've found Raptor Lake to be very robust and solid. This will be my opinion until my Raptor Lake cpu dies. I hope it doesn't, it seems really stable. It only has to pass default settings. OC is simply a perk.

It wasn't even one model, it was one vendor with a bad batch of cpu which they prpbably just set up wrong, which is more likely since no other vendor had any issues. Or just click bait. Noone could match what they claimed, unlike 14900K

You were the one claiming Ryzen had a high failure rate, didnt specify anything else, and linked to a BS article. But you didn't even read through the article yourself, because that's not what the article states.

Just FYI. Intel themselves have admitted that there's a problem, along with some of the sharpest minds in the industry. Keep believing in your robust and solid 14900K but unlike your BS AMD claim, actual Intel RMA claims look pretty dire

 

[Klemc]

Intel denies RMA requests for its faulty 13th Gen, 14th Gen CPUs with instability issues

Intel Core i9-14900K, Core i9-13900K major stability issues are forcing game server companies to switch to AMD, creating major headaches for gamers, too.

www.tweaktown.com

It's broken, it doesn't works, i love it bc i hate 200w+ cpu for consumers at a time when ecology is offered to them in politics as a voting choice

 

[JustBenching]

Why do you ignore that they handled the hand grenades really well and has been solved, done and dusted in less time than it took Intel to even put out their first incorrect statement. AMD handled the situation a million times better than Intel did and continues to do. It's frankly pathetic the way Intel is handling this.

Don't constantly keep bring AMD's resolved situation here. Contrary to what you might think, it only makes Intel looks worse

Because people like the guy I quoted is bringing his amd fanboy BS into this thread, completely forgetting that you could use those amd chips as firestarters. Don't bring amd up and I won't either, simple as that.

 

[mkppo]

Intel denies RMA requests for its faulty 13th Gen, 14th Gen CPUs with instability issues

Intel Core i9-14900K, Core i9-13900K major stability issues are forcing game server companies to switch to AMD, creating major headaches for gamers, too.

www.tweaktown.com

Someone tell the author in that website that his article is flat out wrong. AMD doesn't have 30% of the errors compared to 70% for Intel, that was the ratio of Intel:AMD chips. In terms of errors, it's something like 2 Ryzen chips for a few thousand raptor lake. So more like 1% AMD, 99% intel.

Why do websites post articles without even getting the jist of whats happening.

 

[Klemc]

Because people like the guy I quoted is bringing his amd fanboy BS into this thread, completely forgetting that you could use those amd chips as firestarters. Don't bring amd up and I won't either, simple as that.

But the fanboy isn't broke and doesn't bothers the entire world

Someone tell the author in that website that his article is flat out wrong. AMD doesn't have 30% of the errors compared to 70% for Intel, that was the ratio of Intel:AMD chips. In terms of errors, it's something like 2 Ryzen chips for a few thousand raptor lake. So more like 1% AMD, 99% intel.

Why do websites post articles without even getting the jist of whats happening.

Broken

edit: idc writer, writer writes what he reads about, he can be a man i hate, idc

I'm an Intel fanboy, i have a 7800x3d by luck of best hardware available at this time it didn't make sesnse to try the 400w ++ from Intel, that's all,and finally broken stuff

And what if Intel is tied to CrowdStrike breaking a Win Update other day, just to push a dll that does his stuff (report) so that they can repair only the needed CPU they know that will fail, that's a possibility

I read too much NO, Intel no, no no no, then i finished by conspirate

 

[OneSorcerer]

should I sell my cpu / mobo and go amd at this point? Or just wait for barlett rumour to come true?

 

[AusWolf]

should I sell my cpu / mobo and go amd at this point? Or just wait for barlett rumour to come true?

Is your PC enough for what you're using it for? Only you can answer this question.