intel CPUs are literally falling apart

[@LowLevel-TV]

no way haha anyway if you want to learn to code check out lowlevel.academy

[@LowLevel-TV]

ok

[@apollowellstein188]

@@LowLevel-TV ok

[@ding.1367]

"The PS4 has been hacked by a 20 year old bug! (yes 2006 was almost 20 years ago)" lll gang should fix it

[@PedroGlez-d7t]

@@LowLevel-TV ok

[@Kane0123]

Wendell from Level1Techs was a really important person in the recent work on this.

[@everyhandletaken]

Ed: "should try Rust" Intel: "we have more rust than we would like to, actually.."

[@daniellima4391]

I laughed too much at this lmao

[@josephmazor725]

This is brilliant

[@uk4725]

its not the same rust oxide, this is "via" oxide, its not iron. Vias are holes in the die used to connect metal wires through each layers, if via gets damaged, poof, no connection.

[@monad_tcp]

They're overclocking the thing

[@ThylineTheGay]

rust in the kernel? nahh lets take it one step further

[@NotherPleb]

Not trusting the hardware is a whole another level of debugging nightmare

[@ralfbaechle]

If you haven't worked in that industry you can't possibly imagine how bad. Circuit simulation on monstrously large supercomputers, circuit emulators (which probably are beyond capacity for something like a 13th gen Intel core) piles of FPGA. A tapeout, new masks are all silly expensive and fabbing a circuit from scratch after a major change may take months. So every change need to be validated most carefully before the design is sent off to the fab. Oh and I don't know how much a set of masks for a large processor die like the ones we're talking about, costs. Masks for much more moderate designs easily broke the $1,000,000 boundary. Today we might be talking about $10M to $40M. Try and error is not an option. Add the fun of issues with licensed 3rd party IP integrated into a circuit, potential process issues, scheduling with the fab, customer relations and the worst "enemy" of all, your own bosses, marketing, lfinance and egal departments, business partners and you may quickly have a situation where presure on the poor engineers working on a fix is maximal. And as I said above, some things in the semiconductor world are moving slow, so extreme care is mandatory. Just as a reminder - only a few years ago Intel was the undisputed king and AMD was looking like a dead man walking. Don't count Intel out. I'm a software guy doing mostly low-level work. So I've been standing nearby on many occasions when things were not working right and a bunch of nerdy engineers with a combined IQ of a million are trying to track down and fix the cause. As such I know how bad it feels when you don't know if the cause is software or hardware.

[@smlgd]

You bet. I work with embedded and we currently use primarily STM32 MCUs. Recently we found out the Pierce oscillators built into those MCUs don't work correctly, and we couldn't find out why, our electronics engineers tried everything, changing the crystal, the capacitor, the PCB layout, all well within listed specs and nothing would help. Then we found out even ST themselves apparently don't trust their oscillator because in all their development and discovery kits they bothered to add an external oscillator instead of using the internal one. That thing has caused us a lot of issues because we'd have random errors like SDRAM corruption, LCD display flickering, I2C and SPI framing errors, super hard to catch because it would happen like once a day. Then once we managed (after a few months) to pinpoint the oscillator as the culprit we tried feeding an external clock to the MCU and all these problems just went away.

[@tomenosmauserrio2747]

@@ralfbaechle That definitely sounds like a nightmare

[@DennouNeko]

@@smlgd Same here, I'm an embedded software developer working mostly with STM32 mcu. Haven't stumbled yet on an undocumented hardware issue, but nearly every single time when there is an issue with code and it makes no sense at all it turns out a problem with peripheral is described in the hardware errata note.

[@monad_tcp]

Don't trust hardware or compilers, I would trust my code more than other things, you just have to debug it in lots of different hardware, otherwise it is a nightmare. But writing multi-platform code is another kind of hell, you get stuck on language lawyering, and have to keep fighting "those" C programmers that think in too concrete terms that are only valid for some architectures because they keep thinking "C is baremetal assembly" instead of "C is a high level code for a virtual machine".

[@AngelOnFira]

Sounds like Rust wasn't the fix for this one

[@shivanshuraj7175]

No

[@everyhandletaken]

Too much rust, actually

[@tru2thastyle]

😂😂

[@j340_official]

Nice pun, especially since oxidation causes Rust … hehe

[@diegosorte]

They should rewrite the microcode decoder in rust

[@alderonmatt]

Most developers wouldn't even consider that the Compiler or CPU has a bug thats causing their code to crash. It certainly took us 4 months to figure out it was actually the CPU.

[@JJFX-]

Perhaps not at first but surely you'd realize something was up if the majority of oddball crashes were mostly high-end 13th/14th chips.

[@alderonmatt]

@@JJFX- Most developers dont sort their crashes by CPU Type. Its usually sorted by callstack

[@JJFX-]

@@alderonmatt I understand but when something unusual keeps popping up I'd personally start looking at other commonalities before spending a ton of time chasing my tail. Especially as more and more people start using a new platform generation and all the potential issues associated with that. I know it really depends on the situation though, I can understand why you may not have.

[@bday3816]

@@alderonmatt Cool to see the dev in here

[@MeriaDuck]

I have seen a compiler issue once in my career (at the very start 😂) over twenty years ago. Having to conclude that the CPU is the culprit is way out there. Especially given that it happened over time due to physical damage. That's wild!

[@CrispyMuffin2]

Userbenchmark: the lastest intel CPUs are so amazing they cant even contain their own power!

[@MultiWirth]

Userbenchmark actually calls out AMD claiming the issues which Intel CPUs are facing right now are fake and it´s AMD with defective CPUs...

[@fuka9676]

they always shit talk amd now look at intel 😂

[@gothgirlenjoyer69]

"bUt MuH iNtEl NoOOOOOOOoo!!1!1!1!"

[@gothgirlenjoyer69]

​@@MultiWirthAND I QUOTE: "This is especially true since AMD's "equivalent" 7950x3d is haunted by software bugs and "features" such as needing to have Xbox game bar open 24/7 and having their motherboards overvolt and kill the CPUs." - i9-14900K vs R9 7950X

[@jackbaldyga7952]

fr tho

[@toms7114]

Transistors weren't oxidizing, the vias were. A via through is a "wire" that travels in the up/down direction in the cpu when the cpu is laid flat on a surface to allow connections to different layers of the cpu. The transistors were getting excessive voltage causing the semi-conductive state along the 5-7 nanometer transitive area of a transistor to lose the semi-conductivity by having those atoms in there shift position due to the excessive voltage.

[@MrGriefCreep]

> converts your CPU's transistors to 1nΩ resistors > refuses to elaborate > leaves

[@jamescollier3]

oh snap. Those were ( maybe are ) make of tungsten. I was a tungsten deposition engineer. AMAT used to make the machines for that

[@joechristo2]

not my atoms!

[@Corpsecrank]

And knowing this they still want to sell these to you and don't want to take them back once the inevitable happens. I smell an incoming lawsuit from this just saying.

[@ccrodrigues]

Atoms dont move due to excessive voltage. Excessive voltage will short the gate and basically destroy the transistor. What causes electromigration is current and temperature. So you will only have accelerated electromigration when excessive voltage will result in excessive temperature and/or current.These are 2 different mechanisms of chip failure. A given voltage might be safe if the chip is running with subzero temperatures and instantaneously destroy the chip if its running near TJMax

[@zhd-net]

Not new for Intel. Back in the 70's we had major failures with Intel EPROM's (yes I'm that old). They blamed everything except their product. "You're not flashing them right" (Intel programmer), "...not protecting from UV light" (Intel foil labels), "...not erasing them right" (Intel eraser), "...wrong voltage" (Intel developer system), "...etc., etc." They never admitted it to us, didn't even offer free replacements (well they did, but with similarly defective components). Years later I read an acknowledgement in an Intel biography by one of their senior company officers that it happened, and that they were frantically trying to deflect from their production pending an internal fix. Dissembling again?

[@makebreakrepeat]

Oxidation? Sounds like Rust was the issue 😅

[@lxn7404]

😂

[@dhc2]

so original

[@WackoMcGoose]

I still maintain that rust (as in oxidized metal) _is and_ *_always has been_* the namesake of Rust (the programming language, and probably also the game).

[@StefanH]

If my game is failing, there's at least a thousand things I'd blame before I would ever consider thinking the CPU itself is actually starting to rot. Especially as a game developer this is a ballsy move but kudos do them!

[@CrispyMuffin2]

I cant even imagine the sheer magnitude of wasted hours spent debugging something caused by a failing CPU Game devs on Intel are boutta have a nightmare on their hands

[@nomore6167]

"Especially as a game developer this is a ballsy move" - Not really. Instability problems with Intel 13th/14th gen CPUs have been known for quite a while, and I guarantee that he was well aware of that before he pointed to the CPUs as the problem.

[@gljames24]

Userbenchmark is going to implode. Lmao.

[@JJFX-]

We don't speak its name anymore.

[@luizmourabr]

They're gonna find a way to blame AMD 😂

[@ILovePancakes24]

Obviously AMD broke in and added defects to the CPUs

[@hughjanes4883]

No its a selling point for them, the cpu requests more power? Hidden automatic overclocking feature more like

[@nicosanchez1980]

"Forced processor updates is a great selling point" UserBenchmark

[@pr0xZen]

Got 3 client units running 13900K, we intially suspected ram, then got mislead towards bios, cooling, CPU frequency etc. We tuned it way down, below very conservative intel spec, and still they would bluescreen or hard reset doing commercial no-recovery workloads randomly but at least once every week. What gave up the Intel (pun intended) for us, was I started observing WHEA hardware crash events. Debugged the dumps and it was GPU errors, always out of memory ones. Even observed several ones that didn't fully BSOD but crashed display driver and threw us out of the user session (on metal, not VM/container or remote). Issue was that these units A) wasn't running anything tasking GPU at all, and had ample allocated memory free at time of crash - and B) they don't have graphics cards. Only the intel CPU integrated. Edit: However, we ran hwinfo64 sensor logging on all of them an never saw voltage peak above 1.36v on any of them. Never above 1.4v in bios. Did not verify with multimeter though.

[@vinicio1089]

yeah with board like the EVGA Z790, that has a header for probing voltages directly it could be seen if the board is really over volting the cpu and underreporting it in the BIOS.

[@omninull]

Level1Techs and Gamers Nexus have both been digging into this issue and have videos I'd highly recommend going deep into this issue.

[@Kane0123]

Yep Wendell went so dang deep on this one..

[@stage6fan475]

YES!! They smoked Intel out. Intel would still be pretending nothing was wrong without the crescendo caused by their videos.

[@TheGunnarRoxen]

Wendell and Steve did really good with this (as always)

[@volodumurkalunyak4651]

Actually Hardcore Overclocking (Buildzoid) has a really cool explanation why those CPU degrade. There are actually 3 issues with Intel 13- and 14-gen CPU's: 1. some 13gen ones were botched up during manufacturing (via oxidation) 2. Moutherboards were applying unstable undervolting settings (AC_LL - CPU register where VRM loadline is supposed to be got value way smaller than actuall VRM loadline) 3. Intel loadline compensation causes CPU to ask for way to high voltage (1.6V) and recieve just that at all cores active but not really loaded

[@rumplstiltztinkerstein]

Get ready for thousands of these defective CPUs flooding the market,

[@marcux83]

well too bad for who is stupid /uninformed enough to buy them.. while having warranty you better bet on a recall

[@-4.]

Respect to the "Scammers" who did NOTHING wrong and are simply trying to get THEIR money BACK

[@Marauder-q2v]

@@-4.yeah they are if they’re knowingly selling defective CPU’s to unsuspecting people.

[@mduckernz]

@@-4.And where is this money they are getting back coming from, hmm? If it’s anything other than Intel - the manufacturer - or possibly a third party vendor (depending on laws) they had bought it from originally, then they are in fact scamming the buyer, taking advantage of their lack of knowledge, or deliberately misleading them.

[@-4.]

@@Marauder-q2v No they are not because Intel scammed them and they are simply doing what is right.

[@Seoanee]

Intel just doesn't wanna recognize that they have an "off by one volt" error in code

[@SterileNeutrino]

"Microcode update to fix oxydation issues" has the same bad smell as "software patch to make a MAX 737 behave like a 737". "Small number of reports" ditto.

[@liesandy291]

Yea let's not include that mcas in pilot manual too.

[@CorpoWolf]

@@SterileNeutrino Two separate issues.

[@aresye]

"Microcode Corrosion Avoidance System"

[@lycanthoss]

Because it's not an oxidation issue. Oxidation was happening to a batch of 13th gen CPUs in 2023 and that issue was supposedly fixed, while 14th gen is also affected by this instability meaning that the oxidation and voltage issues are separate. Based on Intel's wording it seems like oxidation only affects some older CPUs from 2023, while the majority of 13/14th gen CPUs are failing due to the voltage issue.

[@hotdogsarepropaganda]

two 100% separate issues. so either your CPU is oxidized or has microcode problems and voltage damage. since its a software "bug" its not covered under the same "poor workmanship" warranty clauses. the oxidation is covered by it but microcode over voltage damage is not

[@luketurner314]

5:36 made me replay in my head the compilation of Louis Rossmann reading "small number" in numerous Apple press releases/recalls/warranty extensions. Because we all (should) know that when a manufacturer uses the term "small number", they are trying to gaslight us into thinking the issue isn't as widespread as it actually is

[@alphamikeomega5728]

In the UK, a buggy accounting system by Fujitsu was used to prosecute a few hundred innocent people. When users reported bugs, they were told it was only them, or perhaps a small number, experiencing any issues.

[@thewhitefalcon8539]

@@alphamikeomega5728 To be fair, it was only 100 people who had the government delete their entire lives, take all their stuff, lock them in prison and throw away the key! Small number!

[@d3fau1thmph]

Enshittification is spreading into hardware.

[@SterileNeutrino]

More like going to fast on the FINFET structure

[@truedatrue2744]

There's no such thing as enshittification. This is capitalism.

[@SpartanJoe193]

​@@truedatrue2744 Are you serious? Enshittification is literally a symptom of crapitalism.

[@eIicit]

@@SpartanJoe193What economic model do you propose as an alternative? What other approach besides global free trade has the ability to elevate the entire world out of poverty? Is it perfect? Not by a long shot. Is it hands down the absolute best model we have come up with? Without a shadow of a doubt.

[@KingKrouch]

​@@SpartanJoe193late stage capitalism specifically.

[@IricAlexis]

Planned obsoletion goes too fast?

[@feisaljauharitufail]

Nah. I think Intel wants this.

[@ILovePancakes24]

The fix is to buy the new one that actually works

[@hoodcate]

​@@feisaljauharitufailWhy would that be, for what reason.

[@jonasghafur4940]

that's a profoundly stupid take

[@vappyreon1176]

Not planned, just poor quality products. Intel is circling the drain right now alongside a lot of Israeli companies.

[@Milosz_Ostrow]

Intel's analysis of the problem sounds correct. Years ago, at the insistence of my boss, I purchased a Palm Pilot personal digital assistant. It had a problem in that when fresh AA alkaline batteries were installed, the date would not change at midnight, although the clock would keep the correct time of day. After running on the batteries for several days, their voltage would drop slightly and the calendar function would start working correctly. I had the device replaced under warranty a couple of times and all of them acted the same way, making them essentially useless in their primary function of acting as an electronic reminder for meetings and tasks. I am sure that Palm's customer service people knew the cause of this failure as being a defective processor in their product, but every time I spoke to them, they pretended my case was unique, i.e., lied to me. (The company folded not long thereafter.)

[@jsrodman]

The problem is worse than this. Intel is still issueing misleading press releases about the problem, and we now have information that Intel refused rmas for affected CPUs when they knew they were caused by flaws in manufacture.

[@familhagaudir8561]

Class Action Lawsuit ( which Intel will lose ) if they don't handle this to the satisfaction of the costumers. This could end Intel.

[@benyomovod6904]

Intel has Boeing

[@Paulctan]

You won the Internet for the day!🤣

[@nishyanthkumar]

they outsourced their QC to boeing

[@mallninja9805]

Meh, it's end stage capitalism. Nobody wants 'quality' - least of all hardware manufacturers. _everything_ can be either ephemeral or subscription-only. Consume!

[@stage666]

Boeing: "Damn...we are in big trouble". Intel: "Chill bro, you are not the only one".

[@ploed]

@@stage666 at least no one died because of Intel (yet) fuck Up.

[@AyushKumar-md9ut]

seeing Intel and Boeing, companies were once leaders of engineering in their spaces, going up in flames like this is really disheartening.

[@jigsaw2253]

Stick to your country Kumar

[@paneledp]

@@jigsaw2253 jigsaw you trippin

[@manbok2035]

When pure capitalism takes over and every inch of slightest passion to make a good product is killed off.

[@jackzugna5830]

Intel to Crowdstrike: "Well, I will continue what you started."

[@reallyryan_]

i'm sure you thought that was clever in your head.

[@mrkesu]

This 100% sounds like planned obsolescence backfiring on them. CPUs typically "last forever" and can be re-used indefinitely for various projects. The only major issue with using older hardware in home projects has typically been power consumption and heat generation (for me at least), but as they've become more and more power efficient this problem has gone away, so now there is even less reason in the future to upgrade my servers. Unless, of course, CPUs just started randomly dying somewhere between 3-10 years of being in use...

[@familhagaudir8561]

I never had a CPU die in all my life. If discovery during a class actuin lawsuit shows Intel deliberately did this, the company better me fined into oblivion.

[@timramich]

AMD already does that with their Epycs and vendor lock.

[@Hullbreachdetected]

Except what Intel does is just throwing more power at their CPU and call it next gen. Both 13th and 14th gen are overclocked 12th gen. You can see the difference in power draw efficiency in recent Intel vs AMD CPUs.

[@andrewlim6329]

A friend had his 3800x AMD CPU die and had to warranty, I just couldn't figure out how a CPU would die running stock until I learned how motherboards are overclocking CPUs by default. It could be a new planned obsolescence tactic to shorten the lifespan of CPUs by feeding it high voltages and letting it run at high temperatures for paltry gains in performance.

[@stickfijibugs]

@mrkesu. Are you sure this is not the motherboard "capacitor plague" which has a lifetime of what you state? I have Intel CPUs going back decades and they all work. However, on several motherboards, including ASUS and GigaByte, I have had to replace popped electrolytic capacitors to bring operation back to life. Inspect every aluminum electrolytic capacitor (wrapped in insulating tape, usually black, sometimes green or orange) for a bulged top, even a small bulge, on every working machine you have before it fails. Replace those with aluminum polymer capacitors (visible aluminum all on the outside), and your CPUs should last "forever".

[@Adrian-ql5yz]

Ed takes holidays, the IT world colapses. Coincidence? I THINK NOT!

[@ContemplativeCat]

🤣

[@dalehorton7748]

I still wonder if it'll ever come out if the CrowdStrike devs were running 13th/14th gen CPUs and their deployment issue/corruption was actually Intel's fault.

[@nicholas_obert]

That would be hilarious and terrifying at the same time

[@vitajazz]

No, it was a null pointer in the code, a none existent function was called up, causing the CPU to bluescreen to protect memory.

[@dalehorton7748]

@@vitajazz open the .sys file in question in a hex editor, the entire file is binary 0s. So yes one address fetched from the file was null, but also all checksums or such were too, yet it still attempted the load. The file was likely corrupted on upload

[@SrssSteve]

@@dalehorton7748 Couldn’t a faulty CPU have fed a whole block of zeros to the FileCopy function?

[@volodumurkalunyak4651]

@@vitajazz non-existant function was really non-existant from a file beeing full of binary '0'-es

[@spacemeter3001]

I had a similar issue with an AMD CPU a couple years ago. My new Ryzen 5 3600 build had odd crashes while playing games like The Witcher 3 and these crashes happened at random intervals. I narrowed it down to a CPU / board issue and RMA'd both parts. MSI didn't find anything wrong with the board and sent it back to me but AMD found that the CPU had issues and sent me a brand new part as a replacement. Intel seriously needs to step up to their mistake and refund their customers or send them working parts.

[@MindHunger]

As someone who has been in semiconductor manufacturing most of my career, I can tell right away there is no way these processors were let out the door without many people at Intel knowing this was a problem. From my own recent experience it seems Intel is like Boeing, the accountants and MBAs are overruling the engineers.

[@gavorgavin]

Like the old saying goes, The problem is never the CPU.... Except when it is..... but it never is... Except when it is....

[@Biosynchro]

This is why we need tech diversity in IT. Networks, CPUs, OSes, etc.

[@familhagaudir8561]

Intel and Boeing : "Best I can do is hire unqualified people based on skin color."

[@MrSpy13011]

@@familhagaudir8561 Yep because all these issues are caused by non-whites, you found the source.

[@edwardallenthree]

It's the RMA refusals that will make me steer away from Intel for a long time. You can make a mistake. You can make a mistake and have trouble realizing it. You can make a mistake and deny it and deny it and deny it and then suddenly admit it. I'll forgive you for any of those, as long as you do right by your customers. Intel has not and did not.

[@JamieBainbridge]

This. Mistakes happen. Don't make the customer wear the cost. Trust takes years to build but an instant to lose.

[@llmnr3xp0sed]

The Oxidation problem is what will make this an expensive fix for Intel. The issue with the microcode algorithm is patchable; a microcode decoder will use match patch registers to compare a stored value with the value of the microcode in microcode-RAM based on the entry point. Ad hoc patching or re-architecture of microcode is why Intel doesn't document microcode; it allows them to patch (or ultimately change) microcode without breaking compatibility. If you're interested in CPU security, look up the Red Unlock technique developed by the uCode Research team.

[@Hullbreachdetected]

You think they will do those thing?

[@djsmeguk]

Level1 techs and gamers nexus are both investigating this, working with large game server providers and others. There's a bunch of issues on these processors across a wide range of product lines including desktop, server and laptop parts. It's a whole can of worms and Intel has been frantically trying to bury it in any way they can. The over voltage problem is unlikely to be a widespread cure. They can't RMA because they don't have a solution yet (and would likely need to build a new part to offer). It's a huge mess.

[@ILovePancakes24]

This is the end of Intel.

[@djsmeguk]

@@ILovePancakes24 it's not, but it's going to take a lot of time effort money and honesty to recover from it.

[@kassd2]

linus tech tips are not even talking about this problem. that is because they are heavily sponsored by intel

[@djsmeguk]

@@kassd2 what? They done a whole wan show segment on it a couple of times.

[@kassd2]

@@djsmeguk and where is dedicated episode on chanel with title "We need to talk about intel..."? In 4 hour long wan show episode it was one of 20 topics. So it does not count

[@00jknight]

As a game dev who has investigated non sensical error reports with logs and stack traces that seem impossible to generate, this video puts my mind at ease.

[@jonasghafur4940]

I have a strong suspicion that microcode updates, although maybe slowing down the process, will not be able to prevent degradation over the entire planned life-cycle as expected of x64 CPUs. If this really is rooted in oxidation of copper interconnects, the occurrence of fast degradation in lower-binned SKUs does not instill confidence. Compute providers already have significantly increased prices for dealing with intel boxes, system integrators facing RMAs over misleading failure modes won’t be a joy to sort out either. I think intel being silent for so long and only doing the bare minimum is the result of damage control, namely, accepting as little blame as possible, paying the price of reputation damage within smaller enthusiast circles to keep this out of the mainstream newscycle This will be an inevitable nightmare,

[@familhagaudir8561]

It won't solve the problem : the CPUs are corroding due to contamination during manufacturing. They will all degrade, and most will fail after a relatively short life. I never had a CPU die on me no matter how old the computer. Intel will break a new frontier of abyssmal quality.

[@jaredwilliams8621]

The oxidation issue really isn't the biggest problem. In theory, it was a small number and was resolved. These are just bad CPUs that need to be RMAed. The real problem is that ALL 13th and 14th gen CPUs (at least of certain SKUs), whether they have failed or not, have been running at voltage levels which is causing internal damage. Even if a microcode update fixes the voltage issue, it cannot fix the physical damage that has been done to every CPU in those generations. Some CPUs haven't been damaged enough to cause problems, and probably could continue on for many years without failing (assuming the microcode update is applied in a timely manner), while others may have been pushed to the brink of failure and become essentially ticking time-bombs. There is no good way to determine the extent of the damage done on any particular CPU, so I would say Intel likely needs to recall the entire 13th and 14th generation.

[@enderdodo9749]

1:18 "the size of the cojones" 😂 true though

[@antoniogarest7516]

@@enderdodo9749 jajajajaja

[@Bareego]

It's been great seeing the evolving coverage on this issue on the main computer tech channels.

[@MeriaDuck]

ONCE have I seen a case where the compiler was actually faulty. I stumbled upon an issue in gcc that Red Hat hadn't addressed in patches despite the fact thst gcc had fixed in days after it was discovered after a release. This was over twenty years ago. It took two Very Smart colleagues (I was an intern) to find it. We were astounded 😂 To have to conclude that the actual CPU is the culprit is so out there! Especially the fact that it happens over time. Wow.

[@InfiniteQuest86]

It sounds scary to say intel is an interpreted language. The truth is that every CPU runs microcode and has been for over 30 years.

[@inodedentry8887]

Not *every* CPU, but every x86 cpu for sure. It just makes sense, if you are chasing performance. The instruction set needs to be stable and backwards compatible, else you will break people's software. But you want your microarchitecture engineers to be free to explore different new optimizations when designing newer generations of cores. So you let them. The internals of the core can be implemented using whatever custom proprietary instructions make the most sense for that particular CPU design, letting them be as fast as possible. And since this is going to be a big and power hungry CPU anyway (given that it is a CPU designed for performance), might as well spend some die area on a more complicated instruction decoder + translation unit, to translate the public-facing instructions into the internal ones. Plus, having microcode means that many various kinds of bugs become fixable after the fact, after the CPU is in production and in the hands of users. Security vulnerability or misbehaving instruction found? It can probably just be fixed with a microcode update. But for small cores that chase power efficiency and low cost, instead of performance, like microcontrollers or the lowest power designs from the likes of Arm, it doesn't make sense. And those CPUs don't have microcode, even today.

[@Knirin]

@@inodedentry8887Microcode is a great solution for tasks that equate to building a hardware lookup table. Instruction decoding is a good example. Ben Eater uses it for that purpose in his 8-Bit breadboard computer.

[@InfiniteQuest86]

@@inodedentry8887 Yeah thanks for expanding. I was trying to say it isn't scary, and you've articulated the reasons well. Still, I would call microcontrollers MCUs not CPUs. I still maintain all CPUs use microcode. Even ARM for any normal CPU they make.

[@lauraprates8764]

They are not interpreted, it's more like a bunch of control signals, to be interpreted microcode should be Turing complete

[@Arthur-qv8np]

You are confusing things up. The micro-code have nothing to do with seeing x86 as an "interperated langage". And by the way, there is no "interpretation". Instruction are just decoded into micro-operations, it just about breaking complex instructions into simple operations (instruction != operation). Also, micro-code and micro-operation are 2 very distinct concepts. A basic in-order processor can have a micro-code. It's just a way to make the decoder more flexible. Ok, the intel micro-code is sophisticated but this just help handling non-performance-critical complex instructions (e.g. for legacy purpose). About micro-operation: sometime we call them "micro-instruction" but it's misleading, they are just a bunch of control signals (as @lauraprates8764 says) that should be dispatch to an execution unit to perform an operation. "micro-operation" is therefore a more appropriate name. Sometime we can read on that micro-operations are "RISC-style operations", but this is misleading too. "RISC" is a type of Instruction-Set, it's part of the architectural definition. While a "micro-operation" is an internal representation, it's part of the micro-architecture. Taking about "RISC-style operation" is therefore breaking the seperation between architecture (the programmer interface) and micro-architecture (the internal structure), it's just add's up to the global confusion about how computers actually works.

[@mascot4950]

I've been having the "out of memory" thing on shader compilation since I built this computer a few months ago. I never thought anything of it, because everything still worked fine. Shaders compiled and games all ran fine, I just got an error that I could ignore on rare occasions. I chalked it up to Unreal Engine weirdness related to shader compilation. It happened very rarely and I had forgotten about it, but yesterday it happened again and since this issue had been in the news lately I connected the dots. I happened to be trying out a title that lets me spawn into different parts of the map, and it compiles shaders at that point. The error happened every time I changed location. I decided to try turning off all CPU overclocking, and it went from 100% reproduction rate, to not occurring at all. I'm leaving it like this until the microcode update gets released, then I guess it's experimentation time to see if I need to RMA or not. It's a 14900k so it should be safe from the oxidation issue, but whether this is instability from voltage or from damage caused by voltage, remains to be seen. It's so weird to know this is an issue, while also experiencing the system as rock solid. It's like the issue is an intermittent bug on exactly one processor instruction that's exclusively used when compiling particular shaders.

[@JathraDH]

100% voltage issue in your case. You need to disable the thermal boost on the CPU and check your board bios for update. There was an issue with some boards actually undervolting the CPU too much too causing those crashes as well. The 14900K is not safe overclocked or at stock with the thermal boost on though.

[@mascot4950]

@@JathraDH I already had the eTVB BIOS update from a few weeks back. I set the BIOS to use "Intel Default Settings," which was added in a previous BIOS update earlier in the history of unravelling these issues. Granted, I just assume that's not overclocking, but I don't actually know that. I guess I'll have another run around in BIOS to see if I can find anything called thermal boost, at least. Thanks for the tip.

[@JathraDH]

@@mascot4950 2 Cores on your chip are deemed "special" cores and have a max boost set to 6ghz out of the box. They are a few hundred MHZ higher than the boost on your other cores. It's this boosting behavior that is largely responsible for the degradation. Apparently the chip was requesting even more voltage than its VID states, but even the VID for that level of boost is scary. Capping the boost on those cores to the boost of the rest of your cores should help with the degradation on your CPU.

[@familhagaudir8561]

I hope you kept your reciet for the inevitable class action lawsuit, because those chips are corroding.

[@mascot4950]

@@familhagaudir8561 No need for a class action over here. If it fails within five years I get a replacement or full refund. It's the law. The corrosion issue is supposedly limited to 13th gen so not applicable to me.

[@tqrules01]

Intel pr: its voltages ignore the W680 boards with 35watt 13900T and 14900T dying on mass. Intel engineers: Sir ever since we moved the io layer on the 13900 later 14900, we have seen the chips die. Probably io and speed step is enough but if we downclock and decrease the voltage we might drag this Beyond their warranty period.

[@arthurmoore9488]

You're missing some crucial context. Level1Techs broke the story two weeks ago that the issue was not the power profile, since server motherboards with those chips at conservative power profiles had around a 50% defect/failure rate. Gamers Nexus then released the news about oxidation last week, and is hiring a failure analysis lab. Put another way, you're actually giving Intel too much credit, as they are still trying to bury the story as much as they can. I highly recommend the Gamers Nexus video examining the statement, as it's worse than you think!

[@FriedEgg101]

My 980X spent 6 years of daily use at 4.4GHz, and another 2 at stock clocks. I then gave it to a freind, who used it as an ark game server for another 2 years (that I used as a player), before giving it to his friend. Afaik it hasn't died yet. My 6850k spent the first 4 years of its life at stock clocks, but has been at 4.4GHz for the last 3 years. I rarely clean the cooler. It's fine.

[@MultiWirth]

I´ve been overclocking an Intel Core 2 Quad for many years, after i bought it second hand back then and still this CPU is working fine. It happens to be over 15 years old...

[@CompufreakVultureX]

We've lost days of work, going over all the possibilities why a system would crash. We had ssd corruption. We lost data. This whole stuff is a nightmare. Intel can expect a bunch of RMAs after their August patch, because once the damage is done no micro update is going to fix that.

[@developersteve1658]

We've been spoiled by modern computing. I can't imagine punch cards, tape reels, or mechanical transistors were all that reliable.

[@WD_Unieles]

I just discovered your channel, the content is incredibly interesting and also very accessible. Keep up the good work champ

[@Alexis-k5d]

so can we get our money back from intel?

[@Doctored_Oak]

Intel's denying product return requests so we're probably going to have to wait for a class action lawsuit or something

[@weshuiz1325]

Intel: *laughs, No

[@gunturbayu6779]

Pat Gelsinger : well no , we cant even fund new facilities for rnd

[@NitroDubzzz]

No. Intel might send you enough money for a sanding pad to clean up all the oxidation on the copper though, you could always ask

[@zimriel]

might depend on your warranty deal with the computer manufacturer. they're the middle people.

[@WyvernDotRed]

While the actual cores degrading like this is another level of problematic, I am fairly certain that my Ryzen 3 3200G processor is suffering similar degradation in it's memory controller. This as over time, I have had to downclock the memory, to even below the specification, for it to first run stable and now boot at all. Before figuring this out, the system suffered random crashes while playing back videos or running UE4 games, which slowy got more frequent. Which stopped happening after the downclock, for now. Not that I mind this much, as the process lasted much longer than intended already and an upgrade will be an easy drop-in once it does go out.

[@justindressler5992]

Mircocode wont fix oxidation, and if there is electron migration due to overvoltage the transistors are already damaged and will have shorter life. The microcode patch only addresses one of these issues in the mean time we are left with and processor that will die shortly after warranty expires.

[@reallyryan_]

really you dOn'T SaYyYy duh

[@CookyMonzta]

I must say I'm glad I went back to AMD in 2020.

[@stonedhackerman]

I swear this is exactly what's happening to me! I thought it's overclocking or bad ram or whatever. But my 13900K behaves exactly like this, the longer it runs, the more just seemingly random errors occur in CPU-intensive tasks where a lot of memory is being moved around, like compiling huge C++ projects, and I'm getting random GPU errors too!

[@jokerace8227]

Yes, I can see this intermittent microcode flaw causing certain processes to possibly send bad data to the GPU, and then the GPU can't process it, causes it to crash.

[@familhagaudir8561]

I had computers since the middle of highschool. NEVER had a CPU die. 10 years+ computers still work. Intel is going to argue "hurr durr it's normal for CPUs to die after 2 years warranty".

[@kuma9239]

The amount of malding their devs must have gone through to finding the culprit was the client/server cpu... This shit happens with me I'm gonna have trust issues for the rest of my life.

[@Arthur-qv8np]

Hi, several remarks about CPU microcode and micro-architecture: - The term "microcode" here is not related to the way instruction are decoded, executed, and so on. For Intel here, it's just a synonym for "CPU's specific firmware". - Actual true microcode (related to instruction decoding, not general firmware) is not specific to superscalar uarch like the Intel one. A very simple in-order CPU can have a microcode, it just help to fix faulty instuction decoder. - Supescalar out-of-order processor (like intel's core) do not "interprets" x86 assembly at all. It decode them into micro-operations, but to call that an interpreter of any kind is misleading. And this is a source of many misconceptions about CISC vs RISC ISA.

[@leapsseg4372]

So basically they mixed cpus with poo sauce

[@altrombone1775]

poo

[@triangleunderstander]

pee as well

[@quantumjourney1]

@@triangleunderstander good point

[@hughjanes4883]

Central Pooping Unit

[@Corteum]

Poop Inside 😂

[@CC-gu3ze]

The competence crisis is gaining momentum.

[@Paulctan]

WTF??! I thought I was the only one that had a BAD Intel i7-13700 CPU (which Intel is refusing to RMA)! My CPU outright died completely.

[@rottershier6775]

13700 f, k?

[@Paulctan]

@@rottershier6775 13700K

[@lsy88888]

I have one 13700 died too. And still under rma process. It been one month already. It is a 13700, non k non f, a simply 13700. Fml And yes, the chip have some darker tonation in different places, looks like oxidation

[@rottershier6775]

@@lsy88888 i have 13700f should i be worried? I havent experience any bsod though, tye only crash i got from the finals but all games seems fine

[@lsy88888]

@@rottershier6775 mine have minor crash from the start and only died off after one year. (and intel stated a 3 yr warranty) So I guess you could monitor yours when the crash frequency become higher. There is still a 50% rate of having a good CPU tho haha

[@YuraL88]

I was unfortunate enough to buy a laptop with i7-13700H right before the story went public😢😢😢...

[@ariphaos]

I've shelved my laptop for now and hopefully it's a late enough model that the microcode update will fix this properly when they release it.

[@doganertan7259]

Most of the 13th gen laptop CPU's are just renamed and clocked a little higher 12th gen CPU's and most of them are not running at full performance so most probably you are fine. If you are not getting an error of course, if you are getting an error it is maybe a little late because the harm might have been done. I hope intel will at least give a refund.

[@doganertan7259]

@@ariphaos if you can i think you can undervolt it and continue using it.

[@greatcanadianmoose3965]

So I got a framework laptop with an i5-1340P... is that short for i5-13400P? Is this a safe CPU?

[@MrGryph78]

It's not likely that this issue will be a problem for mobile processors. They just aren't pushing the power envelope like the desktop parts are.

[@KvapuJanjalia]

All I wanted was a best gaming CPU. All I got was random crashes.

[@ДмитроПрищепа-д3я]

Then you should've went for 7800x3D

[@mrpocock]

Way back, when intel was first diversifying their chips and adding vector operations, we had some vectorised code that would literally pop a chunk of the chip off. The only reliable way to avoid it was to do some non vectorised work every few iterations. That was an expensive debug session.

[@marcelcoetzee7152]

Buildzoid has been talking to a group that runs minecraft servers and it looks like that is almost guaranteed to kill a 13900k in a datacentre in 3 months. That isn't exactly the kind of load you would expect to brick a cpu in that timespan so it suggests a more complex fault at play here.

[@JathraDH]

The "complex" issue is that as he stated in that vid, the MC server is a single thread, which puts the CPU into thermal boost mode and dumps 1.5+ volts through it non stop. It is intel flying too close to the sun. I do agree there are some other things probably at play but it's mostly the super high voltage killing those chips.

[@JJFX-]

​@@JathraDHPotentially up to ~1.5V. Only the worst bins need voltage that high and the failure rate was more like 30% based on what the person he spoke to said.

[@JathraDH]

@@JJFX- The lower end binned chips are still over 1.4v, which is still not a safe voltage for 24/7 use.

[@JJFX-]

@@JathraDH That's simply not true. It's much more complicated than that. There's nothing inherently wrong with boost clocks running higher voltages than you would with a manual OC. Intel just screwed up their algorithms big time and I'm still suspicious there's actually bigger issues at play than they're letting on.

[@JathraDH]

@@JJFX- 1.5v is not normal OC voltages lmao. Even 1.4v is pushing it for OC. Yes the chips are pushing even higher voltages than that due to the error but those are the voltages in the chips VID table and still far too high. I do agree its probably not ONLY voltage related, but the high boost voltages, even the intended ones are not safe voltages for long term use.

[@kfj795]

will you ever upload in 4k? im watching on a high res screen and 1080p is looking rough

[@Veptis]

This started way back in mid 2023 when Nvidia said that driver crashes are Intels fault. it has been going on ever since. You would normally expect a bathtub like curve for technology failures.

[@KSJAFN]

I raised a tech support issue (years ago) with a game developer due to a game crashing at a particular point. They asked if I had a particular series of graphics cards and told me that the GPU had come from the manufacturer overclocked by 50 mhz. I lowered the clock speed in the driver's settings page and the issue resolved. Game devs are used to running up against hardware issues I think.

[@gotfan7743]

Is it the same with Laptop CPU's? I have been thinking to buy gaming Laptop with i9 14900HX. With all the news I am afraid to make the purchase.

[@haha-hk9tx]

I would not buy raptor lake. Just 7 days ago I bought a core ultra 5 125h laptop and this came out and I'm worried as ####!

[@HoosierTransfer]

Yes laptop cpus are also affected.

[@gotfan7743]

@@haha-hk9tx I have saved up for 2 years to buy something which can last me for the next 7 years. The last thing I want is to have my money go up in smoke. If the failure is inevitable at some point then I have no choice but to go for AMD. :(

[@ItsHaldun]

Just buy one with AMD, they're straight up better at this point.

[@bravefastrabbit770]

@@gotfan7743 What's with the sad face, you've been left with the superior alternative 🤦‍♂

[@isaiahkroeker7062]

Can you please do a video or reply with some advice going forward? It's been so hard for me (new to computer builds) to gather information. I always see people talk about 13/14 900K specifically. What about stuff like 13700F? I haven't gotten a failure yet, but I also don't play as much. Is it the kind of failure where I should wait to see if they fix the microcode? Should I just completely get a new CPU? Will riding it out until a failure just screw up my CPU (which I then replace) or does it leave the rest of your computer in shambles?

[@mduckernz]

I strongly recommend watching the Level1Tech’s video on the topic - or the one from Gamers Nexus. It will answer questions like this. But short answer: yes, your model is among those affected, but whether your one specifically may be / how strongly affected it may be is much harder to say, particularly with how little information we have from Intel (.. like, we don’t have have a range of serial numbers that may be affected - almost all the detail we have is from semi-amateur investigators and third party vendors or organisations) At the _minimum_ and *as soon as possible* : set some considerably lower maximum voltage or current (since current is directly tied to voltage) limits on what any core may use!!! This will prevent or greatly reduce the rate of further damage occurring. How exactly to do this will vary depending on your motherboard, so consult the manual or a knowledgeable person. -- Personally I would RMA the CPU prior to getting the microcode update that Intel is promising, as prior to that point, it will likely have been accumulating damage slowly but surely, and I wouldn’t want a damaged CPU that at any point may start showing symptoms, since it is progressive over time, slowly getting worse, and there is no guarantee that the update will stop it completely (and it is impossible to reverse). But you may choose not to if you don’t wish to be without it for a time… although I personally think this would be a mistake, and an expensive one at that. Something that might shift your opinion: the kinds of errors that occur include I/O errors, and people have experienced data corruption, where corrupted data is written back to disk, and this breaks file integrity or even the operating system. If you use file system encryption, it’s even worse as a single bit error will render a large block of data totally unusable (not the whole disk, just a part, due to how encrypting filesystems work).

[@privacyvalued4134]

I _was_ eyeing an Intel 14th gen CPU for a new machine. Based on all the reports that have been showing up, that idea is on hold indefinitely. The AMD Ryzen series has better power draw metrics (from the wall), more cores, and better stability than Outtel. Outtel can spin it however they want to, but everyone is on to their shenanigans. How many major failures in CPU design does this make now? They know they are getting their rear kicked by AMD but appear to have forgotten that they need to make a functional product first.

[@vectorinteractiveoffical]

I switched from the 14900k to the 7950x3D for game dev and it and it’s such a relief not fearing a bluescreen at every moment.

[@ytnathandude]

me with my 13th gen i9: 👀👀

[@ytnathandude]

fuck as i watched this i got a out of memory from gta in the bg (i have a 4090 and 64gb ram) AINT NO WAY THE TIMING IS INSANE

[@PJHLR]

Intel does confirm oxidation issue of the vias. So far, it is believed that this is the root of the issue that triggers the incorrect voltage requests.

[@SterileNeutrino]

That T-Shirt is like saying that "every text contains the lost second book of Aristotle's Poetics if you have the right mapping". But you don't have the mapping.

[@davidwebster4457]

No.

[@vladislavkaras491]

Thanks for explaining the problem!

[@6i668]

Intel, has to be using inferior quality materials then, if oxidation is occurring rapidly

[@rusi6219]

@@6i668 how else do you think they got to the top? In those circles, "clever financial management" means providing inferior product while charging extra.

[@rbrosz]

It's a manufacturing process issue, not a materials issue.

[@6i668]

So blame the Chinese now

[@parvneema]

Loved your thumbnails on both intel and crowdstrike videos. 😅😄

[@maxrev-dev]

Got 14900. Undervolting is the way to keep it cool and safe. Offsets are -0.130 or more Edit: added benchmarks and more settings below.

[@StephenMcGregor1986]

personally I like the ability to run my stuff stock if so desired and have it run reliably until the end of time without screwing with anything

[@maxrev-dev]

@@StephenMcGregor1986 I ran it in stock for a while and it was totally fine, until I tried training a huge ML model with a big dataset (which was overkill) and it reached 100C on package. So after an hour of search I found some posts on r/intel regarding taming this beast. Still, I had the "Intel Optimized Defaults" with 253W limit enabled and a good AIO, but this didn't help. I had to, just to be safe. The silicon won't last long at this temperatures (as confirmed from video). For 99% of time it worked good even with stress tests under 90C. But a 100% load at 253W+ power draw it goes out of the line. It's throttled around 1C to TJmax, that's no good for me. Now it warms to 90C max (93C peak) in stress test. For sure, it can be cooled even more, but I don't reach those temps 99% of time. I limited package power draw to 240W + offset I mentioned above. No significant perfomance loss so far. Benchmark: 925/16780 (single/multi) bench which is the same or better comparing to stock (926/14255)

[@maxrev-dev]

I ran it in stock for a while and it was totally fine, until I tried training a huge ML model with a big dataset (which was overkill) and it reached 100C on package. So after an hour of search I found some posts on r/intel regarding taming this beast. Still, I had the "Intel Optimized Defaults" with 253W limit enabled and a good AIO, but this didn't help. I had to, just to be safe. The silicon won't last long at this temperatures (as confirmed from video). For 99% of time it worked good even with stress tests under 90C. But a 100% load at 253W+ power draw it goes out of the line. It's throttled around 1C to TJmax, that's no good for me. Now it warms to 90C max (93C peak) in stress test. For sure, it can be cooled even more, but I don't reach those temps 99% of time. I limited package power draw to 240W + offset I mentioned above. No significant perfomance loss so far. Benchmark: 925/16780 (single/multi) bench which is the same or better comparing to stock (926/14255)

[@MaxHeadroomGPT]

Just found this video on my feed. Love this guy's T-shirt. Totally approve of his vernacular. Subbed.

[@HoosierTransfer]

Looks like i will be using amd from now on.

[@nickwallette6201]

The same reason Western Digital users gave when they switched to Seagate, and Seagate users gave when they switched to Maxtor, and Maxtor users gave when the switched to Quantum .... Also the same argument Symantec users gave when they switched to McAfee, and McAfee users gave when they switched to Symantec. Everybody just changes teams every few years to get to the greener grass. Basically: Every vendor effs up, and when you have a limited number to pick from, you can either just wait it out, or switch to The Other Guy until, inevitably, they also eff up, and then you can switch back.

[@orterves]

In-depth info like this is great, but I'm happy that I don't have to actually worry much day to day about the real details beyond "intelligent rock sometimes releases magic blue smoke".

[@UncleKennysPlace]

Has anyone made a comprehensive list of which CPUs are affected? Is it _all_ of the 13/14 gen? I hope not ...

[@jaycahow4667]

I thought I read somewhere it mainly effects I9/I7 chips based on reporting and was less likely to effect I3/I5 chips. I have not seen list of effected chips from Intel yet...............

[@Notfallkaramell]

@UncleKennysPlace My theory is the i3 and i5's are affected, too, but we won't notice them dying on masse for a while, because they are weaker and produce less heat. Their rot will be slower.

[@thisnthat3530]

"Back in the day" my brother-in-law had a Pentium 90 system that kept crashing. We eventually tracked it down to the CPU. Any time DMA was used by a peripheral the PC would instantly lock up solid. The CPU was replaced by a Pentium 100 and the shop said Intel had specifically asked for the defective CPU back for testing. This is the only time I've seen a CPU defect where the PC "mostly works" and it took a while to isolate the cause.

[@j340_official]

My 13900K is overclocked on an older BIOS (RoG z690 formula) with all the ridiculous power limit settings like 4096 power limit etc. And it’s overclocked, boosting to 6 GHz on 1 core, 5.9 GHz on 2 cores, 5.5 GHz on 4 or more cores. it doesn’t crash. But the key was to undervolt it (relative to Asus’s optimized defaults or ‘auto’ settings which pumped far too much voltage into the CPU even at stock). Unfortunately, Intel motherboards, on 'auto' settings, have been pumping too much voltage into Intel CPUS since at least Skylake 6700K. Intel needed to clamp down on the mobo vendors years ago… but now with Raptor Lake flying too close to the sun, Intel’s lax practices has come back to bite it in the a**. I hope every affected customer is made whole.

[@trucid2]

Intel flew too close to the sun in order to compete with AMD.

[@j340_official]

@@trucid2 Indeed! Intel just did not have the requisite production node available to make faster and more power efficient CPUs to compete with Zen 4. That is the root cause. Perhaps we are now seeing another reason why Apple left and released Apple Silicon. Imagine if Apple had a bunch of machines based on Raptor Lake and they were now failing en masse. Alder lake was a good upgrade over Rocket Lake/Comet Lake, and defeated Zen 3 (I remember the mighty 5950x dropped in price soon after Alder Lake came out). But zen4 was a very solid upgrade, especially the x3d part, and Intel didn't have Intel 20A or Intel 3/4 or TSMC 3nm available yet. So it pushed raptor lake too far and the motherboard vendors have been pumping high voltages on 'auto' settings for years. Put the two together, and it was a recipe for disaster. Makes you wonder whether Intel actually does QA/QC for months on end using retail boards. Why didn't they catch that RoG, Gigabyte, MSI and others pump high votlages into their CPUs? My opinion: If Arrow Lake is not an absolute home run, Intel might be in trouble....this might be the beginning of the end because they're losing customer trust already making people consider Zen 5 or Qualcomm or Apple, and those other companies are firing on all cylinders. AMD's stock price has had a meteoric rise in recent years, and it has been beautiful to watch. Might Intel be the next IBM?

[@trucid2]

@j340_official I've been buying Intel processors for over 20 years but unless they have a response to AMD's x3D processors, my next system will be AMD.

[@j340_official]

@@trucid2 same here. I've never had an AMD system, but I might downsize my rig and go SFF with a 9800x3d. I don't really see the point to keep on investing in Intel hardware any more if this is what is happening. It's really sad to see a company you've been a fan of for 30 years just start to fail. When I got into computers, my first PC had an Intel 80286! Then eventually we got a Pentium. That chip was a big deal back then. I started playing Doom and Wolfenstein 3D! It was such an exciting time back then in the 1990s. But the 2024 version of Intel isn't the same company any more. But in life, when it's time to move on, it's time to move on!

[@DandilynGoyette1001]

"it's just one volt guys, how bad can it be?" *Several billion dollars of chips later....*

[@maddog9213]

laughs in 7800x3d

[@deletevil]

the best CPU in the world ❤

[@navi2710]

Let's all be honest. This is not a micro code issue with voltage. Intel was struggling to maintain it's lead against AMD so it realised it could just pump higher voltage to get the performance it wants and likely knew no one would pick this up until several a year has pased. It's funny how it only effects 13th and 14th gen. The two generation where AMD have taken the lead in the CPU market in terms of price and 1 to 1 performance.

[@rikachiu]

Maybe I lucked out. I run my 13900k at full tilt for almost 2 years now. No issue. Not even a single BSOD.

[@privacyvalued4134]

Maybe. But maybe you are also sitting on a ticking time bomb. I'd wager how clean the power/voltage from your wall is also plays into things. The PSU does a lot of filtering/cleaning of power but it can't handle a ton of brownouts/power surges and will pass significant variances onto various components, including the CPU. I've seen reports say a 50% failure rate. 50% is already insanely high. Those are not good odds.

[@volodumurkalunyak4651]

@@privacyvalued4134 no. Clean power from PSU does nouthing. Loading the CPU fully does everything. CPU asks it's VRM for a specific voltage depending on frequency it wants to run (higher ontended frequency -> higher voltage) and loading CPU fully makes it run at voltage (and frequency) significantly lower than maximum, staying away from degradation.

[@StephenMcGregor1986]

Survivor bias Identifying Problematic Revisions: If Intel can pinpoint specific stepping codes within the affected CPU models that are more prone to oxidation, they could narrow down the scope of the problem. This would involve analyzing returned CPUs, gathering data from affected users, and potentially conducting additional testing. Targeted Recall or Refund: With this information, Intel could issue a targeted recall or refund program specifically for the problematic stepping codes. This would allow them to address the issue more efficiently and compensate affected customers without having to recall or refund every single CPU of that model. Clear Communication: Intel would need to clearly communicate the affected stepping codes to customers, potentially through a dedicated webpage, support documentation, or direct communication with retailers. This would allow customers to easily identify whether their CPU is eligible for a refund or replacement. Benefits of this approach: Precision: By targeting specific revisions, Intel can focus its resources on the CPUs that are actually affected by the issue, avoiding unnecessary returns and refunds. Customer Satisfaction: This approach would demonstrate Intel's commitment to addressing the issue promptly and fairly for those who are directly impacted. Cost-Effectiveness: It could potentially be more cost-effective for Intel to focus on specific revisions rather than recalling or refunding an entire model.

[@JathraDH]

@@volodumurkalunyak4651 This is untrue lmao. Fully loading the CPU causes the voltage to massively drop below what it even is at idle due to vdroop. On the contrary its when the CPU is not fully loaded at all that the very high frequency boosting takes place. Like when the CPU is at full idle or only 1-2 cores are being used. This is when the extremely high boost clocks/voltages are being applied.

[@JathraDH]

@@privacyvalued4134 It has really nothing to do with how clean the power is, that's what your VRM is for. My 13900K is still degraded despite being on a UPS it's entire life with voltage regulation circuitry and one of the top tier PSU's in the world running it. The power is as clean as it can possibly get outside running off an active UPS. I do agree about the ticking time bomb bit though. Because I also shut down my 13900K's thermal boost after only 1-2 weeks running it and the degradation still happened. It is stable under normal use but fails synthetic tests. It is a combo of the voltage + something else I'm pretty sure. High boost voltage will absolutely speed up the process however.

[@rigen97]

I hope the board manufacturers sue intel for reputation damage from intel's accusations

[@addydiesel6627]

Data corruption on the SSD is the worst risk. Imagine that you have corrupt backup as well 😢

[@msromike123]

Literally falling apart means they the physical package is becoming unserviceable.

[@HectorDiabolucus]

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that these CPUs have spyware embedded that is the ultimate cause.

[@geigenunterricht8684]

Two years!! How on earth can this happen??? What a mess, unbelievable..

[@chaferraro]

Since x86 is Intel proprietary tech, would it be right to say that any x86 licensed processor (like AMD) also runs interpreted assembly with microcode? 🤔

[@1DwtEaUn]

not the same microcode in AMD, and microcode is not just an X86 thing, even ARM has microcode.

[@Hiznogood]

Guess I dodged a bullet by going A9 this time for my gaming rig! Professionally as an IT-guy, this is really, really bad as most of our customers uses Intel based hardware! I will be a nightmare dealing with all the warranty stuff, the increase of support cases and so on!

[@AexoeroV]

If I'm not having problems with my 13900K should i upgrade the Bios when this new microcode comes out? Im undervolting my CPU to -0.75v, my PL1/PL2 are set to 253W and ICCMAX is 400A. The PC was built like 2 months ago and till now no problems.

[@Bolton19]

My i9 13900k is recently all of a sudden making every program crash frequently. Hoping to get a replacement right now but Intel's customer suupport is so bad it's crazy to navigate their site. It's as if they wanted to make it as painful as humanly possible to use your warranty. I identified the problem being a damaged core by using a software called Lasso, after googling a bit it seems that the main problem of 13 and 14th gen intel processors draw too much power causing them to become defective within a couple years.

[@jonjimihendrix]

No silicon can withstand 1000°c

[@txorimorea3869]

If the rust issue is as big as it looks in one or two years is going to destroy Intel's reputation.

[@MisterWillow]

Oh man, I got to say: Whenever I encouter a bug, I totally 100% assume it was my fault. Then debugging starts. Really, many cudo's (no CUDA's) to the team that escalated this to CPU issues.

[@PuscH311]

Every overclocker was wondering why they removed any safety. 100celsius ….400watt… My 5950x has 16cores and runs below 120W Something went totally wrong.