Too busy on chat with Intel support and sending in RMA's
Too busy on chat with Intel support and sending in RMA'sI remember people sticking with Intel 20+ years ago because the perception was Intel = stable and AMD = unstable. Where are these people today?
We joke but sometimes I still think this way. For some folks that give me the vibe it’s Intel/nvidia builds all the way. The couple I did like that semi recently I used 12th gen because the value was so good.I remember people sticking with Intel 20+ years ago because the perception was Intel = stable and AMD = unstable. Where are these people today?
Maybe. Until Intel informs us all exactly what is going on, noone can really answer your question.I recently upgraded a 12700 to a 14900 non-K. Is there any news on the non-k chips being degraded? For a couple of months I ran a 300W / 280 custom setting, but my workload was pretty medium most of the time. After some consideration I set it to 125W put the performance was terrible, so I settled on 250W for the moment, is this likely to be safe?
Install the latest BIOS, even if it's beta and hope for the best.is this likely to be safe?
We don't know the cause of the apparent degradation, so we can't establish a "safe" profile. However, there are things you can do to make sure the CPU is operating within the limits recommended by Intel. Start by updating your BIOS and then check all the settings below to make sure motherboard is configured properly.I recently upgraded a 12700 to a 14900 non-K. Is there any news on the non-k chips being degraded? For a couple of months I ran a 300W / 280 custom setting, but my workload was pretty medium most of the time. After some consideration I set it to 125W put the performance was terrible, so I settled on 250W for the moment, is this likely to be safe?
Just saw this on the hwbot discordInstall the latest BIOS, even if it's beta and hope for the best.
voltage tolerance for the ring clock did not translate with the jump from 12th to 13th gen
The ring got bigger due to more cores and more cache
Alongside more baseline voltage
What the hell does he means with "Microcode can't be undone"? Microcode is uploaded to Processor by Firmware about POST time (Nowadays can also be done by early OS boot) and goes in a sort of volatile patch RAM. It is not some kind of internal NVRAM.Just saw this on the hwbot discord
View attachment 103086
Probably means Intel instructed the mobo vendors to disallow BIOS downgrade from this latest one.What the hell does he means with "Microcode can't be undone"?
I guess that is one way to deal with this situation. Just keep getting RMA's if you need it. Keep those benching scores intact... for as long as you can. But if performance is radically altered, Intel is leaving themselves open to a class action.Just saw this on the hwbot discord
View attachment 103086
It's honestly mind-boggling how intel decided to jump so hard from 12900K's 5.2 GHz boost to Raptor lake i9s and their 5.8-6.2 GHz boosts. Ryzen 7000 irrationally scared them with its 5.7 GHz boost.
I just want to say, as someone who has tried to enable XMP and then still reign in Intel chips with power limits and all the rest for the last five or so generations, all this hoop jumping is ridiculous. Given how UEFI interfaces use their own lingo (side eye at ASUS) to further obfuscate this stuff, its felt darn near impossible. Intel not only pushed their chips too hard it seems, they let OEM's cook how their CPUs are configured for way too long. IMO.We don't know the cause of the apparent degradation, so we can't establish a "safe" profile. However, there are things you can do to make sure the CPU is operating within the limits recommended by Intel. Start by updating your BIOS and then check all the settings below to make sure motherboard is configured properly.
You can use the values in the "Performance" column for a 250W configuration, but you need to make sure the current limits are also enforced (ICCMAX). Also make sure that CEP, eTVB, TVB and TVB Voltage Optimizations are enabled. The last few settings are essential for making sure the CPU uses less voltage under light loads.
View attachment 103085
Yup, it's absurd, and the worse part is probably yet to come.all this hoop jumping is ridiculous.
Maybe. Until Intel informs us all exactly what is going on, noone can really answer your question.
Anecdotal stuff here - but a guy on reddit said that he got rid of his stability issues at the 200W mark. What worked for one user may not work for others. But if you want to play is safe until Intel spills the beans I would screw down the wattage to the 200W mark.
The first I've heard of this. Do you have a source?AMD boosting Zen 2 single core boost too high and causing degradation/accelerated aging
Not many buying the argument as is. It's a nice soft shoe, but few are throwing money in the hat. a TPU poll that closed October last year already had almost as many respondents using 3D as all Intel CPUs combined. https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/...-an-amd-ryzen-x3d-cpu-with-3d-v-cache.312452/I have to wonder, when ARL launches and RPL gets price cuts, will reviewers re-bench RPL if there's a clock speed reduction? If so, it's going to make those arguments that RPL is the best bang-per-buck gaming CPU harder to sell...
LMAO - I actually chuckled because 1) it called out ASUS on some "feature" only their boards seem to have, probably something else with a custom name and 2)setting it does what? and its not safe? what?Hm, ok and that is some kind of option.