Question DEGRADING Raptor lake CPUs

Page 17 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Kocicak

Golden Member
Jan 17, 2019
1,059
1,115
136
I noticed some reports about degrading i9 13900K and KF processors.

I experienced this problem myself, when I ran it at 6 GHz, light load (3 threads of Cinebench), at acceptable temperature and non extreme voltage. After only few minutes it crashed, and then it could not run even at stock setting without bumping the voltage a bit.

I was thinking about the cause for this and I believe the problem is, that people do not appreciate, how high these frequencies are and that the real comfortable frequency limit of these CPUs is probably at something like 5500 or 5600 MHz. These CPUs are made on a same process (possibly improved somehow) on which Alder lake CPUs were made. See the frequencies 12900KS runs at. The frequency improvement of the new process tweak may not be so high as some people presume.

Those 13900K CPUs are probably highly binned to be able to find those which contain some cores which can reliably run at 5800 MHz. Some of the 13900K probably have little/no OC reserve left and pushing them will cause them to degrade/break.

The conclusion for me is that the best you can do to your 13900K or 13900KF is to disable the 5800 MHz peak, which will allow you to offset the voltage lower, and then set all core maximal frequency to some comfortable level, I guess the maximum level could be 5600 MHz. With lowered voltage this frequency should be gentler to the processor than running it at original 5500 MHz at higher voltage. You can also run it at lower frequencies, allowing for even higher voltage drop, but then the CPU is slowly loosing its sense (unless you want some high efficiency CPU intended for heavy multithread loads).

Running it with some power consumption limit dependent on your cooling solution to keep the CPU at sensible temperature will help too for sure.
 
Last edited:

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,019
10,339
136
The tray one seemed to have them misreading the serial number as the number they quoted back was 3262 not 3252... And then doubled down on the number they misread.

If their agents or the agents' managers are not on commission to reject RMAs... Well I don't know what they are doing.

GN said in their video that Intel’s response to rejected RMAs was to just keep trying and hopefully it’ll get accepted. It’s really hard to make anything of that except that they seem to have little interest in actually making things right for customers who bought a product Intel knew had a manufacturing flaw when they sold it.

I usually try to stay middle ground and by the facts on things, but Intel is making it really hard to not just feel a certain way about them right now.
 

DaaQ

Golden Member
Dec 8, 2018
1,435
1,034
136
GN said in their video that Intel’s response to rejected RMAs was to just keep trying and hopefully it’ll get accepted. It’s really hard to make anything of that except that they seem to have little interest in actually making things right for customers who bought a product Intel knew had a manufacturing flaw when they sold it.

I usually try to stay middle ground and by the facts on things, but Intel is making it really hard to not just feel a certain way about them right now.
In agreement here, but the problem is, according to the other article, you send in your CPU to Intel and they deem it fake, counterfeit, or whatever. They will not return it to you and reserve the right to destroy it.

So how will multiple attempts work out if they crush your first attempt with "it's fake" and you are left with nothing but a loss.
 

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,019
10,339
136
In agreement here, but the problem is, according to the other article, you send in your CPU to Intel and they deem it fake, counterfeit, or whatever. They will not return it to you and reserve the right to destroy it.

So how will multiple attempts work out if they crush your first attempt with "it's fake" and you are left with nothing but a loss.

I understand the right to confiscate counterfeit or relabeled CPUs, but yeah, using that as an excuse to not honor a valid warranty claim and get rid of the evidence would be quite despicable.
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
29,442
24,096
146
I understand the right to confiscate counterfeit or relabeled CPUs, but yeah, using that as an excuse to not honor a valid warranty claim and get rid of the evidence would be quite despicable.
I think the Intel employee that said there are still a lot of moving pieces nailed it. The efforts and people necessary to make this all happen were not already in place or well coordinated. Every move Intel has made has been reactive not proactive. They could have avoided all of this bad blood instead of needing to be effectively forced to admit or do anything.

Both of my Xbox 360s had the RROD issue BITD. Microsoft announced they would take care of us and how they would do it. The process of filing the RMA was extremely simple and fast, the shipping box and instructions were at my home in a couple of days. They returned a working console a week? later. It would have been better if they had not nerfed the design to begin with of course. But as Wendell said. Sometimes there are big problems, they happen. It's how you deal with them that is the most important, and that's where Intel's hubris led to failures that have made the problems much bigger.

Hell, I don't even buy the hypothesis that this course of action is the cheapest out. There are intangibles, or perhaps the better term is variables, involved, that are nigh impossible to calculate. But they may nevertheless have a big financial impact over time.
 

Doug S

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2020
2,695
4,563
136
Modern customer service: get no response unless you escalate to social media.

AKA scummy companies won't do right unless they are embarrassed?

Before the internet companies would pull the same stuff, but you didn't have any way to find out if it was just you or was happening to others, nor to publicize it and hope to embarrass them, unless you were friends with someone who worked at one of the three major networks or a big newspaper like the NYT and could get them to report on it.
 

maddie

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2010
4,877
4,945
136
In agreement here, but the problem is, according to the other article, you send in your CPU to Intel and they deem it fake, counterfeit, or whatever. They will not return it to you and reserve the right to destroy it.

So how will multiple attempts work out if they crush your first attempt with "it's fake" and you are left with nothing but a loss.
That can't be right. Can't that be considered theft?
 

Turbonium

Platinum Member
Mar 15, 2003
2,143
79
91
Counter WTF from me: Why did you go with 11th gen (slower HOTTER 14nm Rocket Lake crap) instead of Alder Lake (12th gen) ?????

It's funny because I did get 12th gen (Alder Lake). For some reason earlier, I thought 11 == 12 (no but I literally just made a mental error when reading/posting earlier, thinking 11th gen is Alder Lake).

I actually realized my mistake in comprehension a little while ago, and came back to this thread solely to check my post to see if it was indeed inaccurate, which it was. I'm relieved that my brain, minus occasional hiccups, does in fact, work.
 

DaaQ

Golden Member
Dec 8, 2018
1,435
1,034
136
That can't be right. Can't that be considered theft?
I don't know, I have a Piledriver CPU atm, buying parts for AM5 as permitted, waiting on X3D, but yes, it sure does seem like an arbitrary FU sorry about taking your money and unstable chip.

I have a Sapphire Nitro+ where I could not get confirmation if I waterblocked it or changed thermal paste would warranty be void. I got reply of if sticker removed warranty void, this is US CS center btw, I replied with I'm in US that is not legal void warranty, ticket closed.

So hope this one lasts longer than it's warranty, I missed a Seasonic PSU warranty, that said 7 years, when I bought it I SWEAR it was 10 year. I still would have missed it by 6 months, but lesson learned, don't borrow out your parts for someone to check if their crap is bad, and copy the warranty at the time.

For my sapphire warranty starts at date of purchase, no registering serial or anything I have found yet. Been a good card so far, but will probably dig deeper on next purchase for sure. Wish EVGA would do Radeon.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
21,991
11,533
136
That can't be right. Can't that be considered theft?
If someone is selling tray processors as box processors, then that's a no-no, and the retailer/e-tailer is responsible for making it right for the customer. Unfortunately once the CPU is confiscated then how does the wronged customer get a refund? Also it's extremely awkward (to say the least) for Intel to be enforcing such rules under these particular circumstances.
 

poke01

Golden Member
Mar 8, 2022
1,983
2,509
106
If someone is selling tray processors as box processors, then that's a no-no, and the retailer/e-tailer is responsible for making it right for the customer. Unfortunately once the CPU is confiscated then how does the wronged customer get a refund? Also it's extremely awkward (to say the least) for Intel to be enforcing such rules under these particular circumstances.
Intel needs to implement a QR code like AMD does on the retail boxes to authinticate CPUS. I would never buy CPUs from shady online websites. Always go to a good trustworthy seller.
 
Reactions: igor_kavinski

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,451
2,365
136
I know I've written this before but we have gotten to this point because Intel's specifications have become so unclear.

3 year warranty, okay...
At what frequency? How many cores running? What application? What cooling and case? What motherboard? What temps?

All of this needs to be clearly defined moving forward so consumers know exactly what they should expect from their CPU.

Intel used to advertise base frequency. Now they advertise super optimistic, rarely achievable turbo 1, 2, 3, Thermal Velocity boost, frequency running at basically idle.
 
Reactions: igor_kavinski

Jan Olšan

Senior member
Jan 12, 2017
396
680
136
If someone is selling tray processors as box processors, then that's a no-no, and the retailer/e-tailer is responsible for making it right for the customer. Unfortunately once the CPU is confiscated then how does the wronged customer get a refund? Also it's extremely awkward (to say the least) for Intel to be enforcing such rules under these particular circumstances.
Considering a tray processor (that is a legitimately sold thing from Intel) that was sold "wrongly" to a retail customer instead of going to OEM market as counterfeit/non-genuine AND reserving the right to confiscate it and destroy it on that ground?

I am an AMD fan, but this would make me hardcore Intel HATER to death. This would be scummy on all levels beginning with environmental impact and only getting "better" from there.
Heck, they don't even have right to confiscate actual counterfeit items (as in, chinese backyard operation gluing reused/repainted IHS on old/completely fake CPUs).
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
21,991
11,533
136
Considering a tray processor (that is a legitimately sold thing from Intel) that was sold "wrongly" to a retail customer instead of going to OEM market as counterfeit/non-genuine AND reserving the right to confiscate it and destroy it on that ground?

I am an AMD fan, but this would make me hardcore Intel HATER to death. This would be scummy on all levels beginning with environmental impact and only getting "better" from there.
Heck, they don't even have right to confiscate actual counterfeit items (as in, chinese backyard operation gluing reused/repainted IHS on old/completely fake CPUs).
I don't disagree with you, but that's Intel's policy. Make of it what you will.
 

bononos

Diamond Member
Aug 21, 2011
3,909
171
106
............
Last but not least, both the article and the video are discussing the topic of Intel 13th and 14th gen failures, which is a proven fact today. Puget included the AMD data for context, to show why they're not seriously considering dropping Intel as their approach has minimized the impact of the Intel issues so far. The Intel issue exists whether or not Puget data reflects it. Anyone further pushing AMD into the discussion after Intel themselves have admitted their CPUs are defective should familiarize themselves with whataboutism and how toxic it is in debates.

We had AMD failure events in the past. One of them was very recent, the SoC voltage issue burning up 7000 series chips. When discussing that issue we did not bring up Intel failure rates to distract folks from acknowleding the extent and seriousness of the failure on the AMD side.
Thats the thing, I would've thought that the failure rate of the Puget 13/14th gen cpus would be far higher than Ryzen 5000/7000.
Are the Ryzen 5000 failures less serious because they had proper fix with a bios patch or something, like that USB connectivity bug.
 

gdansk

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2011
2,829
4,190
136
Thats the thing, I would've thought that the failure rate of the Puget 13/14th gen cpus would be far higher than Ryzen 5000/7000.
Are the Ryzen 5000 failures less serious because they had proper fix with a bios patch or something, like that USB connectivity bug.
The 13900K fails in an insidious way. It's not that they simply don't power on, they start crashing various programs.

I think it'd be better if they failed in a way where they simply didn't turn on.
 
Last edited:

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,019
10,339
136
Thats the thing, I would've thought that the failure rate of the Puget 13/14th gen cpus would be far higher than Ryzen 5000/7000.
Are the Ryzen 5000 failures less serious because they had proper fix with a bios patch or something, like that USB connectivity bug.

We don't know Pudget's testing method or what they qualify as a fail.
 

sham63

Member
Apr 29, 2010
55
9
71
Wtf.

While I'm not as technically versed as a lot of users posting in this thread, the idea that 11th gen may have issues as well is really frustrating, considering I just got an 11th gen chip to replace the RTL chip I have. I'd fully go AMD at this point if it proves factual.
Just my personal experience. I have used an 11700k for the past few years without any issues. The pc is used for gaming, and the usual internet stuff.
 

lakedude

Platinum Member
Mar 14, 2009
2,679
478
126
I have used an 11700k for the past few years without any issues.
I think T-dude actually got a 12th gen not 11th.

He got confused between the two which means he either bought 12th and said 11th or he meant to buy 12th and accidentally bought 11th. I wasn't sure which actually happened at the time but later he said he had 12th gen.
 
Last edited:

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
29,442
24,096
146
Also the fact that Jon Bach the owner of Puget is on the intel board of advisors.

View attachment 104592
I saw this making the rounds when I got online an hour or so ago. Even Intel's propaganda machines' wheels are falling off.

MLID has Matt from Alderon Games as the guest today. Should be an interesting listen. Hopefully Matt gets into the nitty gritty details of how everything went down.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |