I suspect they have come to grips with the fact there is no preventing the avalanche of RMAs. And what is going to happen to flaky CPUs when the voltage is lowered by the MC patch? These questions and more, next on 60 minutes.
The plot thickens. Admitting oxidation is probably to get out in front of GN sending CPUs of to the FA lab.Apparently an Intel employee on /r/Intel confirms some degradation / stability issues were caused via oxidation.
Why wasn’t this in the community post, but only on /r/Intel?
Direct link to the comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/intel/s/S6XbiuaCiQ
Don't laugh...Maybe intel laid off too many QA staff and can't even catch something basic like this for 2 years
Let me set the scene: It's late in 2013. Intel is frantic about losing the mobile CPU wars to ARM. Meetings with all the validation groups. Head honcho in charge of Validation says something to the effect of: "We need to move faster. Validation at Intel is taking much longer than it does for our competition. We need to do whatever we can to reduce those times... we can't live forever in the shadow of the early 90's FDIV bug, we need to move on. Our competition is moving much faster than we are" - I'm paraphrasing. Many of the engineers in the room could remember the FDIV bug and the ensuing problems caused for Intel 20 years prior. Many of us were aghast that someone highly placed would suggest we needed to cut corners in validation - that wasn't explicitly said, of course, but that was the implicit message. That meeting there in late 2013 signaled a sea change at Intel to many of us who were there. And it didn't seem like it was going to be a good kind of sea change. Some of us chose to get out while the getting was good. As someone who worked in an Intel Validation group for SOCs until mid-2014 or so I can tell you, yes, you will see more CPU bugs from Intel than you have in the past from the post-FDIV-bug era until recently.
As a former Intel employee this aligns closely with my experience. I didn't work in validation (actually joined as part of Altera) but velocity is an absolute buzzword and the senior management's approach to complex challenges is sheer panic. Slips in schedules are not tolerated at all - so problems in validation are an existential threat, your project can easily just be canned. Also, because of the size of the company the ways in which quality and completeness are 'acheived' is hugely bureaucratic and rarely reflect true engineering fundamentals. Intel's biggest challenge is simply that it's not 'winning big' at the moment and rather than strong leadership and focus the company just jumps from fad to fad failing at each (VR is dead, long live automotive).
Intel found the root cause.
Zu hohe Spannung: Intel gibt Ergebnis seiner Analyse zu ausfallenden Prozessoren bekannt - Hardwareluxx
Zu hohe Spannung: Intel gibt Ergebnis seiner Analyse zu ausfallenden Prozessoren bekanntwww.hardwareluxx.de
Would you like to update your comment below @zir_blazer ?
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.
UNLESS Microcode is blowing some kind of eFuses...
What I do recall is some kind of bug involving Intel XTU tool where changing the Uncore/Cache was sorta permanent and required a full Firmware reflash, since settings are stored in NVRAM but the Firmware itself doesn't clear whatever setting XTU was changing. There were multiple reports about that one, and I have memories of having personally encountering it.
We're told that the microcode patch currently doesn't exhibit any adverse performance impact (i.e., the chip running slower), but testing is ongoing. We can expect Intel to share more information about performance in the future.
BIOS and ME (Management Engine) regions on the SPI Flash EEPROM can be technically updated/downgraded separately. Your worst case scenario is that ME regions are locked and it doesn't allow you to downgrade via Software (You need Intel tools to unlock it to update, flashrom can't write to it if it is protected), forcing you to use an external reprogrammer like a CH341A to downgrade.Would you like to update your comment below @zir_blazer ?
That's not the issue.If it's a bug with the core voltage going out of spec, wouldn't one of the testing guys say "Hey, this pin is spiking to 1.6V, that doesn't seem right"?
If that's the case, then why does raptor lake still degrade and crash when underclocked and undervolted below alder lake? And why is Intel claiming that there'll be no loss in performance?That's not the issue.
The stock (which is what, 1.4v 1t?) voltage isn't particularly safe to begin with.
Guess Intel will have to learn the sacred art of Clock Stretching.
"This situation has not been awesome?" That's the understatement of the year. Having the asterisk flash by for the 300Mhz downclock that says it isn't meant as a permanent fix. Telling you to install Nvidia drivers 10 times in a row to see if you are affected.
Sounds like the current available microcode drops performance by about 4%. Should be interesting to see what the August microcode will do performance wise.
Heh yeah I lol'ed at that part too. Intel needs to release a detection tool.Telling you to install Nvidia drivers 10 times in a row to see if you are affected.
You've already cooked the chip.then why does raptor lake still degrade and crash when underclocked and undervolted below alder lake?
That I don't know. ask em.And why is Intel claiming that there'll be no loss in performance?
I don't even need to shoot the messenger, comments are roasting this shill. I was trying to remember why I did not sub to his channel last year, then I saw this and was like "oh yeah, that's right." 🤣Heh yeah I lol'ed at that part too. Intel needs to release a detection tool.
I will believe anybody but Intel after this. When EVERYBODY agrees its fixed, and a few websites have confirmed no performance loss after benchmarked "fixed" CPUs then I will agree its fixed, and agree with the benchmarks.If that's the case, then why does raptor lake still degrade and crash when underclocked and undervolted below alder lake? And why is Intel claiming that there'll be no loss in performance?
There are various types of FET degradation. IIRC, things like HCI or xBTI causes "ageing" or increasing of Vth and this may be mitigated to some extent by the FW or microcode. On the contrary, EM ultimately leads to circuit failure.I don't understand people like that. He's gonna continue using his degraded CPU by limiting it instead of asking for refund or replacement
They ran it under clocked from the start.You've already cooked the chip.
They ran it under clocked from the start.
My gut brain says when the problems reach mainstream awareness, they tell you there is a microcode patch coming that helps, in an attempt to calm things down. They lean on their vast propaganda machine to disseminate it, then go back to silent running. Always fighting a delaying action and buying more time.Maybe they got one with the oxidation issue? Or maybe there’s more going on. We’ll have to wait for the update to drop and lots of testing to be done.