Aren't you reading the news? The 9950X is coming on 31st July.
Aren't you reading the news? The 9950X is coming on 31st July.I am at the point where I'm about 95% certain I'm going to return my motherboard and i9-14900KF for a Ryzen 9 7950X3D.
Admittedly, I totally missed that. Like I said, I've always gone Intel and never really looked at AMD's offering in detail.Aren't you reading the news? The 9950X is coming on 31st July.
Yep, plenty. Like this one: https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X670E Taichi/index.aspAre there adequate motherboards available that will fully support the 9950X on day one?
Yep, plenty. Like this one: https://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/X670E Taichi/index.asp
Just type in Google x670/x670 AM5 motherboards.
Notice the small heatsink with a fan. Thats actually for the NVME !!!!! (on the asrockx670e)Alright. I'm officially sold... time to switch teams baby. Farewell Intel!
Going with the Ryzen 9 9950X when It's released and that Taichi board looks wicked. Fortunately I already have every component I need other than the motherboard and CPU. So glad I stumbled across this thread, it definitely helped me avoid a huge headache with the i9.
Some history for any of the young ones here. Intel Pentium III 'Coppermine';Intel can avoid repeating 1.13G Coppermine just fine
SourceA 1.13 GHz version (S-Spec SL4HH) was released in mid-2000 but famously recalled after a collaboration between HardOCP and Tom's Hardware[8] discovered various instabilities with the operation of the new CPU speed grade. The Coppermine core was unable to reliably reach the 1.13 GHz speed without various tweaks to the processor's microcode, effective cooling, higher voltage (1.75 V vs. 1.65 V), and specifically validated platforms.[8] Intel only officially supported the processor on its own VC820 i820-based motherboard, but even this motherboard displayed instability in the independent tests of the hardware review sites. In benchmarks that were stable, performance was shown to be sub-par, with the 1.13 GHz CPU equalling a 1.0 GHz model. Tom's Hardware attributed this performance deficit to relaxed tuning of the CPU and motherboard to improve stability.[9] Intel needed at least six months to resolve the problems using a new cD0 stepping and re-released 1.1 GHz and 1.13 GHz versions in 2001.
In the case of the game server Raptor Lake CPUs running in the W680 boards, I don't think they ever ran at "too high" frequencies in those setups. Certainly not compared to similar CPUs in desktop boards.If it is a degradation issue from trying to run too high of frequencies, it could be that those CPUs were already too badly damaged that even down clocking will no longer work.
ADL is on the same socket, so mechanical cause is unlikely.Anecdotes on reddit point to usage of a contact frame being associated with vastly lower incidence of instability.
It's more the warping of the IHS creating an airgap. I had used a graphite pad before on my 12700K in winter (had a contact frame but was too squeamish to install it). Come summer (after more than a year of being unused), I was getting thermal throttling in XTU. Took off the graphite pad, applied paste and this time did two things different:So hypothetically the cpu is being literally crushed to death?
Commenter 2Been building PCs for a while and this is the first time I have had so many bad i9 CPUs this year and last. On one build we went through 3.
Commenter 3I work in a computer shop as a tech. The amount of 13th & 14th gen we've sent back to RMA is insane. It's not just the i9s. I really wish I had access to the data and could publish it... It's i5s, i7s and i9. Haven't seen i3s yet.
Commenter 4I'm reading this as I'm helping a friend as we speak diagnose his 13600KF that's throwing thousands of errors in OCCT. It's not just the i9s.
Commenter 5This is purely anecdotal, but for what it's worth I was seeing a ton of instability from day 1 with the stock motherboard settings on my Asus z790-p with a 14900k. Obviously there was the usual "idiot OEM running the cpu faaaaar beyond spec for voltage and current", so dialling it back to Intel spec helped, but didn't fully resolve the issue. Lowering the PL1 from 253 to 225W helped even more, but I was still seeing periodic soft errors (WHEA) in the event log. Dropping to 200W, however, has completely 100% fixed the issue on my system, but this comes at the cost of losing several hundred mhz on the boost clocks, which naturally isn't ideal.
While not a fix, if someone is struggling a lot with their system and they're not in a position to RMA the chip or wanting to roll the dice at this time while investigations are still ongoing and there's a good chance of simply getting yet another faulty chip, it may be worth dialling down the power limits to even more conservative levels than the official spec as it did resolve 100% of instability that I was seeing, even under sustained overnight stress testing.
Commenter 6I've seen the same problem exhibit on most mid range models of the 13th and 14th gen as well, but no where near as frequent as the 13900 and 14900. Seen it a couple of times on 12th Gen but telling users to update their BIOS and make sure they have the latest Intel Windows updates seems to resolve the issue 12th gen.
At first I thought it was a memory controller cause all the problems seemed to point back to something to do with storage or memory. Manually setting XMP values on RAM or slightly lower clocks and timings seemed to create better stability too. But appears these are only temporary fixes for many people.
I have also been seeing this problem since the release of 13th gen. Have been repeatedly reminding end users I've helped troubleshoot and tech support with to flood Intel with the complaints. Seems that pushback of customers to Intel lead them to telling everyone it's a developer issue to which many developers are now coming out and saying "no, there's definitely something off with the CPUs"
Commenter 7My program at college just bought 50 systems for two labs. Asus prime b760 plus boards with i7-14700K CPUs. Almost all of the CPUs have failed (5 did not) as the boards came shipped with a bios that tried pushing 1.71V upon first boot. This is not a fun RMA :/
Commenter 8I got 2 13900k cpus refunded by Intel because they were broken. AMD is a must at the high end right now sadly
Commenter 9I had an issue with MW3 zombies crashing, never multiplayer. It would go a few days sometimes without crashing and sometimes crashing twice a day. My friend had a R9 5950X and never crashed while we played together, not once. I finally got some new BIOS updates from MSI, and the latest BIOS, I haven’t crashed a single time. Knock on wood. It’s been 3 months since updating the BIOS and all is well finally. I have an Intel 13700KF
Commenter 10My 13900k just degraded after a year of daily usage. Had to replace it with AMD Ryzen 7950x3d, not a single issue since
Commenter 11I had to set the 13900KF pcore ratio to 52x after a while or it would BSOD loop. When I play The First Descendant I also have to switch to PC to power saver mode so it doesn't crash loading shaders. Most DX12 games are too unstable and crash so I have to downgrade to the DX11 versions if there is any.
Commenter 12I too have a 14900k and was experiencing blue screens when i first got it put together. Kept reading and reading about what to do and someone told me to go into bios and choose box cooler rather than water cooled which helped but underclocked my CPU i didn't pay top dollar to have all these issues and need to underclock my CPU. Wish i would have done more research and gotten a Ryzen CPU instead now. Before i switched to box cooler mode i was getting 90c temps idle on desktop. Craps ridiculous
Built a system with a 13600k for a friend about a month ago, worked fine for a couple of weeks and then suddenly half his games were glitching out and lightroom would constantly crash. Took me 2 days to figure out it was a weird CPU fault, it worked fine with my 12700k, waiting on a return now.
Would it maybe be better to just switch to a 12600k or 12700k instead?
Intel sells these processors at a specific advertised performance level, and people pay a premium for that performance. If the product cannot achieve the advertised specification without breaking down, then it is defective and Intel should issue refunds.These frequencies are not a result of a true CPU capability, but a result of desparate Intel wanting to beat/match AMD in review charts. They are really CRAZY. Do not use them.
The CPUs are fine. They break if you let them run at crazy frequencies.
And the uninformed buyers of those will have no chance of knowing that the CPU is bad unless they push it hard in specific instances.however I am seeing a lot of them for sale in secondary markets on other forums.
Following image needs to be quoted big:Warframe devs post some info on their forums:
Instability on recent Intel Processors
While investigating crashes in Warframe we came across a particular series that were not crashing in our code (they were crashing in nvgpucomp64.dll, a component of Nvidia drivers). After aggregating hundreds of reports from helpful players we discovered a pattern: almost all were coming from sys...forums.warframe.com
Uh oh, the HX are not immune either.Thanks for posting about this:
We had bulk purchased lots of 13900k and 14900ks to use for servers pre-paid for a year. This was a very expensive massive failure for us and spent months trying to get the right BIOS settings and patches to work.
We even have developers who are on laptop chips having defects and crashes, One MSI Laptop dev who got a really expensive 13th gen HX now has a paperweight and cant' RMA it.
This doesn't include the time we wasted pulling the game apart, thinking it was our fault and realising, oh no, this is a hardware issue at massive scale.
It's getting to the point where we may have to ban 13th and 14th gen chips being used by any developer with Unreal Engine at our company because of the productivity loss and file corruption, which can get checked into version control and cause problems for other devs.