I am using a Z690 motherboard since ADL with a drop in RPL upgrade and the higher clocks lead to higher voltages - shocker. They were still too high with the 12700k I used to have. And I didn't know that Intel ran constant telemetry on all of the systems out there. You state Intel was "surely aware" when nobody else was until a while after the 14th gen Raptor refresh was released.
And how would you change the bios for all of the motherboards already out there and rewrite the signed contracts to mandate specific LLC settings and hardware? How about issuing an advisory that Asus and Gigabyte motherboards should not be used as they have potentially unstable and degrading default settings? People already own them. Would that be better or worse to consumers than what Intel has already done?
As far as giving people exact instructions, many will assume that anything unmentioned must be safe. Like if Intel were to say that a core voltage of 1.55v must not be exceeded, many will think 1.55v 24/7 must be safe.
What would happen to a Ryzen subject to that? They both use silicon and copper. If some non official guy like me recommends to reduce vdroop via LLC(which increases load voltage applied) then reduce load voltage back to what was stable then that is a different matter as people don't expect some internet rando to have perfect official instructions.
As far as this issue being disasterous to RPL, have the percentage of degradation failures been worse than of Zen 2 degradation? Some reason people remembered how to deal with those.
Higher clocks leads to higher voltages, sure, but consumers and coporate clients rely on Intel to spec it correctly so that it don't self destruct or degrade in reasonble time
It is not only asus and MSI, it happens across the board, MSI isn't immune, so does Asrock, and other like even uses server boards and clock+use ram speed lower than what consumer does. Yet the degradation is still there.
Why it will not be able to change the bios outhere is a puzzle to me, do you forget when we do in socket upgrade, we need to wait for a UPDATED BIOS release before the board can even recognize the new CPU? If intel did correctly assess the chip, and that it is unsafe to run at the aggressive LLC and power limit which essentially everyone and their dog is using, I can't understand why they do not advise the board partners about that and at least advise them not to do so, if they don't they should release a note/ news that some bios maynot be compliant and may need to do certain tunings for safety, at least for the biggest board vendors. They did none of the above, and yet they don't even found out/admit it's voltage and VID issues or faulty eTVB code without enough safeguard.
Given advise to ppl isn't that hard, just give two instructions, cap the vcore supply to 1.55v max, AND set sustained vcore below 1.4v is not difficult isn't it? if you gave such warnings that old boards without safe bios might harm it in the future, I don't see why the boarad partners won't rush out a new, safe bios with correct LLC and voltage settings implemented. It's all excuses.
As for the degree of disaster compared to Zen 2 or other CPU gens, none have any numbers yet. But this is the only time, from both Intel and AMD, we have seen a widespread frustration, even with coporate customers. individual DIYers are more likely to complain out of their arrogance, but coperate users? Game developers? they need to be extra frustrated about the issue to come out and speak, risking their own discount/offers from the largest CPU maker in the world.
They can definitely ask. That doesn't mean board partners will comply. As is the case with AMD. Actually on AMD platforms board partners have taken cheating to the next level
Im quoting a small part from a huge article and the link to the full article. Power reporting deviation present in HWINFO on amd cpus
Since at least two of the largest motherboard manufacturers, still insist on using this exploit to gain an advantage over their competitors despite being constantly asked and told not to, we thought it would be only fair to allow the consumers to see if their boards are doing something they're not supposed to do. The issue with using this exploit is, that it messes up the power management of the CPU and potentially also decreases its lifespan because it is running the CPU outside the spec, in some cases by a vast margin. Also, it can cause issues when this exploit goes undetected by a hardware reviewer, since both the performance and the sofware based power consumption figures will be affected by it.
Basically amd motherboards missreport the power the CPU is using (since amd cpus don't have their own telemetry, they rely on the SVID on the mobo) in order to make the CPU think it has headroom to boost higher. This has been the case at least since zen 2.
Ryzen CPUs for AM4 platform rely on external, motherboard sourced telemetry to determine their power consumption. The voltage, current and power telemetry is provided to the processor by the motherboard VRM controller through the AMD SVI2 interface. This information is consumed by the processors...
www.hwinfo.com
Too soon man. We all know what happens to a ryzen.
Funny thing is everyone will tell you it's fixed, even though it's not. All the "fix" does is prevent XMP from going above 1.25 vsoc. But that wasn't the main problem in the first place, the problem was the CPU instead of protecting itself - it literally cooked itself and the motherboard. And it still does. But don't worry, problem is fixed, let's focus on intel's rmas now
😆
They can advise ppl to steer away from the exploits no? did Intel did that all along?
More funny for mocking for melting and burning of the X3D, if it is not fixed, did you see anymore burnt out CPUs from the issue since the fix? while RPL degradation "clickbaits" are coming up every now and then showing how their 14900k and KS degraded to a point they can't open UE5 games or install NV driver. How funny is that.
Edit: By the way, while we don't know how this disaster affected Intel, but apparently they have to said what in this news to try rensure the clients that "it is safe this time, trust", while AMD didn't maybe Intel buyers are all paranoia while AMD buyers are all fans? Trying to defend Intel being doing really bad in 13th and 14th gen is actually not putting off fire, but fueling it for consumers
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram