News Intel's CPU instability and crashing issues also impact mainstream 65W and higher 'non-K' models — damage is irreversible, no planned recall

[stuff and nonesense]

How is a microcode update changing the description of the product? They aren't making limits to what they had described the product as, they are actually rectifying (with the microcode update) a mistake that caused the product to operate out of its original description.

Now this error may very well impinge on the quality of the processor, but 1) You have to prove this, and 2) Is this impingement on quality such that the processor will behave unacceptably within the 5 or 6 year consumer warranty period? If so, then under UK law they'll have to replace it or refund the purchase. If not, then tough.

https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/consumer-rights-act-aKJYx8n5KiSl

If the update reduces the performance of the device it would not be performing as advertised.

Second, the proof is in the current events, Intel have sold a faulty product. It is aging prematurely. The fault may or may not be evident in any given processor today. The bandaid… oops, microcode update may stop the accelerated aging and return it to a more normal rate.. who knows.

I don’t have a dog in this fight, I hope that all those who do are treated with due respect by Intel. They trusted that Intel would sell a piece of kit that wouldn’t die or have an elevated risk of popping its mortal coil within the warranty period (replacement no problem) or just after.

This has been going on for months, Intel have deflected, blamed partners and been found to be responsible. They have finally admitted the fault in the cpu and hopefully the August patch will arrest the aging.

 

[slightnitpick]

If the update reduces the performance of the device it would not be performing as advertised.

IF. But then only if the reduction in performance is such that the new performance is below the advertised specifications.

Second, the proof is in the current events, Intel have sold a faulty product.

Yes, and they have the legal right in the UK to try to "repair" before replacement or refund.

It is aging prematurely.

Some of them have aged prematurely, but you have to prove that the aging for any particular processor is such that it will no longer be functional within the warranted period. You are not entitled to a processor as good as the one you originally bought, you are only entitled to a processor that is as good as Intel's minimum marketing guarantees and the UK warranty act's requirements. We all know from prior publications about binning variability that some processors are better than others. Outside of particular product IDs Intel, AMD, and everyone else are only making minimal guarantees.

I agree with the rest of what you wrote and also don't have a stake in this outcome. I am however, quite happy that I decided to continue sticking with my Ivy Bridge laptop for now.

 

[stuff and nonesense]

IF. But then only if the reduction in performance is such that the new performance is below the advertised specifications.

Yes, and they have the legal right in the UK to try to "repair" before replacement or refund.

Some of them have aged prematurely, but you have to prove that the aging for any particular processor is such that it will no longer be functional within the warranted period. You are not entitled to a processor as good as the one you originally bought, you are only entitled to a processor that is as good as Intel's minimum marketing guarantees and the UK warranty act's requirements. We all know from prior publications about binning variability that some processors are better than others. Outside of particular product IDs Intel, AMD, and everyone else are only making minimal guarantees.

I agree with the rest of what you wrote and also don't have a stake in this outcome. I am however, quite happy that I decided to continue sticking with my Ivy Bridge laptop for now.

There is one huge reason for a recall. (Of ANY description)

Everyone who doesn’t know that this is currently happening, the for want of a better term, normies, non-geeks, the people who don’t read tech press, the people who went to their local electronics shop and bought a pc, switched it on and will use it till it dies…. Those people who wouldn’t have a clue what a bios is, what a command line is NEED to be helped by intel and or their system integrators. If they aren’t it’s fair to assume the patch will never be applied and their CPUs will go to silicon heaven way too early….

 

[vanadiel007]

Just FYI as it's bugging me: "Recall" does not mean "replace". It means to remove, fix, or replace. A microcode update sent to all systems with affected processors is a recall.

True. But since you cannot remove or fix silicone degradation, replace is the only viable option under the circumstances.

 

[ohio_buckeye]

Haven’t read all the comments but I built a new pc with a 12600k and z690 board around Christmas last year. Much of that decision was cost. While my pc works fine it really makes me think that when it’s time to upgrade I may not be grabbing a 13th or 14th gen cpu, and that my next pc is likely to be amd.

The other big thing is at work we buy almost every pc from Dell typically with an Intel i7. Hopefully we don’t start seeing failures of those.

 

[YSCCC]

I actually don't mind they did nothing to recall and replace all CPUs, they will pay for their coming gens revenue, in a multi-billion company practically dominating the market share for over 3 decades, one bad move is going to give chance to their rivals and very difficult if not impossible to regain former glory. Remember the massive Toyota runway throttle issue like a decade ago? if they didn't eventually do that multi billion dollar recall, they will pay a lot more.

More recent epic example of (disasterous) crisis handling ref. comes from Boeing, see how the best selling 737Max turns into a billion dollar sinkhole which just don't stop stinking? I hope intel will be smarter than that

 

[TheHerald]

I actually don't mind they did nothing to recall and replace all CPUs

You do realize that that's just not possible? Do you also realize that the people that actually have issues would be mad as hell cause they had to get in line for months to receive their replacement, while the vast majority of people that don't have issues would take their spot?

Imagine you are one of the people actually having issues, and instead of doing an RMA and receiving your new CPU in literally a couple of days, you had to wait for 2-3-5-6 months cause Intel is trying to replace EVERYONES cpu. We are talking about millions. Probably tens of millions.

 

[thestryker]

We are talking about millions. Probably tens of millions.

Intel shipped ~50 million desktop/notebook CPUs in Q4 2023 and that same report said ~69% of market sales were notebook. So it's definitely the latter given that was the first entire year for RPL with over 15 million desktop CPU sales and we're only a few months off the two year anniversary now. It's very likely that even with ADL die making up a large chunk of the shipping products there's minimum 15 million desktop CPUs with RPL die out there the majority of which fall under the stated 65W+ base power.

edit: adjusted timeline because I'd read chart wrong, so we're talking significantly more than 15m and probably in the 40-50m range

 

[TheHerald]

Intel shipped ~50 million desktop/notebook CPUs in 2023 and that same report said ~69% of market sales were notebook. So it's definitely the latter given that was the first entire year for RPL with over 15 million desktop CPU sales and we're only a few months off the two year anniversary now. It's very likely that even with ADL die making up a large chunk of the shipping products there's minimum 15 million desktop CPUs with RPL die out there the majority of which fall under the stated 65W+ base power.

Don't think facts matter here, people are just ready to jump on the intel hatewagon for no reason.

Like yeah, let's recall 15-20 million chips - it's going to go great for people experiencing issues, lol...

 

[Loadedaxe]

You do realize that that's just not possible? Do you also realize that the people that actually have issues would be mad as hell cause they had to get in line for months to receive their replacement, while the vast majority of people that don't have issues would take their spot?

Imagine you are one of the people actually having issues, and instead of doing an RMA and receiving your new CPU in literally a couple of days, you had to wait for 2-3-5-6 months cause Intel is trying to replace EVERYONES cpu. We are talking about millions. Probably tens of millions.

Refreshing to see someone post common sense.

 

[YSCCC]

You do realize that that's just not possible? Do you also realize that the people that actually have issues would be mad as hell cause they had to get in line for months to receive their replacement, while the vast majority of people that don't have issues would take their spot?

Imagine you are one of the people actually having issues, and instead of doing an RMA and receiving your new CPU in literally a couple of days, you had to wait for 2-3-5-6 months cause Intel is trying to replace EVERYONES cpu. We are talking about millions. Probably tens of millions.

Recall need not to be instant replacement of everyone's CPU, it could offer to have temporary "loan" CPU of lower tier or even 12th Gen for interim use and notify that the replacement will be arriving in 6 months, that way those without immediate issues would not send them back right away, and it can be in the form of offering partial refund with offering of a differnet working CPU of lower tier /full refund if one don't bother.

It's not a logistic issue but a brand reputation issue, with such full recall/refund guarantee, ppl would still trust their next gen won't cost them a kidney and after a whole year of frustration without compensation, and for those who need their computer for work, not even 3 days return will be acceptable and they will already bought a replacement in the meantime, plus it's not difficult to add one more step for RMA that they need to go through a 15min stress test, only those failed will have priority exchange and those still runs stable will need to wait 6months or whatever time it needed and only need to come back and exchange by the day the ok ones arrived, any CPU produced after certain serial number after the date of announcement will not have the exchange/recall benefit etc.

There are literally hundreds of possible ways to recall a product, see how Toyota managed their millions of sold cars for safety repair. It is NOT an excuse of not recalling the whole defective batches of your product just because "it might still be working by now, we need to prioritize those who are already screwed and not sure after 2-3 years will you be the one screwed but without warranty"

 

[TheHerald]

Recall need not to be instant replacement of everyone's CPU, it could offer to have temporary "loan" CPU of lower tier or even 12th Gen for interim use and notify that the replacement will be arriving in 6 months, that way those without immediate issues would not send them back right away, and it can be in the form of offering partial refund with offering of a differnet working CPU of lower tier /full refund if one don't bother.

It's not a logistic issue but a brand reputation issue, with such full recall/refund guarantee, ppl would still trust their next gen won't cost them a kidney and after a whole year of frustration without compensation, and for those who need their computer for work, not even 3 days return will be acceptable and they will already bought a replacement in the meantime, plus it's not difficult to add one more step for RMA that they need to go through a 15min stress test, only those failed will have priority exchange and those still runs stable will need to wait 6months or whatever time it needed and only need to come back and exchange by the day the ok ones arrived, any CPU produced after certain serial number after the date of announcement will not have the exchange/recall benefit etc.

There are literally hundreds of possible ways to recall a product, see how Toyota managed their millions of sold cars for safety repair. It is NOT an excuse of not recalling the whole defective batches of your product just because "it might still be working by now, we need to prioritize those who are already screwed and not sure after 2-3 years will you be the one screwed but without warranty"

And where would the 20+ million alderlake cpus come from? And let's say they have them available and ready to be magically teleported to everyone. Would you, as an owner of a 14900k be happy that you get to replace it with a 12900k for 6 months instead of just receiving a new 14900k within 3 working days? Really? You wouldn't be still here complaining? I bet you would.

I find it fascinating that the only people complaining are the ones not affected....they come up with all kinds of crazy solutions that are logistically not possible and even if they were they wouldn't really be good neither for Intel or for the affected people.

A car is completely different. A car can get you and other people killed. A cpu crashing once in a blue moon on an nvidia drivers installation will not kill you, trust me on that one.

Eg1. Yeah, your solutions keeps increasing the logistical nightmare. Let's put 20 million cpus into a 20 minute stress test to see which one gets priority. Holy cow, it gets better and better. Even if Intel has the capacity to test 1000 cpus simultaneously, with 0 downtime 24/7 and with zero time spent on changing the cpu etc it would take 277 days to test them all..... Lol.

 

[rarovend]

Hey folks, I applied the BIOS settings Toms hardware talked about a few months ago, the default settings. Does this mean my chip is screwed and will eventually degrade? Do I need a replacement?

I have not had a BSOD since I applied those BIOs settings and it was only crashing when I tried playing helldivers, which was the main reason.

Is there anyway I can check for degradation or is it just a slow death?

 

[TheHerald]

Hey folks, I applied the BIOS settings Toms hardware talked about a few months ago, the default settings. Does this mean my chip is screwed and will eventually degrade? Do I need a replacement?

I have not had a BSOD since I applied those BIOs settings and it was only crashing when I tried playing helldivers, which was the main reason.

Is there anyway I can check for degradation or is it just a slow death?

Checking for degradation might make the problem even worse. Apply a voltage cap of 1. 35v and turn off the ST boost and then try to install nvidia drivers 10 times in a row. If it passes, you good.

 

[YSCCC]

And where would the 20+ million alderlake cpus come from? And let's say they have them available and ready to be magically teleported to everyone. Would you, as an owner of a 14900k be happy that you get to replace it with a 12900k for 6 months instead of just receiving a new 14900k within 3 working days? Really? You wouldn't be still here complaining? I bet you would.

I find it fascinating that the only people complaining are the ones not affected....they come up with all kinds of crazy solutions that are logistically not possible and even if they were they wouldn't really be good neither for Intel or for the affected people.

A car is completely different. A car can get you and other people killed. A cpu crashing once in a blue moon on an nvidia drivers installation will not kill you, trust me on that one.

It is an choice for consumer, just like you preorder something, like IF you file for RMA, the lead time will be 6 months, we have ____ for temporary use or even nothing interim will be offered now, you can take back $400/ whatever you paid for in the reciept if you just send in the CPU without needing replacement. As a real owner of a 14900k without issue now even if this is announced, guess what I will do? just file for it and keep using my working 14900k. If my 14900k CTD every now and then today, I will gladly even take a 12600 for interim use, at least I can do my work and browse the web without BSOD until the replacement arrives.

Only those already broken and verified at RMA centers could have priority replacement in the 3 working days period/whatever stock they have now, online filing for RMA or those send out to RMA centers passing the stress test will need to at least another 6 months for replacement, currently your working CPU will be send back. you have 6 months to ramp up your production of usable stuffs and replace those havn't have serious issuess now, who said everyone need replacement day 1 with or without issues? and RMA centers having a few test rigs with fixed bios stress testing isn't a new thing.

 

[YSCCC]

Hey folks, I applied the BIOS settings Toms hardware talked about a few months ago, the default settings. Does this mean my chip is screwed and will eventually degrade? Do I need a replacement?

I have not had a BSOD since I applied those BIOs settings and it was only crashing when I tried playing helldivers, which was the main reason.

Is there anyway I can check for degradation or is it just a slow death?

Try install Nvidia drivers 10 times in a row is a way to check if it is already f uped, usually it's a slow death worsens by time, if you applied no undervolting and applied the intel default profile and still crash playing helldivers, it likely is already unstable somewhat.... good luck they will RMA you anytime soon and not being thrown around by those RMA center PR stuffs..

 

[TheHerald]

It is an choice for consumer, just like you preorder something, like IF you file for RMA, the lead time will be 6 months, we have ____ for temporary use or even nothing interim will be offered now, you can take back $400/ whatever you paid for in the reciept if you just send in the CPU without needing replacement. As a real owner of a 14900k without issue now even if this is announced, guess what I will do? just file for it and keep using my working 14900k. If my 14900k CTD every now and then today, I will gladly even take a 12600 for interim use, at least I can do my work and browse the web without BSOD until the replacement arrives.

Only those already broken and verified at RMA centers could have priority replacement in the 3 working days period/whatever stock they have now, online filing for RMA or those send out to RMA centers passing the stress test will need to at least another 6 months for replacement, currently your working CPU will be send back. you have 6 months to ramp up your production of usable stuffs and replace those havn't have serious issuess now, who said everyone need replacement day 1 with or without issues? and RMA centers having a few test rigs with fixed bios stress testing isn't a new thing.

Great, tell me how much time would it take to verify which ones are already broken. I already did the math but let's see if you figure out.

I'll give you the best conditions, 24/7 testing, 20 minute stress test, capable of testing 1000 cpus simultaneously, 0 downtimes. What if if told you it would take 9 months just to freaking test all these chips?

 

[TheHerald]

Try install Nvidia drivers 10 times in a row is a way to check if it is already f uped, usually it's a slow death worsens by time, if you applied no undervolting and applied the intel default profile and still crash playing helldivers, it likely is already unstable somewhat.... good luck they will RMA you anytime soon and not being thrown around by those RMA center PR stuffs..

Are you talking from experience? Usually whenever I ram with Intel I get a brand new chip within 3 workdays....

 

[YSCCC]

Great, tell me how much time would it take to verify which ones are already broken. I already did the math but let's see if you figure out.

I'll give you the best conditions, 24/7 testing, 20 minute stress test, capable of testing 1000 cpus simultaneously, 0 downtimes. What if if told you it would take 9 months just to freaking test all these chips?

Do you know how many RMA centers are there worldwide? in a certain geological location, the numbers of the higher tier CPUs who are mostly already in trouble are kind of low, when only a few thousand of i9s in a city were sold it don't take too long to test those, and you can always get a estimated lead time (say, 1 month) when one files for immediate replacement after stress testing, or no testing required but you get a ticket to send it back for free replacement 6 months or even a year later.
Guess what ppl with CPUs without issue will opt for? in my own experience ppl will just take the 6 months ticket and wait till their turn while still rocking their current chip unless it breaks within the period, which they can change the ticket to "CPU failed, need immediate testing and RMA"

Are you talking from experience? Usually whenever I ram with Intel I get a brand new chip within 3 workdays....

Here in Asia in my city normal Intel RMA take 3 weeks +, so a lot will even opt for tray CPUs coz the dealer is basically useless when you need it. And the dealer till last week still nit picking on say minor scratch on HS, or the return is without a box for reason to decline RMA requests. Not the whole world have as good consumer protection as in the US

 

[TheHerald]

Do you know how many RMA centers are there worldwide? in a certain geological location, the numbers of the higher tier CPUs who are mostly already in trouble are kind of low, when only a few thousand of i9s in a city were sold it don't take too long to test those, and you can always get a estimated lead time (say, 1 month) when one files for immediate replacement after stress testing, or no testing required but you get a ticket to send it back for free replacement 6 months or even a year later.
Guess what ppl with CPUs without issue will opt for? in my own experience ppl will just take the 6 months ticket and wait till their turn while still rocking their current chip unless it breaks within the period, which they can change the ticket to "CPU failed, need immediate testing and RMA"


Here in Asia in my city normal Intel RMA take 3 weeks +, so a lot will even opt for tray CPUs coz the dealer is basically useless when you need it. And the dealer till last week still nit picking on say minor scratch on HS, or the return is without a box for reason to decline RMA requests. Not the whole world have as good consumer protection as in the US

I'm not in the US, I'm in EU.

How many cpus do you think intel can test globally? More than 1000? OK let's make it 10.000. Now let's get down to an 8 work schedule, working days, and uptime for swapping cpus etc. We are still looking at over 6 months to see which ones are currently affected.

And there is still the small issue of having to find 20 million alderlake chips...

Again, it's just not a viable solution. And I really don't get what the problem is with.... affected people just rmaing the chip?

 

[YSCCC]

I'm not in the US, I'm in EU.

How many cpus do you think intel can test globally? More than 1000? OK let's make it 10.000. Now let's get down to an 8 work schedule, working days, and uptime for swapping cpus etc. We are still looking at over 6 months to see which ones are currently affected.

And there is still the small issue of having to find 20 million alderlake chips...

Again, it's just not a viable solution. And I really don't get what the problem is with.... affected people just rmaing the chip?

Ok, EU or US don't really matter, but in Asia, long normal RMA leadtime is more often than you will imagine, and all sort of BS to deny RMA is common.

Again, I don't see why one need to test every single CPU, it's divide into 2 options for a recall, since one's CPU could be already fatally injured and having all sort of issues around, or already degraded partially, but not fatally so it still kind of works but will die a premature death

1) if you opt to send in for replacement now, it will need to be tested, and only those failed will have priority replacement, noting testing leadtime will likely be at least 1 month or even longer if it is not a no boot or instant fail case, they can even upload a kind of official testing suite say, with known massive decompression tasks known to be typical of a degraded CPU, which generates a report of the system state, settings and serial code, one can send in the CPU with the report for quicker leadtime if it fails.

2) Since this is a full recall, those who don't want to send in for that 1 month+ leadtime of testing can get a ticket, queuing and will be email notifed when the time comes for a no question asked RMA, those who still have kinda working CPUs can opt for this and just wait for that 6months or 1 year period, just by then they can send back with the notified email for no question asked 1 to 1 replacement.

By that only those who are really needed to be prioritized will send in for testing or replacement now, the rest don't need to be tested. I don't see why that will be impossible. And yes, this will hurt Intel a lot in terms of logistics and money, but that's the consequent to gain back customer faith. I personally experienced my car's parts recall for one of the million airbags in the batch which might contain some sharnals accidentally inside the airbag and may kill you if deployed, it says I could queue by the time of notification and they will tell me when parts are available so I can drive in for quick replacement in days, I ended up filed and waited 9 months before going back, no extra hurdle for me and they filled their liability to make it right, so I still trust my car brand.

 

[YSCCC]

And I really don't get what the problem is with.... affected people just rmaing the chip?

And the problem is, when basically all CPUs out there have potentially have their lifespan shortened, which is now well known and even reported by news, if a recall isn't out there, when the computers using the RPL processers eventually died, say in 5 years since their service, maybe due to completely normal issues like ram in a prebuilt gone bad, dried thermal paste etc. since it is a RPL and it dies relatively easy compared to what Intel CPUs used to survive (My old Sandy bridge still works since 2011 as my "document machine"), most will just blame the RPL just get shortened by the first year of defective design/oxidation, do you think they will just buy another Intel?

Right now we are already seeing server providers reported moving to AMD for reliability and frustration of previous RMA deny before it was widely reported to be really an intel issue. once that move was done it will be hard to get the customer faith back, the problem is actually a faith issue, not "ok, we finally cannot deny, and if your CPU died right now or within original warranty period, we will replace them as usual, if it somehow survived longer than the 3 years warranty, please go home and pay for another one yourself"

 

[x7007]

Could this happen also on Intel 12th? because I don't have crashing, but I have Crackling none stop, a friend with 13700K has no issues at all. I remember it starts since I did a firmware update on the ASRock Z690 Extreme WIFI 6E

I was thinking already to buy 7800x3D right now, just CPU And MOB. I can't stand this crackling anymore

 

[stuff and nonesense]

Could this happen also on Intel 12th?

13/14 gen are affected. 12 is not suffering the problems.

 

[stuff and nonesense]

Open question for 13/14th gen users : the intel baseline patch reduces performance by (conservatively) 5 to 10%. Some reports say that in specific workloads upto 20% reduction in performance has been seen. I don’t necessarily believe the values but those I have read.

So, the question

What level of performance reduction is acceptable to you? 14th gen to 12th gen equivalent? Ryzen 7000? Ryzen 5000? 80286?
I’m curious where the acceptable line is. Please don’t be tribal in your answers.