Question Is my CPU showing signs of instability ?

[p1xel8or]

CPU: i9-13900K

This is my third i9 - replaced it after I updated the BIOS to the 0x12B microcode patch. After a couple of Unreal Engine games started to crash on me, I got a bit paranoid about the CPU degrading again, and at the suggestion of Intel Support on /r/Intel I ran Intel XTU's CPU stress test for 30 minutes. The image I've linked are the results I got.

https://imgur.com/a/KfN6EdR

Computer didn't allow me to use PrintScreen when this window was open, hence the mobile capture.

Some guy on reddit pinged me saying that these are signs of a potential instability and I should start the RMA process, but I thought I'd come here for a more informed (and accurate) opinion.

 

[p1xel8or]

@JayGau CPU cooler is a is GIGABYTE Aorus Waterforce X360 AIO Liquid Cooler. Intel Default was set to performance during the stress test. I'll have to check the temps during gaming, will update in a couple of hours with the GPU numbers.

 

[JayGau]

@JayGau CPU cooler is a is GIGABYTE Aorus Waterforce X360 AIO Liquid Cooler. Intel Default was set to performance during the stress test. I'll have to check the temps during gaming, will update in a couple of hours with the GPU numbers.

You have a good cooler and the reviews I can find say that a i9 13900k should not go above 80°c with it when stressed with heavy tests like Cinebench or Prime95. The fact that you reach 99°c doesn't feel normal. Are you running the pump at max speed? What radiator fan preset are you using? How is the AIO mounted? Is the PC a pre-built or did you build it yourself?

Anyway, let's see your gaming temperatures (ideally CPU, GPU, drives and RAM). If they are ok and you are still crashing the problem is not the heat.

 

[JayGau]

What he should do is to measure clocks without changing anything so he can see how much throttling is going on first, if it barely drops clocks then there is no reason to do anything.
The CPU is made to reach 100 the question is if it reaches the performance it should be reaching at 100.

With the cooler he has he should not throttle. As I wrote in my previous comment, the i9 13900k should not go above 80c with this cooler under heavy stress test. It may not be the problem, but reaching 99c while reviews say it tops at 79c feels like something is wrong.

 

[TerryLaze]

With the cooler he has he should not throttle. As I wrote in my previous comment, the i9 13900k should not go above 80c with this cooler under heavy stress test. It may not be the problem, but reaching 99c while reviews say it tops at 79c feels like something is wrong.

That's when reviewers set it up "correctly" ,most reviews will have it running at 100% when doing heavy loads.
Under normal circumstances 100degrees is normal since turbo works up to 100, so it will always try to reach that temp and will only not reach it if the cooling bruteforces it.

 

[JayGau]

That's when reviewers set it up "correctly" ,most reviews will have it running at 100% when doing heavy loads.
Under normal circumstances 100degrees is normal since turbo works up to 100, so it will always try to reach that temp and will only not reach it if the cooling bruteforces it.

Reviews run it the way it should be. They have to reproduce real life operation for their readers. One I read about this cooler said that the fan preset was set to 50% while the pump was 100%, which sound very reasonable to me (the pump should always run at 100% despite what Jaytwocents claimed after his bad test, or at least, his bad test result analysis (it's why youtuber are not scientists)).

Reaching thermal throttling is not normal operation. You should always be running significantly lower than that to have some headroom. CPUs are not designed to speed up until they reach max temp and slow down. Throttling is a safety feature to prevent damages, not a max boost ceiling that the CPU constantly tries to reach. And everywhere I look, forum or reviews, people say that when cooled properly the 13900k rarely goes above 80 even during stress test.

 

[CompuTronix]

p1xel8or,​

As JayGau has pointed out, monitoring and being mindful of Core temperatures is always critical, especially when running a high-end CPU. However, in order to provide us with more complete information, knowing you ambient (indoor room) temperature is also highly useful, as it gives us a baseline with which to more accurately analyze and compare thermal performance across various platforms.

The International Standard for "normal" room temperature is 22°C or 72°F. Since users write in to us from all over the globe, "normal" could mean 10°C (50°F) for users living near the Arctic Circle, or 40°C (104°F) for users living near the Equator. Since Core temperatures are directly affected by ambient temperature, providing us with your ambient is important in helping you to troubleshoot, just so we don't proceed on false assumptions.

What is your ambient room temperature?

Also, keep in mind that cooler is always better for stability, longevity and ultimate performance. As stated in Intel's Data Sheets, Turbo features such as Thermal Velocity Boost and Turbo Boost Max 3.0 achieve optimal performance up to 70°C, which works well for moderate loads such as gaming. A hardware configuration that can maintain a reasonable thermal margin at least 15°C below Throttle temperature (Tj Max 100°C) is strongly recommended.

Further, when users suggest running Prime95 for a 100% workload stress test, 99% fail to mention that when run at default settings (AVX options enabled), Prime 95 becomes a brutal 130% workload, which leaves users wondering why their Core temperatures go through the roof. Unless you have "AVX Offset" enabled in BIOS and set to a value of at least 2, Power consumption ("Package Power" or Watts), which drives Core temperatures, will skyrocket and can cause your CPU to crash.

The correct method to run Prime95 is to check all AVX selection boxes so that all AVX test options are disabled. This will ensure that Prime95 tests your processor at a proper 100% workload, which is perfect for testing thermal performance, as it's a steady-state workload. The Cinebench R23 and R24 CPU tests as well as OCCT (no AVX) also run at essentially identical workloads to Prime95 (no AVX).

CT

 

[p1xel8or]

Oh wow, thanks for the detailed replies guys!

@JayGau I wasn't even aware that you could control the cooling pump! I also have no idea what radiator fan preset is lol, this is the first time I'm hearing those words. I just ordered the parts in a computer shop, and they built it for me. I haven't messed around with any of that. The cooler is mounted on top of the CPU, perhaps I could take a few pictures from the front and sides and you could look at it and tell me if it's fine? I'm away from the PC right now due to real life stuff (on a laptop rn). I'll take a picture of the cooler and link it when I get back for sure.

@CompuTronix I have a hygrometer in my room, and I always monitor the temps and make sure it is between 28 C - 22 C (the room has an air conditioner). My country is right on the equator.

I have a lot of words I don't understand in your post lol, owing to my being a primarily console gamer.

What is a "Thermal Velocity Boost and Turbo Boost Max 3.0"? Is it some BIOS option I have to tweak? What is TjMax? I remember seeing that word on the sheet Intel released when the microcode was out, but I was afraid I might screw something up and left my BIOS as it is (except change Intel Default Setting to "Extreme".) The Intel XTU stress test had three options : CPU Stress Test, CPU Stress Test with AVX and CPU Stress Test with AVX2. I just ran the normal CPU Stress Test and posted the results here. What should I do next? Please explain like I'm five, I'm very new to all this

 

[JayGau]

I wasn't even aware that you could control the cooling pump! I also have no idea what radiator fan preset is lol, this is the first time I'm hearing those words. I just ordered the parts in a computer shop, and they built it for me. I haven't messed around with any of that. The cooler is mounted on top of the CPU, perhaps I could take a few pictures from the front and sides and you could look at it and tell me if it's fine? I'm away from the PC right now due to real life stuff (on a laptop rn). I'll take a picture of the cooler and link it when I get back for sure.

You need the Gigabyte app installed to have access to those controls. Since it's a pre-built maybe you already have it (look at the Windows installed apps). If it's not installed you gonna have to download and install it.

The app should detect your cooler automatically (according that the AIO is connected properly to the motherboard) and you should be able to set the pump and fan speed and also the display on the AIO screen. Reviews say there is no custom fan curve for this cooler so you need to choose one from the options (those are the presets).

What an AIO does is using a pump to push the liquid through a radiator and the fans on the radiator cool down the liquid, that in turn cools down the CPU. The faster the fans spin and the cooler your liquid is, but you don't want the fans to always run at 100% it would be too loud. There should be several preset options in the Gigabyte app to choose from so you can pick the one that provides the best combination of temperature and noise level for you. And the pump should always run close to 100% so choose this option.

If the radiator is installed on the top of the case that's fine. It's the most common configuration.

 

[p1xel8or]

Update: My CPU was indeed found to be defective, and I received the replacement CPU today after 2 weeks. The games I mentioned also doesn't crash anymore so.... I think it was the CPU's fault after all.

Also, I've been talking to a guy on reddit who has been really helpful so far, he has been facing the same issues I've been facing (Going through multiple CPUs). He recommended me to set the IA AC Loadline to 0.5, which in a GIGABYTE motherboard looks like this. Should I change the IA AC Loadline to 50 (which is equal to 0.5 if I'm not mistaken) and leave everything at the default settings to prevent degradation?

 

[Zarqum]

This is my third i9 - replaced it after I updated the BIOS to the 0x12B microcode patch. After a couple of Unreal Engine games started to crash on me, I got a bit paranoid about the CPU degrading again, and at the suggestion of Intel Support on /r/Intel I ran Intel XTU's CPU stress test for 30 minutes. The image I've linked are the results I got.

Looks solid—if temps and power were stable, that’s a good sign. Totally get the concern after multiple chips!

 

[YSCCC]

Update: My CPU was indeed found to be defective, and I received the replacement CPU today after 2 weeks. The games I mentioned also doesn't crash anymore so.... I think it was the CPU's fault after all.

Also, I've been talking to a guy on reddit who has been really helpful so far, he has been facing the same issues I've been facing (Going through multiple CPUs). He recommended me to set the IA AC Loadline to 0.5, which in a GIGABYTE motherboard looks like this. Should I change the IA AC Loadline to 50 (which is equal to 0.5 if I'm not mistaken) and leave everything at the default settings to prevent degradation?

I forgot I set my 14900k in z690 UD AX board with IA AC to 50/60, but one more thing is that it’s good to keep the ia voltage limit to at most 1500 (1.5v), that way the cpu will never get supplied more than 1.5v and it might run a bit slower.

I set mine with a tested stable under volt and ia current limit to 1450 and get the 14900k to run at KS specs (5.9 P, 4.5E, pl 320w and 400A limit) for more than a year and still stable. The clocks are hit with real world power draw around 120w, in cinebench it will peak at some 280W and only under OCCT AVX2 extreme test (I do 5 min run to ensure stability during undervolting) it will hit 320W power limit.

I think you would want to cap the current to 1400 or 1500 at max to just keep more peace in mind

 

[p1xel8or]

I forgot I set my 14900k in z690 UD AX board with IA AC to 50/60, but one more thing is that it’s good to keep the ia voltage limit to at most 1500 (1.5v), that way the cpu will never get supplied more than 1.5v and it might run a bit slower.

I set mine with a tested stable under volt and ia current limit to 1450 and get the 14900k to run at KS specs (5.9 P, 4.5E, pl 320w and 400A limit) for more than a year and still stable. The clocks are hit with real world power draw around 120w, in cinebench it will peak at some 280W and only under OCCT AVX2 extreme test (I do 5 min run to ensure stability during undervolting) it will hit 320W power limit.

I think you would want to cap the current to 1400 or 1500 at max to just keep more peace in mind

Thanks, I did set my IA AC Loadline to 50. Apparently changing the voltage limit to 1500 does decrease performance, so I did not change that. I did not touch the PL1/PL2 limits at all, but I did disable IA CEP.

Edit: Also Intel Default Setting is now set to performance, which should set the PL1/PL2 and voltage limit to acceptable levels from what I've been seeing online.

 

[YSCCC]

Thanks, I did set my IA AC Loadline to 50. Apparently changing the voltage limit to 1500 does decrease performance, so I did not change that. I did not touch the PL1/PL2 limits at all, but I did disable IA CEP.

Edit: Also Intel Default Setting is now set to performance, which should set the PL1/PL2 and voltage limit to acceptable levels from what I've been seeing online.

tbf limiting it to 1500 should likely safe your CPU with minimal performance loss, if what they published is true the voltage spikes are the thing killing off the CPU overtime, nothing can be better than in the MB bios hard code to not supply above that amount. If you want almost no penalty without going through manual overclocking and undervolting, you could just limit it to 1550 as what the 0x12B microcode said it caps at