News Puget says its Intel chips failures are lower than Ryzen failures — retailer releases failure rate data, cites conservative power settings

[Admin]

High-end PC builder Puget Systems say that its data indicate a lower than expected failure rate for its Intel builds, compared to what’s widely reported.

Puget says its Intel chips failures are lower than Ryzen failures — retailer releases failure rate data, cites conservative power settings : Read more

 

[Makaveli]

Puget with the damage control lol.

 

[Dr3ams]

If Puget's statistics are true, then where's the AMD customer posts and outrage then.

Since 1995, I've never had an AMD or Intel CPU fail on me. Had a few GPUs, hard drives and PSUs break though.

 

[MacZ24]

Saving private Intel.

 

[Pierce2623]

My office had Puget CAD/CAE workstations with a consumer level Intel 13900k chip and two rtx a4000s. Their settings perform significantly below just slapping a 13900k on an Asus z790 in multithreaded workloads. In fact, they don’t even stay at PL2 indefinitely.

 

[SunMaster]

You know, pugets CPU failure rates seems incredibly high for all CPUs, In my experience, it's extremely unusual for a CPU to fail. I have in fact never experienced a cpu fail despite my experience with many hundred machines. CPU failure measured in percentages? I don't for a second believe they're measuring what we believe they are.

 

[Gururu]

This is most certainly a case where you would expect enthusiasts to be the most vocal even though they are an arguably insignificant portion of sales. The CPU issue is much less a problem than Intel’s failure to stay lean and mean in the market. They are top heavy and I worry about the quality of engineers vs. yesteryear. BUT they are an American company, perhaps our flagship for microprocessors and if they go down, I doubt AMD or any other will have the resources or interest to carry that weight. I am hoping they can survive this, not the way IBM did, but the way Apple did.

 

[NickT300]

Puget with the damage control lol.

Agreed.
Many companies have been reporting up to 50% + reports of Intel CPUs failing.

 

[Gururu]

Agreed.
Many companies have been reporting up to 50% + reports of Intel CPUs failing.

This is simply ridiculous. There are thousands of companies using millions of these chips. By many do you mean 5 out of thousands?

 

[sdedalus83]

My office had Puget CAD/CAE workstations with a consumer level Intel 13900k chip and two rtx a4000s. Their settings perform significantly below just slapping a 13900k on an Asus z790 in multithreaded workloads. In fact, they don’t even stay at PL2 indefinitely.

Don’t they run review systems exclusively at base clock speeds?

 

[usertests]

It over. AMD class action within the week.

 

[graham006]

High-end PC builder Puget Systems say that its data indicate a lower than expected failure rate for its Intel builds, compared to what’s widely reported.

Puget says its Intel chips failures are lower than Ryzen failures — retailer releases failure rate data, cites conservative power settings : Read more

I have had two of the Intel CPUs with supposed problems. (reports saying that all 13th and 14th gen CPUs with TDP 65W and higher _could_ be affected). The first CPU was a core i5-13500 in an ASUS ROG STRIX ITX motherboard. I never overclocked the CPU but did overclock RAM to 5600. Ran this CPU for 1 year with no issues and sold to a friend who currently has it and says it's fine. I upgraded that CPU to a Core i7-14700. Again no overclocking except for RAM. I have applied all BIOS updates provided by ASUS to this system. Again, rock solid performance... After hearing all the news about CPU instability I decided to run some stress tests after updating to most recent BIOS. My results:

Cinebench R24 - 1 hour stress. No problems. multi-core score was 1579.
CPU-Z stress test. Ran for 1 hour. No issues. CPU temp went as high as 100C for a bit but leveled out in the high 60s (C).

I did a RESNET50 training on CIFAR data set on CPU (normally would do this on GPU) and that worked fine as well and stressed the CPU for about 50 minutes. Again no issues.

I think most of the problem is people are pushing their CPUs way beyond what they are designed to do. Don't overclock. If you must, overclock your memory. It's a lot cheaper to replace.

 

[graham006]

Agreed.
Many companies have been reporting up to 50% + reports of Intel CPUs failing.

What is the source for that information? Over 50% failure rate? Are you an AMD employee?

 

[YSCCC]

My office had Puget CAD/CAE workstations with a consumer level Intel 13900k chip and two rtx a4000s. Their settings perform significantly below just slapping a 13900k on an Asus z790 in multithreaded workloads. In fact, they don’t even stay at PL2 indefinitely.

This is really interesting, may I ask did you get a metric like Cinebench R23/2024 for a reference point? when they stated that they go on the conservative side and the percentage is at what they reported, that what performance of their system is, if it is stable an reliable at the cost of say, 10% or more copmared to the extreme profile is now, it is not really a fair comparison for consumers, if they release the 13900k getting 30k R23 I bet they will get near as many sales as they did.

Also funny is the total number of systems sent out for the % comparison, if both stayed reasonably low, 10 computers out of 100 failing randomly maybe due to shipment or other parts defect will be 10%, but 10 out of 500 will be 2.5%

 

[vanadiel007]

I have never had a CPU fail on me, and this goes all the way back to the C-64. And I always overclock my CPU's. Neither had an Intel or AMD CPU fail.

 

[Ogotai]

What is the source for that information? Over 50% failure rate? Are you an AMD employee?

News - Game publisher claims 100% crash rate with Intel CPUs – Alderon Games says company sells defective 13th and 14th gen chips

Frustrations are running at an all-time high regarding Raptor Lake stability issues. Game studio Alderon Games reports that nearly all of its Raptor Lake machines are either crashing or suffering from stability issues. Game publisher claims 100% crash rate with Intel CPUs – Alderon Games says...

forums.tomshardware.com

not to mention all the other posts about imtels 13th and 14th gens crashing and the instability issues they have

 

[TheHerald]

I have had two of the Intel CPUs with supposed problems. (reports saying that all 13th and 14th gen CPUs with TDP 65W and higher _could_ be affected). The first CPU was a core i5-13500 in an ASUS ROG STRIX ITX motherboard. I never overclocked the CPU but did overclock RAM to 5600. Ran this CPU for 1 year with no issues and sold to a friend who currently has it and says it's fine. I upgraded that CPU to a Core i7-14700. Again no overclocking except for RAM. I have applied all BIOS updates provided by ASUS to this system. Again, rock solid performance... After hearing all the news about CPU instability I decided to run some stress tests after updating to most recent BIOS. My results:

Cinebench R24 - 1 hour stress. No problems. multi-core score was 1579.
CPU-Z stress test. Ran for 1 hour. No issues. CPU temp went as high as 100C for a bit but leveled out in the high 60s (C).

I did a RESNET50 training on CIFAR data set on CPU (normally would do this on GPU) and that worked fine as well and stressed the CPU for about 50 minutes. Again no issues.

I think most of the problem is people are pushing their CPUs way beyond what they are designed to do. Don't overclock. If you must, overclock your memory. It's a lot cheaper to replace.

Most people won't have any issues - obviously. Anecdotes of 2 cpus are not evidence.

It's clear - even by puget's numbers - that failure rates on 13th and 14th gen are higher than they should be.

 

[Alvar "Miles" Udell]

It'd be interesting to see the rates for both sides from the mass OEMs like Dell and HP, companies that deal in a very large volume of CPUs to see how they fare over time.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

I think most of the problem is people are pushing their CPUs way beyond what they are designed to do. Don't overclock. If you must, overclock your memory. It's a lot cheaper to replace.

Except that these are companies that demand reliability at stock settings yet are seeing 50% failure rates. Hedge funds and investment firms do not overclock because they rely on algorithms to make buy and sell orders on a millisecond scale.

Also, overclocking memory is overclocking your CPU. The memory controller is on the CPU and its frequency changes with the ram’s frequency, and you can very much blow it with too high voltage or current for stability. Even leaving the mem controller voltage alone but allowing too high of a RAM DDR voltage can have bad effects on the memory controller.

 

[wakuwaku]

You know, pugets CPU failure rates seems incredibly high for all CPUs, In my experience, it's extremely unusual for a CPU to fail. I have in fact never experienced a cpu fail despite my experience with many hundred machines. CPU failure measured in percentages? I don't for a second believe they're measuring what we believe they are.

many hundreds? they deal with thousands of pcs. come back when you reach their level please.

also there is a decent amount of failures that happen before they send them out to customers (in the shop). Never got a lemon CPU before? Good for you.

I bought a 7950x earlier this year that was a lemon. Totally didn't boot out of the box. Sent it back to the shop, they tested it in their own system and confirmed it was a lemon. Sent it back to AMD, got my new CPU back in ~2 weeks and its now working happily doing its thing.

 

[TheHerald]

This is really interesting, may I ask did you get a metric like Cinebench R23/2024 for a reference point? when they stated that they go on the conservative side and the percentage is at what they reported, that what performance of their system is, if it is stable an reliable at the cost of say, 10% or more copmared to the extreme profile is now, it is not really a fair comparison for consumers, if they release the 13900k getting 30k R23 I bet they will get near as many sales as they did.

The numbers are there for all to see, they publish reviews with their settings.

Yes, the 13900k scores around 30-31k (10 minute test)with the settings they ship them with, but on the same note, the 7950x scores 33k. The difference is 10% in performance, but the zen 4 parts have twice the failure rate.

Also their workstations aren't really targeted at rendering workloads so these numbers are kinda useless. They are targeted at photoshop / premiere / lightroom etc, tasks that the 13900k (with the aforementioned settings) is faster than the 7950x anyways.

Here is their review

13th Gen Intel Core Processors Content Creation Review

Following AMDs recent release of their Ryzen 7000 Series desktop processors, Intel is fighting back with their own launch of the Core 13th Gen processors (code named "Raptor Lake"). Unlike AMD's launch which moved to a new socket and added support for DDR5, the 13th Gen CPUs are a drop-in...

www.pugetsystems.com

 

[ThomasKinsley]

Summary: Puget has its own special BIOS that is more conservative than default settings. Intel 13th and 14th chips are still failing at a higher rate than 12th gen.

 

[YSCCC]

The numbers are there for all to see, they publish reviews with their settings.

Yes, the 13900k scores around 30-31k (10 minute test)with the settings they ship them with, but on the same note, the 7950x scores 33k. The difference is 10% in performance, but the zen 4 parts have twice the failure rate.

Also their workstations aren't really targeted at rendering workloads so these numbers are kinda useless. They are targeted at photoshop / premiere / lightroom etc, tasks that the 13900k (with the aforementioned settings) is faster than the 7950x anyways.

Here is their review

13th Gen Intel Core Processors Content Creation Review

Following AMDs recent release of their Ryzen 7000 Series desktop processors, Intel is fighting back with their own launch of the Core 13th Gen processors (code named "Raptor Lake"). Unlike AMD's launch which moved to a new socket and added support for DDR5, the 13th Gen CPUs are a drop-in...

www.pugetsystems.com

Well, as said, the base numbers of systems sold and failures arn't nearly comparable in their lineup, but both still well within acceptable line, what is interesting is, IF (and a big IF) it takes this low performance for the 13900k or 14900k, they are not living up to what they are advertised to do in consumer level. Cases closed, this also makes sense for that review sites can no longer recommend intel for some time, since nobody know how conservative in every power matrix is finally safe for long term, and how low the overaall performance will be after the fix

 

[YSCCC]

Summary: Puget has its own special BIOS that is more conservative than default settings. Intel 13th and 14th chips are still failing at a higher rate than 12th gen.

To be fair though, they will likely have the same conservative bios for 12th gen, so being the same tick tok cycle it just makes sense with the lower clocked ones lives better

 

[TheHerald]

Well, as said, the base numbers of systems sold and failures arn't nearly comparable in their lineup, but both still well within acceptable line, what is interesting is, IF (and a big IF) it takes this low performance for the 13900k or 14900k, they are not living up to what they are advertised to do in consumer level. Cases closed, this also makes sense for that review sites can no longer recommend intel for some time, since nobody know how conservative in every power matrix is finally safe for long term, and how low the overaall performance will be after the fix

But neither does AMD, since even with this low performance for the 7950x it still fails at over twice the rate of Intel, right?