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

[graham006]

It doesn't look like that's the case. Most people I heard of had problems at stock settings. Intel and their board partners themselves pushed the CPUs too much. But the root cause is that 13th gen has not been sufficiently validated. The engineers knew about possible problems back then. But 13th gen had to be rushed out. 14th gen just suffers the same problems because it's the same silicon.

pure speculation. I actually have one of these CPUs. I don't overclock it, but it has been great. I even have used it to train a CIFAR10 dataset using RESNET50 model on the CPU. The entire process took 54 minutes and the system was running fairly cool the whole time.
I do use a rather higher end Noctua air cooler in a build I did myself. Probably a ton of people don't know how to properly cool the CPU.

 

[graham006]

Thank you, oh wise one. 🙄

It hasn't happened to you yet, so everyone else must be doing something wrong.

Very likely there are some people out there who ARE doing things wrong.
properly cool your CPU and don't overclock it, and it will last a decade.

 

[graham006]

Found the Intel shill.

And we found the mindless flame thrower.
Let me know when you have something to contribute.

 

[graham006]

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.

overclocking a memory controller (which by the way supports the speed I'm overclocking to anyway) ISN'T the same as overclocking the CPU. the memory controller is on the same die, but not the entire CPU. In fact it is a very small fraction of the total transistors of the entire die.

 

[Guardians Bane]

Of course I won't admit that Intel cpus are degrading faster than normal, unless you are comparing them with 12th gen. If you compare them with zen 4, they degrade way slower. Zen 4 start throwing errors (at double the % rate btw) before they even make it out of the door, according to the data.

Again, im basing this on Puget's data.

1% of 13 and 14th gen start showing errors within a couple of hours. Another 1% starts throwing errors after months of years of usage

4% of zen 4 cpus start throwing errors within a couple of hours.

Please explain to me how is 13th and 14th worse? Ill like to hear your opinion

We've been over this so many times. Lmao...

 

[YSCCC]

We've been over this so many times. Lmao...

and in the AMD thread chief said he will be 9950X day 1 buyer... ignore online troll mode on for me

 

[Guardians Bane]

and in the AMD thread chief said he will be 9950X day 1 buyer... ignore online troll mode on for me

Omg... Yep love it! /S lol

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

overclocking a memory controller (which by the way supports the speed I'm overclocking to anyway) ISN'T the same as overclocking the CPU. the memory controller is on the same die, but not the entire CPU. In fact it is a very small fraction of the total transistors of the entire die.

Wrong…if you fry the memory controller from overclocking then the entire CPU is a brick. Your logic is very flawed, I suspect you are drinking copium.

 

[TheHerald]

and in the AMD thread chief said he will be 9950X day 1 buyer... ignore online troll mode on for me

3d, not the normal one.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

Very likely there are some people out there who ARE doing things wrong.
properly cool your CPU and don't overclock it, and it will last a decade.

Wrong…only a properly designed and manufactured CPU with properly designed microcode that is not pushed to extremes out of the box will last a decade.
When Intel pushes 1.6v stock to eke out a 6 GHz single core speed to cope with AMD’s competition, then you will get the 13th and 14th gen CPU degradation problem regardless of cooling.
Intel threw reliability out the window in recent years. New smaller processes are more sensitive to voltage degradation due to thinner copper interconnects. Back in the sandy bridge days using the 32nm process, Intel stated max safe voltage as 1.35v, with Ivy Bridge on 22nm, stated max safe voltage was 1.3v. With Haswell, stated max safe voltage was 1.25v. Thus clearly pushing close to 1.6v through a 10nm process with 13th and 14th gen CPU’s is asking for electro-migration of the even thinner power interconnects in 10nm. You can be an Intel fan while also accepting that Intel is playing with fire by pushing voltages well beyond safe maximums.

 

[COLGeek]

Folks, we are done here.

Thanks to those who stayed on topic.