PSA for 13th/14th gen Intel CPU owners

[JLK03F150]

You get 4 more cores for the 5900XT vs. the 5900X as well,

The 5900XT is more of a down-clocked 5950X, same number of cores/threads. But yeah, it lands in between the 5900X & 5950X and costs about the same as a 5950X. Personally I don't have a need or a want.

 

[mackerel]

For sure this is all a big headache for Intel and they have to work through it. However the perceived problem by parts of the tech media I feel is getting totally overblown. They directly benefit from any noise they can create, and they're doing just that. Like when GN got the tip off on oxidation issue. Pretty big scoop, especially if it could be proven. Then Intel slapped it down saying it was a known problem from last year that was already resolved. Might there be some affected product that got out? That's what warranty is for. Nothing is always perfect and even without these specific issues no product is 100% reliable.

The only gap I feel has been unfilled is a good way to test CPU stability. I know we have general tools but I'm thinking of one specific to this issue. Running a game for some hours is not a great solution. For example Oodle was one of the early reports to show the instability, so can someone pack that as a stand alone stress test and loop it in the hopes of triggering it faster? I've not kept up to date on if other software is known to easily show up this problem too. Think it would also be a "nice to have" if that software also read hardware settings to ensure standard settings are used and there is no OC or other out of spec setting going on.

 

[Kenrou]

Wouldn't running winrar/winzip and test a multi-gigabyte file with the highest compression/dictionary do the trick?

 

[tiktoksss12]

no. i buy i7 14700k

 

[]-[itman]

For sure this is all a big headache for Intel and they have to work through it. However the perceived problem by parts of the tech media I feel is getting totally overblown. They directly benefit from any noise they can create, and they're doing just that. Like when GN got the tip off on oxidation issue. Pretty big scoop, especially if it could be proven. Then Intel slapped it down saying it was a known problem from last year that was already resolved. Might there be some affected product that got out? That's what warranty is for. Nothing is always perfect and even without these specific issues no product is 100% reliable.

The only gap I feel has been unfilled is a good way to test CPU stability. I know we have general tools but I'm thinking of one specific to this issue. Running a game for some hours is not a great solution. For example Oodle was one of the early reports to show the instability, so can someone pack that as a stand alone stress test and loop it in the hopes of triggering it faster? I've not kept up to date on if other software is known to easily show up this problem too. Think it would also be a "nice to have" if that software also read hardware settings to ensure standard settings are used and there is no OC or other out of spec setting going on.

The problem is, it wasn't resolved in 2023 like they initially said, it wasn't resolved until "early 2024" (actually April according to GN sources). They knew about it for roughly 18 months before it was fully fixed and it seems that they only made a public statement about it because GN was going to expose it anyway. A company selling a product with a known defect that can cause failure leads to easy lawsuits, warranty or not. It may even prompt some government investigations in some countries (namely EU countries really don't like this type of thing).

Wouldn't running winrar/winzip and test a multi-gigabyte file with the highest compression/dictionary do the trick?

That is basically one of the primary tests Wendel from Level 1 Tech used that exposed the instability. I think he used 7zip and like a 10 GB compressed file and then ran checksum after the decompression.

 

[mackerel]

The problem is, it wasn't resolved in 2023 like they initially said, it wasn't resolved until "early 2024" (actually April according to GN sources). They knew about it for roughly 18 months before it was fully fixed and it seems that they only made a public statement about it because GN was going to expose it anyway. A company selling a product with a known defect that can cause failure leads to easy lawsuits, warranty or not. It may even prompt some government investigations in some countries (namely EU countries really don't like this type of thing).

There are levels of fixes. One might be a "get going" fix, the other might be the "full fix". Don't let perfect be the enemy of good.

Lawsuits will vary significantly by jurisdiction. I can only talk about UK law with a big IANAL hat on. At the end of the day, does the product do what it is suppose to do? Yes? If it fails, regardless of warranty, a consumer (not business) can try getting satisfaction on the basis of "fit for purpose". If the product can be shown to have a design defect, it will significantly help the case of getting a repair/replacement outside of warranty. Note under UK law, this has to be taken up with the seller, not manufacturer if different. Businesses do not have this protection and I'm not familiar if they have something else they can use. Also, while the UK is no longer a part of EU since Brexit, at the time the legal systems were not that dissimilar.

 

[mackerel]

Intel says Raptor Lake microcode update will not affect overclocking and performance, new Arrow Lake/Battlemage updates - VideoCardz.com

Intel makes several claims at ASUS event in China Updates for Raptor Lake, Arrow Lake and Battlemage. Source: 小敌鸽/Weibo “小敌鸽” aka Little Pigeon is a Chinese tech blogger who has shared some first-hand information in the past. This person was invited to Intel x ASUS event (said to be an internal...

videocardz.com

At a China event with Asus, it is claimed Intel said the microcode will not impact turbo frequencies.

ASUS first to release 0x129 microcode update for Raptor Lake instability issue - VideoCardz.com

ASUS rolls out new BIOS for LGA-1700 motherboards targeting Intel CPU instability concerns The new BIOS says to contain the expected microcode update. Update: ASUS has confirmed the release of 0x129 microcode update for a number of LGA-1700 motherboard series, including Z690, B760, B660, H610...

videocardz.com

Beta bios with the microcode update for Asus Z790 boards.

I'm sure the media most invested into this issue will be testing it ASAP so we can see what impact it has.


Edit: MSI also have also announced beta bios

MSI releases 0x129 microcode update for first Z790 motherboards, mitigates Intel Raptor Lake instability - VideoCardz.com

BIOS Update For Intel Core 14th and 13th Gen Desktop Processor Instability [Taipei, Taiwan] August 2024 – Regarding the instability of the Intel® Core™ 14th /13th Gen desktop processors, MSI will release the latest BIOS of Intel 700 and 600 series motherboards and 14th /13th Generation Desktop...

videocardz.com

I wont update further. Guess they're starting to roll out now.

 

[EarthDog]

Ill get this applied and go on about my business.

.........BIOS isn't up on the Asus webpage (Dark Hero) yet, just on VideoCardz.

 

[mackerel]

If you click through to source, the original is an Asus forum post from SAFEDISK, who is apparently an OC'er at Asus. Will leave it to people to decide how official they want it before applying it.

 

[EarthDog]

Right.. I see/saw that, just saying it's not on the official Asus site yet.

Sigh........ I forgot about adjusting my fans curves... I'll apply when I have a few mintues to reset everything.

 

[Woomack]

I believe all are betas and not official/stable releases (they can still be stable). I just assume that manufacturers didn't have enough time to fine-tune any BIOS when the new microcode was released this week. It seems they just added the new microcode to the last stable version, but it can be enough.
MSI has new versions on its product websites already, and all are betas. It is a bit weird that for the Z790 Ace MAX, they released one with the 125 microcode yesterday, and today, the one with 129. ASUS had the 128 version available for some weeks, and MSI skipped everything in the last few months.

 

[mackerel]

Sigh........ I forgot about adjusting my fans curves... I'll apply when I have a few mintues to reset everything.

One of the biggest things I dislike about updating BIOS. Wish there was a way to keep settings. I only just found out this morning I forgot to disable the iGPU after the last update. At least it didn't seem to have caused any problem but I don't trust Windows to get multi-GPU right.

I believe all are betas and not official/stable releases (they can still be stable).

Does sound like they got the microcode, integrated it and likely published it as beta after some minimal checks. Hopefully they'll get the full checks done and bring it to release status quickly. And hopefully there's nothing wrong with it!

 

[mackerel]

Possibly first performance test of the new microcode.

I skimmed the charts and worked out the % change in reported tests:

R23 MT +0.2%
R23 ST +0.4%
R24 MT -0.6%
R24 ST no change
Geekbench MT -0.7%
Geekbench ST -0.4%
Handbrake +1.7%
Blender Classroom +0.7%
Blender Junkshop -1.1%
Blender Monster +0.1%
TimeSpy EX CPU -5.7%
SOTTR -0.3%
CP2077 avg -3.0%
CP2077 min -2.1%

I don't know his methodology e.g. repeat testing to make sure there isn't an outlier but most of it is within margin of error. TSE would be worthy of follow up testing to rule out a glitched run for example, and is repeatable. Note I didn't watch the whole video so I don't know if that was addressed at all. CP2077 also shows a bit of a delta so similar could be said.

The time charts also don't seem to show any obvious difference. He seems to be looking at reported voltages. Think it was Buildzoid who did voltage probes previously so that might be more insightful when he gets around to repeating it with new microcode.

I got some "what if" scenarios forming in my head. Wont share them as speculation, but if they happen it could cause the community to blow up. Again.

 

[Woomack]

These results look like an error margin. Depending on the pass, seeing 2-3% differences in most tests is normal. Time Spy result is the exception, but as you said, we don't know his methodology.
I guess barely anyone cares about the performance, but if it solves the stability issue. I don't think anything based on popular tests will convince us, and someone has to perform something more detailed, like the mentioned voltage probes in extended runs. It still doesn't guarantee that CPUs won't degrade faster than expected. However, most CPUs should live for at least 20 years, so if it's even a 50% reduction, then it shouldn't affect most users who are more likely to replace PCs in 3-5 years. In reality, we don't know what degradation it can be. Intel promised +2 years of warranty, so in most cases, it's 5 years and should be more than enough for most users.

On the other hand, I don't care much. I will probably get rid of my 14th-gen CPUs within a year as I use them only for reviews.

 

[mackerel]

Like many desktop users I care about performance, but I do care about stability more. If I had an affected CPU it would be a concern. The oldest CPU I still regularly use would be the 7980XE. As I got it used I have no idea how old it actually is but it could be nearly 7 years old. I don't remember ever having a CPU fail. Their lifespan is practically unlimited, but depending on luck you can get a bad one. Hard to say how often people replace systems, which in most cases is when the CPU is replaced also. Those on hardware sites like us will change far more often. Otherwise some people can keep CPUs for a very long time.

 

[mackerel]

Microcode (0x129) Update for Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen Desktop Processors

Intel is currently distributing to its OEM/ODM partners a new microcode patch (0x129) for its Intel Core 13th/14th Gen desktop processors which will address incorrect voltage requests to the processor that are causing elevated operating voltage. For all Intel Core 13th/14th Gen desktop processor...

community.intel.com

Intel statement on what the microcode does. In short, limits voltage to 1.55. The wording I find curious, as it sounds like they're still investigating something. As for perf, they claim most tasks are within run to run variation, but they do mention some with a "moderate" impact. I guess we'll see testing soon enough on what that means exactly. Note the previous leak claiming no impact was from a China event so was never public or official.

Update will NOT be provided through OS like was done for Spectre/Meltdown. This is more concerning as there may be a lot of people out there who never update bios.

Edit: Anandtech's writeup suggests the further investigation is on operating voltage shift of impacted CPUs. A later microcode version may be pushed by OS, just not this one which is primarily targeted to prevent further degradation.

 

[EarthDog]

New 'instability patch' shaves 9000 points off Cinebench multi-core score in 14900K tests

ASUS has released a beta BIOS that delivers microcode 0x129 to Intel 14th and 13th generation processors. In hopes to stop the degradation.

www.pcguide.com

Intel's "0x129" Microcode Mitigates 14th Gen & 13th Gen CPU Instability Issues, Benchmarks Reveal No Performance Downgrades

Intel's new microcode to mitigate the CPU instability problems is finally out, and the first set of benchmarks reveals "minor changes."

wccftech.com

 

[mackerel]

pcguide's writeup is at best an indication of perf before any fixes at all, and now. However they got the eTVB thing backwards. The old microcode had a bug allowing the CPU to boost more than it should, and the new one (since 0x125) is working as intended. I'd also like explicit confirmation if the power limits are the same between the BIOSes.

The wccf posting doesn't seem to add anything new from what I posted earlier.

 

[]-[itman]

New 'instability patch' shaves 9000 points off Cinebench multi-core score in 14900K tests

ASUS has released a beta BIOS that delivers microcode 0x129 to Intel 14th and 13th generation processors. In hopes to stop the degradation.

www.pcguide.com

Intel's "0x129" Microcode Mitigates 14th Gen & 13th Gen CPU Instability Issues, Benchmarks Reveal No Performance Downgrades

Intel's new microcode to mitigate the CPU instability problems is finally out, and the first set of benchmarks reveals "minor changes."

wccftech.com

PC good either hit a bug due to beta bios, or the new bios lowered power levels significantly. The microcode alone wouldn’t make that much of a difference.

 

[EarthDog]

PC good either hit a bug due to beta bios, or the new bios lowered power levels significantly. The microcode alone wouldn’t make that much of a difference.

Yeah... not seeing that result repeated anywhere else.


I didn't get a chance to put it on mine and test, but should have time once I come back Monday from a wedding in ATL.

PS @]-[itman - you can make that url in your signature a clickable link, if you like.