Problem on Intel 13th & 14th Gen CPUs.

[Devrim]

Hi guys. Lately I'm hearing some stability problems about Intel's 13th and 14th CPUs.
Was there any topics about this? Sorry I couldn't find I guess. Please merge the topics.

A few months ago I gathered a new system (see my sign.) and I currently use 14700K CPU. Actually I've never seen any issue about the CPU, but! but, after installed DCS on my new system, I always get an interesting problem when starting DCS. After splash screen, I expect blue-sky screen with the loading bar from 0% to 100%, but I never see that screen. Only black screen, and freezing mouse movements. I can't even get the Task Manager to kill DCS. In fact that happens randomly. Sometimes I encounter mouse and/or system freeze in the menu or in-game. With 30% chance I manage to play DCS without any problems.

A computer-tech and geek guy of my friend and I examined my system completely and he couldn't find any inadequacy, deficiency, disorder, incompatibility or driver fail thing. My system is perfect but I started to see interesting-freezing situations after bought this system.

I don't know but honestly, I've started to blame the CPU. Intel says they will release a mini BIOS update for those CPUs. I'm waiting for it, I hope it will solve my freeze issue.

Do you have those CPUs? Do you encounter this type issue? What do you think overall?
Thx.

[Wostg]

There's this one 

definitely feeling something iffy on a 13900k 

[SharpeXB]

I had to replace my 13900K recently, maybe this is why. It was indeed overclocked though. 

[Panzerlang]

I've done this to my 13900k. It now maxes at 4.9ghz instead of 5.6ghz (Prime 95 stress-test) but no longer hits 97c (maxes around 80c).

Gigabyte Aorus Master Z790, F12 BIOS.
 

1. Package Power Limit1 - TDP (Watts) > 253 (Holy grail, page 98, table 17, 8P+16E Core 125W Extreme Config)

2. Package Power Limit1 Time > 56 (Holy grail, page 98, table 17, 8P+16E Core 125W Extreme Config)

3. Package Power Limit2 - (Watts) > 253 (Holy grail, page 98, table 17, 8P+16E Core 125W Extreme Config)

4. Core Current Limit(Amps) > 307 (Holy grail, page 184, table 77, S-Processor Line (125W) 8P+16E)

5. Enhanced Multi-Core Performance > Disabled (OP recommendation)

6. Performance CPU Clock Ratio > 57 (I mentioned I changed this to 56x using XTU, but OP told me to go back to 57 when doing the changes above)
   
   Optimizing Stability for Intel 13900k and 14900k CPU’s : r/overclocking (reddit.com)

Still won't do XMP though, totally spazzes out the system. Might be because I have x4 16GB though.

[SharpeXB]

I was able to solve a repeated CDT problem using a 14900KS by updating the mb BIOS

The problems I had with the old 13900K showed as poor performance but not actually crashing or freezing. It was indeed overclocked and so possibly this was the degradation issue  

 

[LucShep]

Quoting myself from another thread (pardon that), but....

Just by activating "Synch All Cores" and placing a value (for all the cores) that is same or as close to the "out of the box" (Stock) all-core clock for the specific processor, you imediately fix the worst part of the problem.

What degrades these CPUs faster is when a single core, even for a background task, asks to boost to whatever outrageous ammount of "single/dual core boost".
Even idling in desktop you can see this destructive behaviour, doing its own unknowningly suicidal thing.
It happens very, very frequently during whatever time of use. 

When it does that, it is given 1.50v+ depending on the individual CPU and motherboard+bios (some people even mention 1.60v at times).
That is one major reason why these chips are dying. Even though the chip has power limits, when only one core wants to boost, ALL of the power is offered, at once.
The most insane part is that this seems to be a feature just so Intel (and also AMD has it) can get a good CineBench score by reviewers.

Lock those cores and you'll be a LOT better.
 

Edited July 31, 2024 by LucShep

[Devrim]

I've just "disabled" Intel boost thing in BIOS. Doesn't that help a little bit to prevent the CPU from dying fast?

Edited August 4, 2024 by Devrim

[Brzi_Joe]

Am 31.7.2024 um 15:58 schrieb SharpeXB:

I was able to solve a repeated CDT problem using a 14900KS by updating the mb BIOS

Thx sharpex, that helped me too. 14600kf, and many bsod and restarts since I bought new pc ...

[Nightdare]

On 7/31/2024 at 3:49 PM, Panzerlang said:

I've done this to my 13900k. It now maxes at 4.9ghz instead of 5.6ghz

 

Ask for your money back, Intel states 5.6Ghz max boost clock for your processor

You didn't buy a K-CPU to run 12% below factory spec

Edited August 4, 2024 by Nightdare

[TFS]

I've had my 14900k since November 2023, haven't had issues, I did the bios update from May 2024 though, (Intel states a BIOS update to address this later this month August 2024) I use process lasso to use P core 1-7 and no cores parked and XMP for Ram OC. I monitor temps, so far so good, never a bsod, never ctd, DCS runs like butter in VR. 

[Aapje]

You may be very lucky with top tier silicon, that can take the high voltages, or you may have damage that is not yet critical. But we know that a proper fix is not yet out.

[Panzerlang]

4 hours ago, Nightdare said:

 

Ask for your money back, Intel states 5.6Ghz max boost clock for your processor

You didn't buy a K-CPU to run 12% below factory spec

 

My mistake, it wasn't globally maxed at 4.9GHz, it was in just the one test I was running (no idea why however). I now have it locked to a max of 5.5GHz and it doesn't go higher than around 85c in DCS (so far, lol).

[Wostg]

So I updated my 13900k with asus' june bios update and I gather another is due, and set all the speed stuff to whatever it considers to be default.

Aside from looking for crashes, how do I actually know if anything is off, and how can I be assured to prevent anything bad happening?

Thanks  

[LucShep]

First BIOS fixes for crashing Intel CPUs are finally rolling out

MSI and Asus are the first motherboard makers to implement Intel's official microcode patch to prevent crashing on Raptor Lake CPUs.

https://www.pcworld.com/article/2422028/first-bios-fixes-for-crashing-intel-processors-rolling-out.html



...and in other news:
 

Intel hit with lawsuit over $32 billion loss, shareholders complain company hid problems

Intel shareholders are suing the company in the wake of its share price rapidly plummeting. The legal action comes days after Intel announced the suspension of dividends and the planned layoff of over 15,000 employees. At its worst, this share price drop wiped over $32 billion off Intel's market value in a single day, and stock price back to 2008 levels.

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/intel-hit-with-lawsuit-over-dollar32-billion-loss-shareholders-complain-company-hid-problems

Edited August 8, 2024 by LucShep

[BitMaster]

Yep, that was bound to come.

What a fiasco, let's wait and see how this develops.

[SharpeXB]

The Boeing of chip makers

[Hiob]

11 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

The Boeing of chip makers

For the same reasons by the way.

The only relevant competitor starts to outperform them on any metric and they start to panic over loosing touch.

[LucShep]

It seems the new microcode doesn't solve the high voltage spike issues after all.  It does slightly improves things, but the problem still exhists.

Resuming, all 13th and 14th gen 65W+ CPUs (i5 "K", i7 and i9) will still continue to degrade if you don't lock the cores and/or adjust voltage limits........  

PS: some testing with 14900KS:

Fully agree with his recommendation there, at 21:08 in the video.
 

Edited August 11, 2024 by LucShep

[Devrim]

So? Why did they release this patch?

By the way they mention about x129 code, but my motherboard has released only x125 patch on their webpage.

[LucShep]

13 hours ago, Devrim said:

So? Why did they release this patch?
 

HEH...  basically, it's damage control.
They're facing a big lawsuit by their own shareholders, the worst ammount of RMA returns in record, and huge losses in the servers business as well.
This will at least diminish the problem (and calm enraged tempers) while not being the perfect solution.

Not sure if you watched the video in my previous post.
With the new microcode, Intel seems to have forced the affected CPUs to downclock further and more frequently, while maintaining what was done already in previous microcodes (in recent BIOS updates prior to these new ones). And it does it even if using the very highest power plans on Windows.

So, the insane boosts and voltages still occur but, at least, it downclocks and undervolts the CPU if not really required (in low activity), effectively improving temps and voltages.
The problem is, the stock boosts and voltages are still peaking outrageously high, like before, so it will not stop CPUs degrading (i.e, the main issue remains).
What it does is just prolong that degradation process further, an atempt to extend the CPU life (which is kind of positive and the intention with this, I guess?).

I still maintain what most people well into this stuff have said already to be a solution:

By all means, get your BIOS update with the new Intel microcode for 13th/14th gen, but don't just use the "Stock" settings of your BIOS (that was never good).

Sync all your P-Cores to same clock, and as close to what the "All P-Cores max clocks" is out-of-the-box, for your own CPU model, effectively locking them to that as a maximum possible, so that none of the stupid single/dual core boosts ever happens (the worst offender, at times spiking over 1.5v!).

Also, making sure the CPU voltage (aka Vcore) does not go over a certain value is a good idea as well (i.e, setting a fixed max voltage for it). 

Setting it up to 1.35v is considered "safe" for 13th and 14th gen i9 and i7 (not sure but I suppose for i5 "K" as well?). Anything above 1.35v is already way too much, IMO.
Something like that (or if below, even better) is what most concerned with degradation, by voltage spikes and temps, should be aiming at maximum. 

So, setting the highest stable clock as possible for all P-Cores (all sync'ed, locked) for that lower cpu core voltage is, IMO, a better solution to go over this 13th/14th gen issue. 
Of course, it requires changing a few BIOS settings, stress-testing and monitoring (as no system is the same) but it's a way to finally enjoy the system with peace of mind.

 

13 hours ago, Devrim said:

By the way they mention about x129 code, but my motherboard has released only x125 patch on their webpage.
 

Not all motherboard models got the new BIOS with latest Intel microcode for 13th and 14th gen.

Some will only have it available for now as "Beta versions", or awaiting release sometime very soon.

Edited August 11, 2024 by LucShep

[Devrim]

Yea I watched the video and his wave and average drawings etc, but thanks for your explaining, and your suggestion is so reasonable. I'll do that today. Thanks mate. 

[BitMaster]

Ya, OK, that's a solution for Bios Junkies and natural born fiddlers like us...BUT what about average Joe's CPU ?

Oh man, this is gonna get ugly soon..

[Devrim]

Hey. May I ask a stupid question?

What does exactly harm CPU?
1) Overheating due to high voltage?
2) Just high voltage itself?
3) High voltage and high CPU usage?

I see CPU voltage around 1.50 or 1.55 on CPU-Z software but, heating never exceeds 62 degrees and CPU usage is between 7%~25%.
Still does it mean my CPU has got harm some amount?

Edited August 11, 2024 by Devrim

[LucShep]

On 8/11/2024 at 5:28 PM, Devrim said:

Hey. May I ask a stupid question?

What does exactly harm CPU?
1) Overheating due to high voltage?
2) Just high voltage itself?
3) High voltage and high CPU usage?

I see CPU voltage around 1.50 or 1.55 on CPU-Z software but, heating never exceeds 62 degrees and CPU usage is between 7%~25%.
Still does it mean my CPU has got harm some amount?

"There is no such thing as a stupid question."  

On any processor it's the combination of high voltage, high amps and heat (they're usually correlated).
But the big problem with 13th/14th gen has been (still is) the high voltage spikes. It's like quick intense "punches" of high voltage and heat, that hurts, then kills, these CPUs. 

The spikes happen mostly due to the single/dual core boost AND the high stock voltages.
It goes over 1.5v all of a sudden when it boosts, some reports of it even going up to 1.6v ....when 1.4v+ was already bad.
It happens instantly, so quickly and so many times. And your regular monitoring software usually won't detect it.
You need an oscilloscope to see it, and that's exactly what Buildzoid already done on his videos to prove a point (see below his latest video, posted some hours ago).

There is an ongoing theory, that the degradation happens because the Ring Bus shares the same rail with the P-Cores and E-Cores, then affected by the high stock voltages.
The Ring Bus design of Intel is really not happy with high voltages (over 1.4v) and perhaps this could explain the processor slow suicide, cooking itself from there.
But, again, just theory at this point (still to be proven).

One thing is certain: to reach these high clocks and go against competitors, the stock voltages on Intel 13th, and again on 14th gen, had been (still are) raised to insane values. 
Now add the single/dual core boost 1.5v+ spikes to the equation. And transient spikes from loads changing. And VRMs response that can also cause spiking. And the thermal velocity boost limit that has been raised to 100ºC instead of 90ºC.
It can not be good, the likelihood of something going wrong is definitely much higher. And that's why many locked the cores and undervolted their CPU from day one, or simply avoided them and went with either Intel 12th gen or AMD AM5.
If you go to tech communities, there are plenty with undervolted 13th and 14th gen since these products launched, and no degradation problem. A pattern? Maybe, I don't know.
I also don't know of any recent PC consumer grade processor that doesn't slowly degrade at 1.4v+.... and these go well beyond that, instantly, at stock settings.

You can not let your processor hit that kind of voltage (1.50v or 1.55v !?! ), that's insanely high, even if temperatures seem ok.
Even if with the new microcode, it can and will slowly degrade, and eventually it can and will fail ("kaput").

And why you should stop the single/dual core boost, easiest way being by sync'ing (locking) your P-Cores all at same max possible clock.
And better if with the cpu core voltage (Vcore) manually adjusted to lower values, best if at 1.35v or below.

One way to look at it is like some sort of undervolt that many also do on high-end GPUs (generally considered the best thing you can do to them).  
It prolongs its life, by lowering the voltage and temps. In this particular case however, and as described, it's (IMO) a necessity.

 

On 8/11/2024 at 3:54 PM, BitMaster said:

Ya, OK, that's a solution for Bios Junkies and natural born fiddlers like us...BUT what about average Joe's CPU ?

Oh man, this is gonna get ugly soon..

Exactly. 
It is a problem if you're someone who knows very little about computers, and even worse if you don't know a thing about BIOS settings.
People are not expected to buy a car and necessarily be mechanics.  Countless people affected.

I understand that Intel and motherboard manufacturers can not release BIOS with all-core "locked" clocks (no single/dual core boost), and adjusted cpu core voltages, because that would represent fundamental changes to a whole line of products that they marketed and sold to the public (a whole can of worms).

But just like cars and motorcycles have had bad parts requiring "ad hoc" modifications (which no warranty solves), this is one of those rare cases when one should put hands to work and take care of his/herself (I know I would, and why I advocate it here). 

But then again, we go back to the initial point....  a problem if knowing very little about computers, and even worse if not knowing a thing about BIOS settings.  *sigh*
 

Edited August 12, 2024 by LucShep
added video, spelling/phrasing

[Hiob]

16 hours ago, Devrim said:

I see CPU voltage around 1.50 or 1.55 on CPU-Z software but, heating never exceeds 62 degrees and CPU usage is between 7%~25%.
 

Problem is, what you see reported there is the overall usage of the cpu and not per core. 25% usage e.g. could be (most likely) a quarter of the cores running full bore whilst the rest is more or less idle.

Same for the temp. In such a scenario the high loaded core or cores are probably hitting 90+ degree C. But the package temp is still reporting 62C.

If you really want to monitor the health of your CPU, you need to monitor on per core basis.