Clarification Update on Intel Core 13th/14th Gen Desktop Processor Support Process

[Thomas_Hannaford]

Intel is committed to making sure all customers who have or are currently experiencing instability symptoms on their 13th and/or 14th Gen desktop processors are supported in the exchange process.

To help streamline the support process, Intel's guidance is as follows:

• For users who purchased 13th/14th Gen-powered desktop systems from OEM/System Integrator - please reach out to your system vendor's customer support team for further assistance.
• For users who purchased boxed/tray 13th/14th Gen desktop processors - please reach out to Intel Customer Support for further assistance.

[zzetta]

Is it imperative for us to exchange the affected processors, or can we just wait for the August microcode patch? Will August patch fix this issue completely for all samples?

[Eisbar]

---

@zzetta wrote:

Is it imperative for us to exchange the affected processors, or can we just wait for the August microcode patch? Will August patch fix this issue completely for all samples?

---

The damage that has been inflicted cannot be undone with microcode changes. The microcode change will attempt to mitigate further damage. With the behaviour exhibited by these processors even with the eTVB "correcting" microcode 0x125 in effect, which is not the same as the microcode that is due in August, all processors will have some degree of degradation if they've been used. 

Buildzoid demonstrates the behaviour here using an oscilloscope to capture excessively high voltage events on a system where Intels 0x125 microcode has aggressively crippled the boosting behaviour of the CPU so it can be assumed that these high voltage events prior to this change were  even more unfathomably severe in terms of occurrence.

The performance impact of the 0x125 microcode is considerable, the August microcode may further reduce it. With these profound changes in effect after August fresh out of the box CPU, while hopefully being more stable, will never perform in the ways they did when they were benchmarked by reviewers and sold upon the performance metrics they used to have. 

[zzetta]

I don't see any degradation on my sample. It works the same if I revert to default settings from when i bought my pc back in march. After i tested the stability issue i played with it so much, especially with high voltage like 1.6v, absurd amounts of current and HUNDREDS of hours at 100c and it still behaves the same as new. So Intel's findings about the voltage requested by the cpu seem to hold. There is no degradation, but this annoying algo that requests wrong voltage values. 

And for the people that have this weird fear about high voltages, if you check intel's spec sheet for raptor lake, VCORE can go up to 1.72 volts, only when you go beyond this voltage your CPU MIGHT die or rapidly degrade.
Link here: VCCORE RAPTOR LAKE SPECS 

Also, in my journey of finding the fix for the instability, I did find a fix that works, but it doesnt work all the time. When that weird voltage bug appears, my cpu is not stable even with absurd VCORE, like static 1.55v. This proves their theory. 

So that's why my question about the RMA. Maybe it's something else that requires the RMA.

[CoolBook]

The big problem is if you combine high voltage and high temperature. That is what the new microcode is aiming to avoid.

Best solution is to give up on some of those peak frequencies for absolute stability and chip longevity.

[pressed_for_time]

It looks like you can take the action outlined now, if you choose.

[zzetta]

I could apply for a RMA but there is an issue. Gigabyte did not update their Z690 line since December of last year. If I get a new chip and I still don't have a bios with the fix, then what would be the point? 

Also, my chip behaved like i described since day one. So it's not like it ''degraded'' in time, it's that annoying bug