• deltreed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    So like, did Intel lay off or deprecate its QA teams similar to what Microsoft did with Windows? Remember when stability was key and everything else was secondary? Pepperidge farms remembers.

    • john89@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Why would they lay off their QA teams when its management and executives who make the decisions to cut corners?

  • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Intel is about to have a lot of lawsuits on their hands if this deny delay deflect strategy doesn’t work out for them. This problem has been going on for over a year and the details Intel lets slip just keep getting worse and worse. The more customers that realize they’re getting defective CPUs, the more outcry there’ll be for a recall. Intel is going to be in a lot of trouble if they wait until regulators force them to have a recall.

    Big moment of truth is next month when they have earnings and we see what the performance impact from dropping voltages will be. Hopefully it’ll just be 5% and no more CPUs die. I can’t imagine investors will be happy about the cost, though.

    • Archer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I want to say gamers rise up, but honestly gamers calling their member of Congress every day and asking what they’re doing about this fraud would be way more effective. Congress is in a Big Tech regulating mood right now

  • w2tpmf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Any real world comparison. Gaming frame rate, video encoding… The 13-700 beats the 7900x while being more energy efficient and costing less.

    That’s even giving AMD a handicap in the comparison since the 7700x is supposed to be the direct comparison to the 13-700.

    I say all this as a longggg time AMD CPU customer. I had planned on buying their CPU before multiple different sources of comparison steered me away this time.

    • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Ok, so maybe you are missing the part where the 13 and 14 gens are destroying themselves. No one really cares if you use AMD or what not, this little issue is intel and makes any performance,power use or cost moot as the cpu’s ability to not hurt itself in its confusion will now always be in question.

      Also I don’t think CPU speeds have been a large bottleneck in the last few years, why both AMD and Intel keep pushing is just silly.

      • w2tpmf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah that does suck. But I was replying specifically to the person saying Intel hasn’t been relevant for years because of a supposed performance dominance from AMD. That’s part just isn’t true.

        • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Your comment does not reply to anyone though, its just floating out there on its own.

          And even taken as a reply it still does not make sense since as of this “issue” any 13th or 14th gen Intel over a 600 is out of the running since they can not be trusted to not kill themselves.

          • w2tpmf@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Yeah not really sure how my comment ended up where it is. Connect stacks comments in a weird way and I must have clicked reply in the wrong place.

            I was replying to this …

            Is there really still such a market for Intel CPUs? I do not understand that AMDs Zen is so much better and is the superior technology since almost a decade now.

            …Which up untill this issue was NOT true. The entire Zen 2 line was a step behind the Intel chips that released at the same times as it.

            I’ve been running a 3600x for years now and love it … But a i5-10600k that came out at the same time absolutely smashes it in performance.

            • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Those came out a year apart and no one does not “smash” the other in performance. I doubt you can even notice the difference between the two, and that is the issue with CPUs today, they are not the bottleneck in most systems. I have used both of these (I like the 10600k as well) but they are almost exactly the same “performance” and would not turn up my nose at ether. The issue is that (especially in personal use cases) there is no justification in the newer systems. DDR4 still runs literally everything and both of these 4 year+ year old CPUs (that are now a few gens old) also will run anything well outside of exotic cases. You are more likely to see slowdowns with a lack of ram (since most programs today seem to think the stuff is unlimited), GPU bottlenecks, or just badly optimized software.

  • CaptainBasculin@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Considering AMD has also paused its release of 9th gen Ryzen just before its release date; I wonder if this issue is caused by TSMC.

  • InAbsentia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Thankfully I haven’t had any issues out of my 13700k but it’s pretty shitty of Intel to not stand behind their products and do a recall.

    • mox@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I don’t think we’ve been given any reason to believe this was caused by Intel Management Engine.

  • ApollosArrow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I have an Intel Core i9-14900K 3.2 GHz 24-Core LGA 1700 Processor purchased in March. Is there any guesses for the window yet of potential affected CPUs?

  • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Amd processors have literally always been a better value and rarely have been surpassed by much for long. The only problem they ever had was back in the day they overheated easily. But I will never ever buy an Intel processor on purpose, especially after this.

    • edgesmash@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      The only problem they ever had was back in the day they overheated easily.

      Very easily.

      In college (early aughts), I worked as tech support for fellow students. Several times I had to take the case cover off, point a desktop fan into the case, and tell the kid he needed to get thermal paste and a better cooler (services we didn’t offer).

      Also, as others have said, AMD CPUs have not always been superior to Intel in performance or even value (though AMDs have almost always been cheaper). It’s been a back-and-forth race for much of their history.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah. I never said they were always better in performance. But I have never had an issue other than the heat problem which all but one time was fully my fault. And I don’t need a processor to perform 3% better on random tasks… which was the kind of benchmark results I would typically find when comparing similar AMD/intel processors (also in some categories amd did win). I saved probably a couple grand avoiding Intel. And as another user said, I prefer to support the underdog. The company making a great product for a lot less money. Again I say: fuck Intel.

    • Deway@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      rarely have been surpassed by much for long.

      I’ve been on team AMD for over 20 years now but that’s not true. The CoreDuo and the first couple of I CPUS were better than what AMD was offering and were for a decade. The Athlon were much better than the Pentium 3 and P4, the Ryzen are better than the current I series but the Phenom weren’t. Don’t get me wrong, I like my Phenom II X4 but it objectively wasn’t as good as Intel’s offerings back in the day.

      • deltapi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        My i5-4690 and i7-4770 machines remain competitive to this day, even with spectre patches in place. I saw no reason to ‘upgrade’ to 6/7/8th gen CPUs.

        I’m looking for a new desktop now, but for the costs involved I might just end up parting together a HP Z6 G4 with server surplus cpu/ram. The costs of going to 11th+ desktop Intel don’t seem worth it.

        I’m going to look at the more recent AMD offerings, but I’m not sure they’ll compete with surplus server kit.

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          My issue with surplus server kit at home is that it tends to idle at very high power usage compared to desktop kit. For home use that won’t be pushing high CPU utilization, the savings in cost off eBay aren’t worth much.

          This is also why you’re seeing AM5 on server motherboards. If you don’t need to have tons of PCIe lanes–and especially with PCIe 5, you probably don’t–the higher core count AM5 chips do really well for servers.

        • Deway@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          I’d say that regardless of the brand, X86 CPU don’t need to be upgraded as often as they used to. No awesome new extension like SSE or something like that, not much more powerful, power consumption not going down significantly. If you don’t care about power consumption, the server CPU will be more interesting, there’s no doubt about that.

        • floofloof@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          They’re still useful, but they’re not competitive in overall performance with recent CPUs in the same category. They do still compete with some of the budget and power-efficient CPUs, but they use more power and get hotter.

          That said, those 4th gen Intel CPUs are indeed good enough for most everyday computing tasks. They won’t run Windows 11 because MS locks them out, but they will feel adequately fast unless you’re doing pretty demanding stuff.

          I still have an i5-2400, an i7-4770K and an i7-6700 for occasional or server use, and my i7-8550U laptop runs great with Linux (though it overheated with Windows).

          I buy AMD now though.

    • mox@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      The only problem they ever had was back in the day they overheated easily.

      That’s not true. It was just last year that some of the Ryzen 7000 models were burning themselves out from the insides at default settings (within AMD specs) due to excessive SoC voltage. They fixed it through new specs and working with board manufacturers to issue new BIOS, and I think they eventually gave in to pressure to cover the damaged units. I guess we’ll see if Intel ends up doing the same.

      I generally agree with your sentiment, though. :)

      I just wish both brands would chill. Pushing the hardware so hard for such slim gains is wasting power and costing customers.

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah. I just meant AMD cpus used to easily overheat if your cooling system had an issue. My ryzen 7 3700x has been freaking awesome though. Feels more solid than any PC I’ve built. And it’s fast AF. I think I saved over $150 when comparing to a similarly rated Intel CPU. And the motherboards generally seem cheaper for AMD too. I would feel ripped off with Intel even without the crashing issues

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Not from AMD. From the autogenerated transcript (with minor edits where it messed up the names of things):

            amd’s official recommendation [f]or the cut off now is 1.3 volts but the board vendors can still technically set whatever they want so even though the [AGESA] update can lock down and start restricting the voltage the problem is Asus their 1.3 number manifests itself as something like 1.34 volts so it is still on the high side

            This was pretty much all on motherboard manufacturers, and ASUS was particularly bad (out scumbaging MSI, good job, guys).

            At the start of this Intel mess, it was thought they had a similar issue on their hands and motherboard manufactures just needed to get in line, but it ended up going a lot deeper.

            • mox@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              That doesn’t contradict anything I wrote. Note that it says AMD’s recommended cutoff is now 1.3 volts, implying that it wasn’t before this mess began. Note also that the problem was worse on Asus boards because their components’ tolerance was a bit too loose for a target voltage this high, not because they used a voltage target beyond AMD’s specified cutoff. If the cutoff hadn’t been pushed so high for this generation in the first place, that same tolerance probably would have been okay.

              In any case, there’s no sense in bickering about it. Asus was not without blame (I was upset with them myself) but also not the only affected brand, so it’s not possible that they were the cause of the underlying problem, now is it?

              AMD and Intel have been pushing their CPUs to very high voltages and temperatures for small performance gains recently. 95°C as the new “normal” was unheard of just a few years ago. It’s no surprise that it led to damage in some cases, especially for early adopters. It’s a thin line to walk.

          • ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Then why were there essentially no blow ups from other motherboard manufacturers? Tell me if my information on this is wrong, but when there’s only one brand causing issues then they’re the ones to blame for it.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Problem is that it’s getting extremely hard to get more single-threaded performance out of a chip, and this is one of the few ways to do so. And a lot of software is not going to be rewritten to use multiple cores. In some cases, it’s fundamentally impossible to parallelize a particular algorithm.

      • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s not true. It was just last year that some of the Ryzen 7000 models were burning themselves

        I think he was referring to “back-in-the-day” when Athlons, unlike the competing Pentium 3 and 4 CPUs of the day, didn’t have any thermal protections and would literally go up in smoke if you ran them without cooling.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRn8ri9tKf8

        • RdVortex@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Some motherboards did have overheating protection back then though. Personally I had my Athlon XP computer randomly shut down several times back then, because the system had some issue, where fans would randomly start slowing down and eventually completely stop. This then triggered overheat protection of the motherboard, which simply cut the power as soon as the temperature was too hight.

        • mox@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          When I started using computers, I wasn’t aware of any thermal protections in popular CPUs. Do you happen to know when they first appeared in Intel chips?

          • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Pentium 2 and 3 had rudimentary protection. They would simply shutdown if they got too hot. Pentium 4 was the first one that would throttle down clock speeds.

            Anything before that didn’t have any protection as far as I’m aware.

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Could also be the fucking GPU of it’s doing that, apparently

        Had some sag on my GPU after years and didn’t really notice. Tried troubleshooting and was about to go mad til someone on Reddit from a year ago had a comment saying to try resetting the GPU and then bracketing it

        Sure as shit it worked

  • sunzu@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    We are giving this failed management team billions of dollars to build “us” a fab

    🤡🤡🤡

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Even worse, there were no conditions to the funding. They just wrote a check.

      • sunzu@kbin.run
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        damn… can you provide more context.

        watch end up like nation wide broadband lol

        never built and patchy bullshit we did get we get price gouged and dissed by comcast and co

        • chingadera@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Profit over everything is involved, it will happen. Although if they kill it with the development, they will have so much more later. They just cannot do it though, short term money go brrrr.

    • nek0d3r@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I genuinely think that was the best Intel generation. Things really started going downhill in my eyes after Skylake.

  • demesisx@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    The other day, when this news hit for the first time, I bought two ITM Put options on INTC. Then, I waited three days and sold them for 200% profit. Then, I used the profit to invest in the SOXX etf. Feels good to finally get some profit from INTC’s incompetence.

  • wirehead@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    A few years ago now I was thinking that it was about time for me to upgrade my desktop (with a case that dates back to 2000 or so, I guess they call them “sleepers” these days?) because some of my usual computer things were taking too long.

    And I realized that Intel was selling the 12th generation of the Core at that point, which means the next one was a 13th generation and I dono, I’m not superstitious but I figured if anything went wrong I’d feel pretty darn silly. So I pulled the trigger and got a 12th gen core processor and motherboard and a few other bits.

    This is quite amusing in retrospect.

    • JPAKx4@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I recently built myself a computer, and went with AMD’s 3d cache chips and boy am I glad. I think I went 12th Gen for my brothers computer but it was mid range which hasn’t had these issues to my knowledge.

      Also yes, sleeper is the right term.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I think I went 12th Gen for my brothers computer

        12th gen isn’t affected. The problem affects only the 13th and 14th gen Intel chips. If your brother has 12th gen – and you might want to confirm that – he’s okay.

        For the high-end thing, initially it was speculated that it was just the high-end chips in these generations, but it’s definitely the case that chips other than just the high-end ones have been recorded failing. It may be that the problem is worse with the high-end CPUs, but it’s known to not be restricted to them at this point.

        The bar they list in the article here is 13th and 14th gen Intel desktop CPUs over 65W TDP.