Intel has a problem... More crashing and stability issues for new CPUs
Vložit
- čas přidán 22. 04. 2024
- Intels i9 13th and 14th gen CPU are crashing more and more... but it may be the motherboard manufacturers fault! Watch to find out more! Falcon Northwest has done a LOT of testing and is in direct communication with Intel regarding motherboard default settings... see their post here / 1782850870574739615
Sponsored Links:
Check out the Viewsonic X2-4K Gaming Projector at vsfinch.es/3LME7BT
Get your JayzTwoCents Merch Here! - www.jayztwocents.com
○○○○○○ Items featured in this video available at Amazon ○○○○○○
► Amazon US - bit.ly/1meybOF
► Amazon UK - amzn.to/Zx813L
► Amazon Canada - amzn.to/1tl6vc6
••• Follow me on your favorite Social Media! •••
Facebook: / jayztwocents
Twitter: / jayztwocents
Instagram: / jayztwocents
SUBSCRIBE! bit.ly/sub2JayzTwoCents - Věda a technologie
As a 3D artist, I'm flabbergasted that any performance mobo vendor would say Cinebench is unrealistic. Cinebench is literally recreating a typical workload I have, but for shorter durations. I'd like to think vendors selling me performance hardware to do that job actually design to be stable with that load.
wait till they discover people render things for hours on their computers lol
@@ademiravdic hours? try days :D
@@Auziuwu Try months at 100% full usage in many research areas, crashing in something as short as cinebench is unacceptable.
Yes I agree. We've been using Cinebench and 3DMark since the days of WinXP. If a PC can't pass those two with flying colors, it's basically trash
I know, right? I did a photogamatry render that lasted 2 hours with my CPU pegged the entire time. The water in my loop was actually 66c. It was cold and rainy outside. My office was extremely cozy.
The fact that mobo manufactures are complaining about it being cinebench shows how little they care. Like Jay said, it's a thing you can run on your system, and the system shouldn't blow itself up over it. If it blows up with no user changes, that's on them.
Yeah, but it's kinda like constantly putting your car on dyno....it can't be good over and over and over again.
@@ronniekregar3482 It's not like that at all. The CPU/mobo should throttle that process and stop it from hurting itself. Unless YOU ask it to lift the limits, you should be able to ASK anything of it, and it should say, "I'm sorry, Dave, I can't do that."
@@pekirt lol, then what's even the point in doing it in the first place?
@@ronniekregar3482it's pretty self explanatory... If you can't figure it out, Please don't ever be in quality control.
I very much doubt that any mainboard vendor said that. Cinebench is essentially just a benchmark version of the Cinema 4D renderer. In the real world, many projects would take way way longer to render than the 20-30 seconds a CB run might take.
How is Cinebench *not realistic*? Its literally the render engine of Cinema 4D and 3d render is #1 use case for a consumer-grade 24-core CPU.
Where do you get that info from, regarding #1 usecase? Curious because I'm near certain that is not the case.
Thanks Jay. Brand new i9 14900, water cooler, on an MSI board, kept maxing out temperatures on minimal loading. I checked the cooler, I changed the thermal paste, then started looking for answers. Thanks for this and a few other videos. It wasn't me, it was the mother board settings. I've been tweeking, but I'll go in and check the setting you posted on this video.
I agree, stock, out of the box settings should have settings at Intel defaults, not overclocked settings.
Thanks again.
What was the setting to disable on MSI?
@@imvipeness reset bios defaults, set xmp, use "air cooler" mode when it asks, then adjust it to do a 250w power limit, negative 0.040 offset, 5.5g for all the p cores and 4.1g on the e cores, amp limit to 307a, LLC to Mode 8, Load Lite to 9. that should be rock solid, good temps, low power usage and score somewhere 38k to 39k in c23, which is 90% of what a super dooper overclock score is. You 'lose' some single core performance but that's irrelevant for actual usage (not benching) these days.
As you and others have pointed out, THIS SHOULD BE THE DEFAULT.
The most stable limits recommended by Intel *SHOULD BE THE DEFAULT SETTINGS OF THE MOTHERBOARD*
Right, your average person never goes into the BIOS or sees AUTO and just thinks okay that means it isn't overclocked so it is "safe." They sure don't think "I hope AUTO redlines my CPU/System to the point of failure or damage." It blows my mind that Intel is okay with this, NVIDIA and AMD would never let ASUS or MSI do this with their GPUs.
Let me tell you something, this wont make any difference, because i already had an 14900KF that BSOD and crashing day one. The silicone itself is bad, the motherboard settings just let us see it faster than intel had planned!
I mean, yes and no - I very much appreciates my MSI motherboard lets my 11400 run on PL2 forever as long as the temps are fine, something which is very much 'out of specs' for that chip.
There's 'out of specs', and 'pumping 100+ watts over the "safe" limit forever' out of specs
But but but that gives a bad Cinebench score like worse than a 7950X3D. 14900KS users won’t be happy about it.
The kitchen in my apartment has a dishwasher but no drawers. They removed all the drawers to put in the dishwasher. I didn't notice until I moved in. They can market "dishwasher" as a selling point for a cheap apartment. Nobody checks for drawers. It's just assumed.
Same reason that most prebuilts have shitty power supplies.
My Asus board had a bios update that placed the Intel stock settings as an option. You know, the thing that should've been there from day one.
What should've been there is Intel stock settings being the default, like Jay said, not just as an option.
@@ZnakerFIN enforce limits were there day one but yes, not turned on out of the box
Made it worse for me . now my cpu go over 1.475 volts . overheats , .
Man they're trying to blow up every CPU this generation.
Enforce all limits I what really needs to be turned on when you go in to BIOS. My voltage on my 13900k was at damn near 1.5v before i updated my bios. Now it's at 1.3v and my temps no longer reach 90c. Asus is the main culprit here imo. I'm using an ASUS ROG STRIX Z790-H.
I had exactly this problem with my i9 13900k with games, especially UE5 ones, crashing way more often than they should. Also, my Bambu 3d printer slicing software crashed consistently for larger models unless I set CPU core affinity. Finally, while trying to figure out why Helldivers was crashing frequently on me, I stumbled across someone on Reddit mentioning this issue, and the same fix mentioned in this video. After applying it a couple of weeks back, everything has been running flawlessly. Not a single crash of any software since.
may i know that reddit post, i accouter the same issues on helldiver 2
Link?
thanks for the video. havent had problems yet but went thru and enabled the setting.
Silly Jay, Airbus doesn’t have a button to eject passengers!!
That’s Boeing….
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
No buttons. Just door plug roulette.
However Airbus does not have problems with crashing and losing doors mid air? So hence no passenger ejection 😊
😅
you thought you needed an I9 to game you thought wrong because Intel broke the I9's this is what they get for fucking the dog with quad cores for twenty years before going with more cores🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
and either accept the air horns will continue till the end of time if you refuse to make me the AI I want so either lets talk about it and you make me it or the Air Horns will continue to the end of time because they will be to end of me being your relaxing Muse I will be the demonic Muse the end the relaxation until you pay me restitution so break silence and talk you know my email lets talk or find a new muse if they are so easy to find💀💀
apparently its not fine to run your cpu at 100c+ without power limits. I respect amd on thermal limits. 85max take it or leave it
I set my 5600X to 95C limit, but I stuck a 240 AIO on it and it barely touches 70C after a half hour Cinebench loop.
My i9-14900ks is on a360 aio and still stays at 100c with limits turned on
Is that really what it took 20 minutes to explain? Have people forgotten that running components outside of spec is something you do at your own risk?
Just upgraded from a 3600 to a 5900x I’ve had no issue with AMD, been using them since my 1600 I got in 2018. No reason to switch back to Intel until it’s an obvious winner again.
newer AMD Ryzen X-series CPUs are 95c by default.
as a rule for my old work, any PC used as a workstation always had the auto settings turned off, stick to the limits and just use it
For my 14900k and my Asus ROG Strix Z790, enabling the intel default power limits didnt fix it and I had to go in and manually set the Long Duration Power Limit to 253 and short duration Power limit to 253 and that fixed it.
I was getting the Video Memory Allocation error on Remnant 2 From the Ashes before and updating those settings fixed it.
Regardless, thank you so much Jay, I couldnt have figured it out without your video because I was scared to change the power settings and your explanation helped me figure out which ones to change
I have a similar combo. By turning off Intel MultiCore Enhancement, and Adaptive Boost Technology, I was able to drop max temps to less than 80 degrees Celsius, and idle to around 30-32c. All with no noticeable difference in real world performance. Prior to changing those two settings, the CPU would constantly boost itself all the way to 100c and sit there, and idle was around 50c.
THIS is exactly the issue me and my friend have been getting. He had this issue for over a year and just recently getting to fix things around. Overwatch kept crashing because it was one of the few games that pushed my CPU really hard (over 300fps) and thus causing crashes. I set my max W to 230 and removed the MSI default OC crap and been working wonders ever since. Awesome to see this put more to light.
Yea overwatch is one of those high cpu intensive games
Exact problem I was having! I'm really glad this video came out.
I've noticed that people have a different MSI UI to me as they have Click BIOS 5 when mine is just called Click BIOS. Do you know where I would be able to find the equivalent setting but on my UI? because I have looked everywhere but haven't found anything. I have a I9-13900H, 4070 2023 laptop so I'm not on old hardware, however I am experiencing quite high CPU temps so this could setting change could really help:)
Board manufacturers are also misleading about validated XMP speeds. You need a unicorn CPU to run 8000 memory stable without any additional tweaking.
A huge problem nobody is talking about.
I have this problem too, with DDR4. I'm getting nowhere near the quoted ram speeds. (Corsair vengeance RGB 32GB kit). It's supposed to be something like 3400Mhz, behaves more like 3100-3200. lol
I can't trust the auto tuning of the MOBO. Always gotta set everything manually.
Why bother going above 6000 speeds, is it worth it?
@@jondonnelly4831Exactly, but my asus mobo said max supported ram frecuency 6000 mhz and 6000 mhz runs perfect
8000? Unicorn? You need Jesus for that.
Great video, thank you for these informative videos! FYI I have a Z790P wifi motherboard running a 13700 cpu they just released a beta bios version that loads Intels factory settings. I have updated the bios and ran cinebench. My temps were low, no stuttering in games after the update. Hoping motherboards keep listening to the end user to help conserve our CPUS.
Same here
As a geek squad technician, lots and lots of clients have come in with this same issue, I've been doing the same thing for 13-14th cen CPUs,
Drop the core volts to 1.4-1.3 volts, and dropping the p cores to 5.7-5.4 ghz.
Most of not all clients haven't had issues since.
If you want that 6ghz the CPU advertised. It's only going to be on 2 p cores or less!
Or you'll need a 480mm liquid cooler or dual radiator custom cooling setup to handle 6ghz most cores.
E cores drop those to 4.4-4.3ghz
These settings still get good numbers achieving 38k-40k points on cinabench r23.
Hope this helps and good luck.
Should I set fixed vcore? Or just auto?
Also, boutta be working for geek squad in about a week! Good work man
Depends on the Mobo, for most I set to fixed. I test the CPU with cinabench 30 min stress test or furmark. If it doesn't crash with those tests then it's safe to say it's stable.
Congrats on the job!
@@shawnnorman4551 my cpu seems stable, but my cpu won’t go past 3.3 ghz when doing cinebench, and my score is so low. Around 25000 only. I have the i9 13900k too.
@@wyattgoesberserk8223 5.5p, 4.1e and an offset of about negative 0.40v will still get you ~95% of the performance a 14900k is capable of (around 38.5k C23 when a super overclock will get barely 42k), only use 1.33v and not use more than 240w power. All these instability issues are caused by motherboard partners slamming the CPU & power delivery systems with crazy settings that don't match intel specs while also not really doing anything to help the system run stable.
less than a 5% performance dip but a 15C reduction in temperatures plus more stability... i'm all for it!
Going to be quieter too and not need as much ac.
When you enforce the Intel limits, the 13900K gets good perfomance per watt.
It shows that you are poor
Was thinking of upgrading to 13700k but got convinced to go 7800X3D instead. Hopefully it’s the right choice
if you only do gaming it's by far the right choice. intel wins for some other workloads but amd wins on temps, gaming, platform longevity.
Just got one, it's solid for gaming, not so great for anything else. Significant downclocks for any real non-game load.
Easy to cool though with custom cooling went direct die for the fun of it, peak temps in the mid 60s most things tun at 35-45c though.
Just to stress again that's with direct die watercooling.
If you only game be happy.
It's not
@@hopperbopper Only true in heavy multi-core work loads. Everything else, the 7800x3D will feel about the same.
I have the 14700k and love it. 0 issues. Been going strong for 3 months now. Have it paired with a Z790 AORUS ELITE X WIFI7, 64gb Corsair Vengeance and RX 7700xt.
Thank you for this video. I just got myself a i9 14900K, and I had that error a few times. And I had no idea of these settings on the mobo.
same problem here thanks for the video!
This is a problem that has occurred on two machines that I and my colleagues have built for our customers with a 14th gen i9 CPUs. They kept crashing Windows during rendering AutoCAD (which is the primary thing they got those expensive machines for). On one of them it got to the point that we had to replace the CPU because it was so unstable from that stupid out of the box overclocking. Thank you for this video, it'll serve as a great guide on what to do on our next order.
I'm sorry, but you charge money for building PC's and you don't know this? WTF!
@@AB-80X they dont necessary keep up with news about them
@@ademiravdic
I'm talking about the fact that any SI should know that the BIOS needs to be set correctly, even if this issue does not happen. So it has zero to do with these news. An SI should not send out a PC without the BIOS set correctly, no matter what.
Sad that people have to deal with this so early. There's no reason to run your CPUs at over 90C. Purpose built silicon is rated for that kind of over temp, not commercial CPUs.
@@AB-80X I know right imagine not checking if defaults are not defaults, its almost like system defaults are not defaults, imagine not checking if defaults are not defaults.
but seriously its a very easy mistake to make, Very little reason to check if "auto" wasn't the default.
good stuff Jay, i was having this problem after doing a bios update and setting the cooling to "water cooling"(which i have just in AIO form) what i didn't know was this was uncapping my voltages and making my CPU hit 100c anytime any load was placed on it.
I'm pretty decent with computers and overclocking and it took me about a month to find out that this is what was causing my temp issues.
The average user will probably never even find this hidden setting, it's just unacceptable.
Keep up the great work man! ❤🔥❤🔥
worth noting my mate had the same 13th Gen i9-13900K and it was DoA from the PC store. Would work for 30mins then hard crash and had to be RMA'd.
what motherboard?
@@rasheedasmith1488 MSI carbon
I had an i9 and asus motherboard blow up last year, I assumed it was a bad cooler. Thank you for making these videos and keeping us updated on these things.
i tried your tips and it helps quite a bit. the issue stopped coming up when playing RoboCop but i also did open a support ticket with intel to see if they would do a CPU replacement in case the CPU is failing. thanks for you advice!
The situation reminds me of the Coppermine Pentium III 1.13 GHz for much the same reason: Intel was losing ground to AMD back then, too, and pushed its silicon too hard to keep up. Electromigration was a hot topic at that time because of the high voltage being used to push the silicon.
I would love to see benchmarks on the correct settings for intel. I wish all reviewers would have catched this a long long time ago.
AFAIK Gamers Nexus did and they test them with actual Intel Limits.
degradation happens over time, and as Jay said the company that produces the chips aka Intel is actively encouraging this MBO vendor behavior so... who should have caught it and when?
@@inkredebilchina9699 Source for "Intel encouraging MBO vendor behavior"? Cause if so, AMD does as well, which made some X3Ds pop and almost could have caused house fires, which I find even much worse than just unstable CPUs...
@@kyoudaiken Jay said it. not me. but I totally agree that there was a time x3d chips burnt themselves. which was reported heavily and in much detail by Gamers Nexus.
@@inkredebilchina9699 He also clearly said that it's speculation. So I would not take that as a fact.
With an Intel (MSI) the one to look for in BIOS is 'CPU cooler tuning' it should be 'boxed'
True but it will set the amps to 307 which will make the cpu underperform. So change it to 400 manually after setting "Stock fan" under ocoler type.
@@DwindleFlip Will depend on other BIOS setting/s. If set at default or normal it won't.
@@jf4872 I've noticed that people have a different MSI UI to me as they have Click BIOS 5 when mine is just called Click BIOS. Do you know where I would be able to find the equivalent setting but on my UI? because I have looked everywhere but haven't found anything. I have a I9-13900H, 4070 2023 laptop so I'm not on old hardware, however I am experiencing quite high CPU temps so this could setting change could really help:)
thank you, Jay (and team), this is valuable information. I would have started looking at the video card with "video memory" error. As always, thanks for all you do 🤓
There are people who compare 13(4)900K with the FX-9590, that's not actually a fair comparison. FX-9590 was putting out 220W into one of the largest die size ever seen (it basically takes up the whole IHS) using 32nm. While Intel is putting out 300-400W into a tiny 10nm die, the power density is so much worse. Even after 13 years you can still find FX chips that has run since than without degradation.
"13(4)900K with the FX-9590"
Yeah - the FX was still slow.
@ABaumstumpf it wasn't about the speed, it was meant to compare the power. This thing is drawing as much or more power than a 96 core threadripper. There's a huge size difference between the two.
@@ABaumstumpf everything back then was slow compared to now lol
My FX-8350 still runs like a champ. I only run it stock these days, but when it was in my primary PC it handled 4.5GHz with ease -- and heat.
@@ToxicChillz Thing is, the 9590 was slow even when it was the newest AMD CPU, on top of being a hot power hog. Intel's current flagships are power hogs and insanely hot running on stock settings, but they're also not far behind AMD's flagships in terms of performance.
THANK YOU for reporting this. I'm chatting with Intel Support now and it's extremely frustrating! If they don't smarten up and do the right thing I'm done with their processors moving forward.
It is the fault of motherboard manufacturers... Not intel.
@@Manakuski did you watch the video?
@@Manakuski you should probably watch the video.
@@fightinggamesexplained453 Did you even watch the video? It's the board vendors cranking up the power limit, and set it as 'default' or 'optimised'.
Yes, and Intel have full power to enforce the standards.
For the 13700k I disabled the enhanced mode, set PL1 and PL2 to 253w, set adaptive vcore and I used -0.100 for the vcore offset. You can get away with the vcore between -0.080 to -0.050 for the vcore. I went -0.100 to have a cooler system. I tested it and got 31k on Cinebench R23 (same results as stock) but about -15 degrees less compared to stock. Very happy about it. Side note: I swapped the stock Intel CPU holder with a proper on from Thermaltake when building up my PC to avoid cpu bending and get better cooling.
If you use XTU to tweak the PL1 and 2 limits live you can fine tune when the cooler + cpu combo becomes thermally limited and starts throttling.
Set that as your limit, set iccMax at intels recommended max.
Then check if minimum voltages are on in your mobo bios (XTU will not show negative voltage offsets if its on). This setting prevents undervolting in the name of ensuring stability.
Thats how I went about it on my 14700K.
Thanks for this. Although I ended up going back to the mobo overclock, this was very useful info which I didn't realise I needed to know. With some experimentation, the simple background info provided by Jay helped to clarify what I had previously Googled. Very, very happy with the results.
Let's destroy your pc it's worth 2%.... I'd rather slow my pc down to and be happy for a decade. I'm not spending 1000 bucks every 3 years if I don't have too.
What's funny is that the CPU actually runs better, because by limiting voltage and power, it doesn't thermal throttle. Meaning, it stays at high clock speed CONSISTENTLY, unlike thermal throttling and down clocking itself to give you worse performance 😂😂🤣
@@csguak Consistent clock >> dynamic clock. There is no reason for there to be dynamic clock logic unless you are trying to hardware overclock in the very design itself. It does not make any difference in real world tasks. We're talking seconds difference to complete a task.
Don't forget the increased electricity usage. 5% speed gain for 30% more watts? That's totally unnecessary.
@@csguak honestly i never even thought of this - good point.
@@csguakThat's why i have my 12700K set to 190 watts PL1 and PL2, 96 seconds boost and undervolt. The clockspeed is perfectly flat, i play a game and the frametime graph is perfectly flat as well.
I recently helped a friend walk through the issue causing crashes with hyper threading turned on. I9-14900k crashes reported as an Nvidia compute library file, but it cleared up after hyper threading was off. Weird, weird issue.
First thing I did with my i9 was undervolt. No issues.
Although I found out the hard way that 4 sticks of ddr5 don't work as expected. Took a lot of fine tuning to get it to run fast and stable.
Wow, thanks for this! Most of the finer details are over my head, but I understand the basics of what you've put out here, and I appreciate it very much!
You say that the MSI equivalent is EZ Mode -> Game Boost but mine was off by default. What actually affects the set limits (as far as I can tell) is your selected cooler, in the bios. When you first start up, it will ask if you have a box cooler, tower cooler, or water cooler. If you select water cooler (because most nowadays are running an AIO) it will set it to completely unlocked limits for both short and long (P1 and P2) along with something like 512A. Setting it to box cooler will set intel limits 253w p1/p2. Tower cooler kind of sits in the middle at 288w p1/p2. I find though that it still wants to exceed those limits with the tower cooler setting, just like the water cooler setting. So, set your cooler to box cooler, and you will be enabling intel defaults. You can also adjust the Lite Load Mode from auto (which on my z790 carbon with an i9 14900k was Mode 10 by default) to something lower like Mode 6 or 8 to drop the voltages a bit more, but this shouldnt be necessary for intel spec because you should realistically be running in the 60-70c range under full load with adequate cooling. Additionally you can adjust your Load Line Calibration to change the Voltage droop when the cpu goes under load but thats kinda going into the weeds. Just set your cooler to Box Cooler for intel limits. I've never seen Game Boost/Creator Genie enabled and honestly, I have never even enabled it in the past to try it out.
This is interesting. I just built a rig with the same mobo and 13900k
Correct.
Or just disable Enhanced Turbo
@@haies09 I tried disabling that and it did not seem to make much of a difference. Also, if you’re using intel spec you can keep it on and the temps don’t seem to change much. I’m not exactly sure what it does or doesn’t do but I have it on now and no issues.
Exactly what I did right after Jay’s video. Changed it to box cooler. Game boost was also off by default. My cpu would get to like 85c in certain games but not for long, but now so far hottest has been like 77c I mostly game and surf the web so I could not really tell a difference in performance. I did not yet have the video error problem after about 8 months on the tower setting but on that setting I was in the 80c’s.
I had this issue since the launch of 13900k. I was going crazy till years later everyone is having the same problem as I did.
It's worse than you think, Jay. These over the top power limits seem to apply to non-K SKUs as well.
I remember on old bios we have “load default settings” and “load optimized settings”
Back when I was building servers for a living we tested all machines with a mix of benchmarks, and test programs that pressed the hardware to the limit. Most of that software came with a warning that it was not a realistic load for the computer but that was fine for us. It was real software doing just what was possible for the hardware. That it was programmed to press the hardware to the outmost was perhaps not realistic for normal programs but it was definitely reaching for the possible limit for the hardware. If the computer could survive this extreme load for 24 hours in a 40 degrees Celsius room without logging a single drive, memory or calculation error then it would survive any "realistic" load in more normal temperature.
My point is test software is not intended to be "realistic", it's intended to be as nasty to the hardware as possible. The hardware should be built to safely process whatever software it getts to run. It's not enough that it works under optimal conditions or in cool environment. It has to be better than that!
Now feeling happy with 7700x , early memory issues were annoying tho.
I am happy with my 5950X, just upgraded from 3600X.
Gonna skip the whole AM5 platform and buy only second gen AM6.
Never had issues adopting on mature platforms. Went from fx8350 to 3600X and now 5950X with the same x470 aorus gaming 7 motherboard.
@@Manysdugjohn Same, I have a well tuned 5900X under water, just didn't need the extra cores for the cost and heat difference of the 5950X. It's an absolute beast for games and everything else I need it for. I came from an i7-3930k around two years ago now and I plan to ride it to at least AM6 if not longer LOL
@@Manysdugjohn The same plan, how are your temps, i just recently upgraded to 5950x, i have idle 45-60 some weird spikes sometimes but i solved that
7980XE is a fantastic chip but yeah the memory issues are indeed legendary bad. Once you get it going, it's a monster and still pretty competitive for anything except something borked into single threaded madness like Photoshop or After Effects. Got it used for 500 bucks many years ago and don't really see a reason to upgrade at all. If I want 5 Ghz, I can on a single core or two even and it does it no problem. 4.2 Ghz on all cores is kinda pushing it but it works. 3.9 Ghz fully loaded is its sweet spot. That's 18 full cores on a Noctua D-15 topping out at 80C. 7000 series was pretty good in a robustness sense, except for the memory. That memory controller is iunno. It takes magic for it to play nice.
Yeah, I'm glad I avoided this mess by going with AMD.
Incredibly well done and informative video; thanks.
Had instability issue with I9 14900k, used this and I can now pass a cinebench run with crashes. CPU would ramp up to 90°+ almost instantly. Now stable around 66°. Cooler is a Ryujin 360 AIO.
The wild part about this is I was getting that specific crash on my 12700k rig. Never could figure out what was wrong. I recently built a new 14700k rig and it does not do this at all which is wild giving this new found knowledge.
I have this issue happening with my 12900k. Has happened since I built the darned thing, even though all memory-specific tests showing that the memory sticks are fine. I'm just about to try Jay's fix.
I had random freezes on a 12900k system I built. Spent months fiddling with settings. Got fed up, ditched the PC and bought a Mac Studio and never been happier.
@OutOfNamesToChoose yeah imma power up my old rig just to see if this is a fix. But it also doesn't happen to my 14th gen system so is it like a luck of the draw thing or what.
OMG THANK YOU
When I get home I will update my bios settings..... I spent like $700 on a freaking cpu just to get non-stop crashes and "out of video memory" messages! I bought a new cheap replacement cpu that works for now, but I want to use my nice cpu i thought was bad! i think this will fix my issue. I tried so many things, cant believe this is my issue.
If you still ahve your old CPU try looking up undervolting. It did wonders for my 13900k and runs much quieter and cooler. Remember the reviewers get golden samples that you and I do not get from Microcenter when we roll the dice. My PC is stable after a good 2 to 3 days of work undervolting and setting limits and amp max and runs much cooler. Sure I do not get a 6.2 ghz boost and just 5.7 one one core and 5.6 on 2 but it works and temps are normal now
I just recently upgraded my CPU, motherboard, and cooler in my setup. Running a 13th gen I9 24 core Intel CPU on an Asus motherboard and things have been seeming a little weird, so im gonna check all of this when I get home.
i had this also happening with an I7-13700K but thankfully my and the guy that does my pc tunning and optimizations was able to fix this awhile back
Intel needed the benchmark wins more than board vendors, so they for sure liked those power limits maxed out. Or else they would restrict them like they did in previous CPU gens.
This is exactly it. I can't blame the mobo manufacturers because, in the end, Intel has control over this and allows it to happen because "bigger number better." They've forced mobo manufacturers to lock crap down that's absurd, and they let this slide. Yep... in the end, the fault lies with Intel.
I cannot thank you enough for this video ive been ripping my hair out looking for an answer on why my pc kept crashing with the video memory error. I had reinstalled windows multiple times, i was blaming armoury crate for being a load of garbage. I got so frustrated I thought I had a bad connection and took my entire pc appart and redid all my connections reapplying thermal paste to my cooler. I am so relieved to have found the answer finally thank you so much Jay.
Asus released a BIOS update 19th of April 2024: "The update introduces the Intel Baseline Profile option, allowing users to revert to Intel factory default settings for basic functionality, lower power limits, and improving stability in certain games"
Hate that bios update. They forced mine 13900k into 280 amps wich makes all mine core goes 4.8 ghz at boost. And 280 amps limits power to 180 watts. So it really sucks. Was better before just 1 click to disable multicore enhancement and mine processor was working exactly as it should 5.5 ghz and 80 degrees in cinebench with top 250 watt power drow. And 60 degrees in cyberpunk 2077 with path tracing and psycho settings. No issus or crashes
OMG! Thank you for confirming this Jay. I have been pulling my hair out trying figure out why my 14900k was getting so hot. As a work around, I have been using Intel's XTU and dropping E cores to 5200 and P cores to 4.2. Perfectly stable system and temps on the 14900k top out at 70c. I have an MSI motherboard and will now try to set the intel limits using the cooler settings in the bios (setting those to box cooler should set the intel limits, NOT the game boost).
EDIT: Just set the Intel limits on my MSI motherboard. CPU never hits 100c and all intensive games and apps peak at 80c. Unity was the worst culprit. It would lock up the whole computer every time I tried to build an avatar for vrchat. Now everything runs smooth. Benchmarks are only down 5%. This had me going ever since November when I built this computer. Glad I didn't do anything drastic like change the cooler or RMA the cpu.
Man, I'm planning an i9 build right now, this is invaluable info
Go with ryzen 9 or 14700k
@@RiyozsuRyzen 9 scheduling is dogsh*t. I would take the 13700K instead of the 14700K (the extra e-cores do nothing to push perfomance, meanwhile the gap between 13700K and 12700K is significant).
I recently had this happen on an Intel 7th generation i5 processor!
I got a 6600k and got no problems. Never overclocked, never overheat works awesome. Can we please turn off overclocking and make it something we have to turn on. I want my next pc to work for a decade then give it to someone else. Who can still use it for 5 more years.
I have also a 6600k at 4600mhz and air cooling for 8 years and play the best games with it without ever having a crash. The combination with the GTX970 is perfect. Will buy the 50 series next year and hopefully play again for at least 8 years
@@antoniocalimero1173 4.6Ghz long term is pretty respectable on air. It's a x600 series so it's got the thermal room to clank up. There is a trade-off to cores. Sometimes less is better as evidenced by the 14900. 8 real cores, 16 co-processors. Shit works.
Bro thank you for this I genuinely was getting confused I'll be adjusting these settings when I get home since I am getting these errors on my rig I thought I had a bad 4070ti super
I learned about this issue a couple of weeks/months ago and immediately noticed improvement once I set those limits in the BIOS. Way less stutters in games, CPU running cooler... It's really bad that they do this but glad it's finally getting some light because it solved a lot of issues for me.
ROG MAXIMUS Z790 HERO BTF BIOS 1202
Version 1202
13.52 MB 2024/04/19
"The update introduces the Intel Baseline Profile option, allowing users to revert to Intel factory default settings for basic functionality, lower power limits, and improving stability in certain games.
Timing is everything, seems last year when AMD was having the motherboard 7 series AMD issues, all content creators were saying in their own builds they are doing Intel cause reliability. Almost around the same time a year later, its flipped. Everyone has issues. It happens.
But it's the motherboard this time.
@@antoniohagopian213 And last year with AMD it was what? Are you now gonna tell me that Intel MB pushing power limits outside the specs is a MB issue, while AMD MB pushing SOC voltage outside the specs is a AMD issue???
@@Audiosan79yes actually, vsoc is regulated, in par, by AGESA, which is distributed by AMD to the mb vendors. No wonder they released a few versions to mitigate the issue
@@Audiosan79 Not only it, only ASUS MOBO had the issue. This one is wide spread
@@Audiosan79 People called a AMD problem because they said AMD should've been looking closer to the partners. Now with Intel pushing 300W CPU the backslash isn't half as bad.
Had same issues you spoke about for my 14900k during first 3 weeks of 14th gen release. Wish i knew this information beforehand.
z790 hero / z790 strix e
Artic liquid freezer II 360
Used two different motherboards and two different 14900k chips. Both scenarios produced the same results. Cinebench and most games would crash upon starting and cpu high spikes.
Everything was tested stock settings out the box.
Returned both chips and went with a 13700k. Everything ran stable.
Got my 13th gen, i7 earlier this year. Dodged a bullet… Thanks for the great vid, as always!
Jay needs to learn the difference between a Perimeter and PARAMETERS
Hi, 14900K user here. So the story goes:
First 2-3 days stock MB settings with 360mm AIO the CPU was stable. Then, started messing with XTU AI and optimizer all stable and R23 and Cinebench 2024 high scores for one day. The next day booted the system and started crashing, restored the MB stock settings, and everything was fine. A day later crashes again, engaged the CPU limits (Intel POR - Gigabyte Z690) everything was fine. A day later random application crashes, random shutdowns and blue screens with Intel power limits.
Counter-Strike 2 is crashing without FPS limit, but as soon as I set a 144fps limit the game runs fine. Battlefield 2042 is not playable at all (this is with Intel limits, I haven't tested it with MB defaults).
I'm going to RMA the chip and I hope that I'll get a good chip this time.
Good content Jay!
The only working solution for crashes that I've found is to underclock it. Set CPU ratio on all perfomance cores to 55x and that should fix the problem. Resolved the crashes on my system, anyway.
@@legend_of_today I've tried, but no luck. Maybe I should downclock it even lower, but I could've get a 13th gen for less money and same performance. I'm using this argument to RMA the chip.
Did you solve the problems? I'm building my first PC, and I'm thinking about a 14900k, but I confess that I'm a little hesitant about this intel.
@@Thebossreserve i'm goind to rma the chip tomorrow. Best case it's glind to last few months...
@@MusicNotesLabel Let us know the final result. 👍🏻
I have a 14900k on a Gigabyte z790 master x and been having this issue for months since I upgraded to this setup and had no idea what was going on. I finally found info that you just explained in this vid this past week and yes I had to turn my 14900k down to 55x and now I get no issues loading/playing UE5 games or any crashes in any other games. Which like you said is crazy how we have to run the K series processors slower when we are supposed to be doing the opposite with them.
"Rushing out products because we can barely compete making a mess at the same time"
Basically
Jay, you are wrong about the MSI settings in BIOS, its not "Game Boost" but "CPU Cooler Tuning" and you set it to "Tower Air Cooler" instead of the default "Water Cooler" which is unlimited!
This is what I did but took it further to “box cooler”. There is game boost but that was defaulted to off in my bios. Only thing I had to turn on was XMP.
I spent at least an hour looking for this thanks @nichronos
I've noticed that people have a different MSI UI to me as they have Click BIOS 5 when mine is just called Click BIOS. Do you know where I would be able to find the equivalent setting but on my UI? because I have looked everywhere but haven't found anything. I have a I9-13900H, 4070 2023 laptop so I'm not on old hardware, however I am experiencing quite high CPU temps so this could setting change could really help:)
@@user-to7kv2rb8z I'm not sure where it would be on a laptop and they might not even have the option because laptops are cooled by box coolers or AIO etc... you might have to look for the other settings Jay mentioned or maybe call MSI and inquire with them, or possibly try and look up your bios on CZcams or Google and see what pops up.
14900K owner here, no crashes/errors yet. When people said this chip was hot, I didn’t think it would be too hot. Out of the box in Cinebench temps instantly hit 100°. I’ve got two thiccc 360 rads with an Eisblock on the CPU. My system was also too loud during gaming (and I have all Noctua). I had to drop the voltage to 1.15 and max power at 225 (I don’t need 6.2Ghz). Sure, I got a lower score in Cinebench but in gaming I honestly can’t tell the difference.
I also find it funny that I can call my 3080Ti a cool (temperature) product.
Pretty much same here. The only crashes I got were specifically on cinebench, my main problem was the infamous heat of my 13900k. Tried everything to get it to cool with my 360 aio, and was very proud of myself when I got it to 93c on cinebench (39k-40k score). Then I tried resetting to defaults and did just the power limits and it caps at 80 on a warm day on cinebench. Similar score to Jay here at around 37k score. Now it runs as cool as it should
Considering that the crashes were from running it untamed, i think it is only natural that you are not getting any crash
Same I have 14900K and no crashes. Got an AIO cooler and 12 fans always keeps it at 32-40 degrees
My crashes were almost exclusively limited to Unreal engine games, with the added confusing bonus of sometimes working without any issues and at other times being unable to even launch the game several times in a row. I've used the Intel tuning utility to downclock my CPU for a while, but then tried out the BIOS setting changes last week and haven't run into any more crashes since.
Nice. Yeah. It'll probably last 10 years+ 24/7 at 225W. Intel does make solid fancy glass. So does AMD.
I am happy to see the Old Jay back. Yeah, I wrote it. Glad your back. I know you don't get a lot of fan love on these, but glad you do them. Remember when you were happy to worry about 8 core problems?
12:45 - Well changed Turbo Power Limits to Enabled. But it still shows PL1 Power Limit: 253watts and PL2 Power Limit: 4095 Watts. GIGABYTE B760 AORUS ELITE AX board.
Well, well, well, how the turntables.
Really happy with my AM5, pcie extra lanes, lower wattage, first time I went with team red
Thanks for these great vids, Jay! I have an i9-13000K, and have been having issues. The resolution I found was to run XMP II, Enforce all Limits in BIOS and then use Intel's XTU to underclock my CPU a smidge, and it is stable again.
Moo
What did you do to underclock your cpu?
@@IslaCloud11 Underclocking can be done using Intel XTU.
@@IslaCloud11 Just used Intel Extreme Tuning Utility (Intel XTU). Is very simple to use.
Moo
I have a 13900k and assembled my build in July of 2023. I followed your earlier advice about using intel XTU and applied automatic OC, which already set an undervolt as standard. So far I have not had any issues, fingers crossed it stays this way.
Much like the Ryzen burning issue AMD controls what their partners can and can't do with their products. Intel controls what their partners can and can't do with their products, Intel is to blame here just like AMD was to blame here, Intel enjoyed MCE giving them better out of box results compared to competing products because it wasn't a 'stock-stock' comparison. Now it's biting them in the ass.
Ryzen burning? Which of the Ryzen?
@@Delver639 x3Ds, that was mostly an asus problem though
@@Delver639 X3D chips when they came out at the very least. 3D cache really doesnt like overclocking, which many boards run by default.
@@alexturnbackthearmy1907 It was an ASUS problem
@@pedro4205 Just an accident that same company had similar problems in the past, aint it?
It's like we heard this same exact issue on the 9,000/10,000 series intel chips?
Time is a flat circle.
as you said my i3-9100F giving the same problems from January Last Week
@@SpiritHawker I had 2 ROG boards for 1th gen intel. One would **ALWAYS** crash when trying to install windows. The other Alt+F4'd itself because it crashed while updating the bios because it was pushing unstable clocks.
I returned both of those boards so quick after Steve / Jay did a report on MoBo makers trying to push out single digit gains "out of the box"
Literally mobo makers learned nothing. They push unstable clocks out of the box but can't auto enable XMP.
Ya I have an older 11900K and even mine had issues as well during certain processes where every thread was at 100% (stock settings) would cause a BSOD as it would quickly go over 100*C and that's with a dedicated custom liquid cooling loop. Upon research (this was about 6 weeks back) I found that some others were running into the issues and by just adjusting the PL1 & PL2 in my BIOS down to the stock settings (like the one you were showing, it was set to 4096W by default) that took care of the issue, no more crashing.
The fact everyone's having issues at the exact same time tells me it's more than just a typical case of degradation. I've run within intel's specs for the past year and an undervolt without issues until late.
Good timing award on this Jaz because this exact issue has been occurring in just the last few days for me. I thought something was strange about it because I have a 4090 and 64 GB of DDR5.
Flexing much😂
CPU is kill
I'm happy going to 7800x3D this summer...
you should wait for the 10 800 x5D in 10 years, gonna be 300 % faster with ddr7 ( :p )
I just upgraded to a 7800x3D and it's a wonderful experience so far. Hope yours is good too.
I have one. Definitely the best gaming cpu on the market.
I'm still extremely happy with my 5800X3D after almost 2 years
I built a 7800x3d system and had to go back to my Intel system. The 7800x3d started crashing and getting bsod after a few months with 6000MHz cl30 ram and now can barely run basic jedec 4800MHz ram without crashing. (using the latest bios and ram on the QVL list) My 7800x3d has been the worst most problematic build I have had in 20+ years using both AMD and Intel.
Can't wait to get home to try this out! PC has been randomly crashing everyday.. most times while just idling.. 🤞 really hope this is it! Thanks Jay
Happy done this tip on my 14900ks and the temps are great and the cinebench score is the same thanks
I do not understand how all of a sudden this has become an issue for Intel 13th gen cpu that’s nearly 2 year old generation and let’s face it 14th is basically same as 13th. It doesn’t make sense to me
There could be a degradation issue which only manifests itself after some time as CPUs age. The more voltage motherboards or users put through them you'll see them sooner. I've also seen personally CPUs degrade over time. On the other hand, most games don't tax the CPU that much, but shader compilation in UE games are highly CPU intensive. Possibly there are some CPUs out there which were sub-par quality from the beginning others might have degraded over time due to too aggressive motherboard default settings as shown in the video. As for stability testing, I use compilation workloads to tax the system and memory a lot which is a real worst-case scenario on my systems (as some compilations take over three hours to finish).
I have the 13900KS.....My Issues came after 1 Year of using the Asus z790e gaming ,,defaults" ...
Everytime on high loads it jums to 100°C instantly... my 360 Corsair Elite XT can`t cool this.....
Now i disabled the Multicore Enhancement
Set Pl1 and Pl2 to 253 and AMP 307
+ set the Temp Limit on 80°C - Manualy.....
Now i have no Issues but i dont know if this is a solution 😂
The issue is mostly on the 13900 and 14900 variants because of the higher frequencies. You are right, I have never heard anyone with a 13700 complain about these types of issues. Seems like once you go over 5.2GHz it becomes a game of who has the best silicon and can operate with stability - provided the game engines then don't freak out on AAA games.
Bios updates that's why
3:00
I hate to throw a monkey wrench into this discussion, but the "out of memory" error is NOT just happening to the 13th and 14th gen CPUs from Intel. Systems as old as my 4770k can experience this, and it appears to be at least partially game specific. A really good example of this that I noted over on Steve's video regarding instability for the 13th/14th gen Intel CPUs is with Diablo 4. A modern game (with a terribadly optimized engine in many respects) that is having that very same "out of memory" error. The thing is, the Fenris logs for that game clearly show that the game didn't hit a *system* RAM wall, it hit a *virtual memory* wall. That is, for some reason, Diablo 4 as of the last few patches since roughly the beginning of March, are not swapping textures to system RAM like you'd expect, but merely dumping them into the VM pool.
On my 4770k system with both a 1080 Ti and my 4090 in as a test (the 4090 is in there because I needed to test the card before its return period was up and hadn't yet put together my more recent build for it due to a bad back and having to move a Cosmos II case), the same out of memory error occurred. Every single time the result was the same: the game noted it had run out of *virtual memory*. When the game crashes like this I typically have 10-13 GB free of the 32 GB RAM I have in this system. The 4090 made a very interesting test scenario because of its absolutely massive amount of VRAM.
In the case of Diablo 4 it appears that the developers kind of did a massive pendulum swing from previous patches. Prior to 3/5/2024, D4 was doing garbage collection at such an aggressive rate that it would induce frame pacing and animation time errors (stuttering/hitching). So as of at least the 1.3.3 patch it appears that frame pacing is smoother, but apparently at the expense of not swapping textures into RAM, but for some reason VM instead. Windows' default VM is going to be nowhere the size of your GPU's total VRAM in 99% of cases. The only solution found here was to *increase* the Windows VM size to ≥16 GB, which is an absurdly large VM size, as that then locks off that much of your boot SSD, which usually tends to be the smaller of any drives you have installed. Regardless though, users should never have to adjust the VM size because a game isn't coded properly. Yet here we are. So you might want to have the folks over at Falcon Northwest give that a try and see what the results are. It's possible we're dealing with multiple different out of memory issues across various games currently, but the timing of this is really suspect relative to when the D4 1.3.3 patch came out and it kind of has me wondering if developers aren't being super lazy and/or sloppy with how they manage memory and/or do garbage collection in their games.
I have run into Windows miss handling the hard disk cache in the past, if you don't have enough RAM it sets the minimum amount to low. Oddly enough PC's for dummies had a working minimum level to set it, at 2.5 times RAM, a work around for windows 98 era computers, and it did improve performance, on a HDD equipped laptop.
"you wouldn't have your car like that"
Well, my mate had a v6 ford mondeo back in the day, where the fix to it pinking was indeed to change the timing such that, it had "less hp". Still wrong of course.
I'm so glad I stuck with a 13500 for my recent 'super upgrade' ( from a 6700). A friend got a 13900 for his office pc (which he is running lots and lots of tests on, so uses those clock cycles) and he's had all sorts of problems with it. the info and fixes from videos like this has been really handy.
Temp is VERY important too.
My 4790k had a 800mhz overclock. It was only stable if the cpu temp was under 70c (water cooled). Once it got above 70c, it was pretty much a ticking time bomb on when it would crash. So in the summer it crashed a bit and id have to kick on the AC.
Why are people still overclocking? It's not the days of 300mhz boosted to 500mhz. You are not getting anything significant for your money and effort.
The insatiable urge to squeeze every last percent of performance out of your CPU even if it's wildly impractical. Now we see the consequences of motherboard manufacturers making that the default behavior.
It's fun
at this point the only real performance gains are in undervolting
The same reasons people do any other “pointless” activities (e.g. any sport or game or hobby): because they can and they find it fun. We all have those things that we enjoy that some other people will just never understand and that is okay.
But yes, if you overclock expecting it to radically boost performance, you will be disappointed. Personally I will take stability over 2% performance boost any day.
It's not even overclocking dude. Just by default I get blue screen of death in random crashes. And that's default settings
So Cinebench results are tainted. CPUs are being run out of spec.
Thanks for the info :)
Back in the DOS days there were a few games you had to enter Command Line stuff to change some CPU settings in Windows so the game could have enough "Video Memory". To me it sounds like a very similar issue as back then and had nothing to do with the Graphics Card.
Amd has its own set of issues. At least, 5000 series did. My launch day 5900x recently was rebooting no bsod, but whea logging errors. Eventually replaced it and it solved all the issues. Degraded core architecture
7000 series as well. I think in general, stability is degrading in computing on multiple fronts right now because of corporate greed.
If your problem was your am4 cpu rebooting while your computer is idle. Its a powersaving feature that caused that. Power supply idle control. Set it to typical current idle. And boom no more random reboots. This happened for my 5600x, and my 7950x. I dont know why nobody else has noticed this. And this happened on an x570s board and a x670e board
@@kyoudaikenif you have random reboots when computer is idle, go to bios, find a setting called power supply idle control, set to typical current idle. Problem fixed. Worked for my 5600x and my 7950x. Since both had this issue. You're welcome if you have an msi board, look under OC, advanced cpu configuration, AMD CBS, then you'll see it.
@@ascissordollynamedgwen9409 I had other issues. Like on 5600G or 5700G flickering lines on the HDMI output when Global C-State Control is enabled (which brings the CPUs to Intel levels in idle consumption). I had the SATA ports in my Chipset (A520) in my NAS die in two Motherboards (RMA). Trying to use audio devices via USB often works only on specific USB ports. AMD also has high DPC latency issues which causes audio crackling and stutter, timing issues in video playback since it has to be synced to audio. Overall experience was not stellar with AMD either. I think it comes down to luck at this point. Both Intel and AMD aren't even trying anymore...
@@ascissordollynamedgwen9409 I had other issues instead with Ryzen 5000, mainly the 5000G APUs in my bedroom PC and NAS. For example flickering stripes in the HDMI signal when Global C State Control is enabled. It brings idle power down a lot, almost to Intel levels... On my NAS, since it's headless, I just ignored it. On my bedroom PC it magically fixed itself after a BIOS update. Strange. But it caused coil whine in the mobo VRM. Other issues are USB issues like crackling and static in audio playback using USB audio devices. It MAY or may not work on a specific USB port. DPC lateny issues also cause audio issues and video playback issues... My now sold Threadripper 3960X degreaded in performance with each Windows Update installed... Not a stellar experience.
It is NOT the power that is the culprit here but the voltage-spikes.
I have said that for years (at least since Skylake) but the motherboard applying default overclocks is just insane. And with every generation it got worse.
With Coffeelake a 95W CPU was running at over 110W permanently while delivering just stock performance. but at least there it was only the power. With 13/14th-gen they are not just increasing the powerlimits but also pushing the voltages to insane levels.
With the Intel CPUs each CPU has an internal Voltage/Frequency curve telling it what voltage to request from the board for a certain frequency... duh, simple. For the i913900k that is something like 1.43V maximum when under full TVB. This voltage is the V_ID - the voltage requested at the power-stage, NOT the voltage that applies to the CPU. Intel specifies these voltages under the pre-condition of a certain resistance of the current tracks delivering the power to the CPU. The nominal value is 2 mOhm. That means when a CPU is drawing 100 Amps the voltage the CPU receives will drop by 0.1V, resulting in 1.33V V_CC.
so the bad new.
These boards have less resistance, apply higher voltages and further increase voltage under load.
So the CPU is requesting 1.43V in expectancy of getting 1.33V at its inputs, but the Motherbords increase that so far that it gets 1.48V instead - a 150mV overvoltage for absolutely no reason.
Now here comes the kicker - this isn't even the worst part. A CPU is only rarely under full load, so what happens when it is done with the work and steps down the frequency? It reduces the demanded voltage. Buuuut cause the motherboard takes some time and had already deliver high currents at too high voltage it can not regulate that fast, and instead cause of the reduced powerdraw the voltage now rises even further, spiking well into the 1.6V region, damaging the CPU and leading to fast degredation.
TL:DR:
It is 100% the motherboards destroying the CPUs, but Intel is still at fault for just watching and allowing them to do so.
Yep, this exact thing happened to me with my 13600k on an Asrock Z690 Steel Legend, I was getting 1.4V 200+W out of the box causing insane temperatures, then I found a video talking about this resistance thing and the guy had a default of 0.01ohms while mine was 1.7ohms, so I tried dropping it to 0.01 and suddenly IT WAS SO MUCH COOLER, down to 1.2V never over 155W, I even managed to undervolt and overclock on top of that to get more performance with way less power.
In games my power consumption went from 100W contantly to 50W, literally half.
These motherboard vendors are insane and Intel needs to keep them in check, this is a wake up call, they are throwing chip-damaging voltages at CPUs for no reason.
@@TheFPSPower I got a 13900k recently and have been wanting to control the temps because it always seemed over kill and I wanted to tame it. I don't know what any of this means but I'm going to try do this, I understand the underclock and over volt part, I was going to start with that. Do you remember who made the video about the resistance thing, posting a link might get the comment fagged, if you know the title and youtube channel that would be great.
What do you recommend to fix this problem? I just got a 13900k and I want it to last
@@NanoNutrino Search for "Intel i7 10th Gen IA AC/DC LL 5.0GHz Overclocking Tutorial" by PianoBench
It's pretty complex but I kept it simple and just set as low of a value as possible and checked for stability.
@@NanoNutrinoreturn it unless you’re okay with much worse performance.
Hope you are feeling better Jay.
Keep us updated about this problem jay
Glad I got a 12th gen
I bought a 11th gen last summer I wanted to wait it out to see how things would shake out
I get what I need right now from my 11700k, I was going to wait for the 15700k, figured it would be a very stable architecture by then.
Fingers crossed...
i7 12700k is just as bad imo.
@@rodturner6759 probably gonna be called core ultra 7 270k instead of core i7 15700k
I've had "memory" blue screens with my 12900k. Memtest etc show no issues. I use an Asus motherboard which defaults to what Jay shows.
@@OutOfNamesToChoose when I had my 12700k I’ve had a lot of memory blue screens as well but that was because 2 of my 4 ram sticks were mismatched. Replacing 2 of them with the same one resolved the issue. I have not run into any issues with 13900k running ddr5 @ 6000mhz D.O.C.P enabled.
Every single post I have seen on this issue is with Windows 11. Most likely an issue with Thread Director. I have two 13900K-RTX4080 systems on W10 22H2 and both have been rock solid for over a year.
@@hopperbopper Both systems are ROG Strix Z790-A D4 with 4000 CL16 ram, manually set, nothing else changed.
Its Intel no good trying to bush the blame, they fudged the numbers out of desperation to beat AMD.
Disabling Hyper Threading worked for me and my 14900k, 4090 and ASUS z790 Dark Maximus rig. I was getting all the same errors he discussed here before but all went away even when leaving all the Ai overclock and power limits on.
I had occasional odd stability issues. It was very infrequent and I couldn't quite isolate it with my 13900k and my Z690 Asus board. I didn't realize what Asus was doing with their optimized defaults until I saw another of your videos about this. I disabled the multi-core enhancement, and my system has been rock solid since.
Even with 12 volts, 300 amps on board for a PC seems insane. With 50 amps, you can power a respectable plasma cutter, and 150 can weld. Puts things in perspective how much juice is surging around the mobo.
Add: Yes, the wattage of the devices listed is different and the comparison highly generalized; your responses are not wrong and I am aware. The thought train was more an optics view of perceived danger between devices. I don't look at my PC in the same danger category as a plasma cutter or a welder. Even though a possible 3600 watts is a far cry from prior compared devices, none of the three would feel great going through your fingers.
300amps under 1.5V though for cpu supply. still a damn good amount of juice but not quite the same lol
Amperage and voltage are both useful numbers but one of them isn’t the end all answer. 100 amps at 1.25 v is only 125 watts. A traditional old style lightbulb was 40-100 watts. A plasma cutter pulling 35-40 amps at 240 volts is up to 10kw…
300A at 1.5V is only 450W. A 50A plasma cutter running at 240V is 12,000W. You can't just compare amperage alone.
The CPU is operating at about 1.4 - 1.5v. 300A @ 1.5V is 450W. For the plasma cutter, that 50A would be at 110v, so 5500W. A 150A 220v welder would be 33000W.
I had a 14900k. Started getting these issues. I got so sick of it, I was well aware of how good the 7800X3D was for gaming and I know the Ryzen 9000 series will be on the same socket so I just bought a 7800X3D. I wont be going back to intel for a long time.
@@-Highlander-42 These things are even going wrong with a constant 253watt limit. I have seen it myself multiple times.
If your CPU requires all that to perform properly then its a total pile of shit. My 14900k was being run on a 360mm AIO and the temps were totally reasonable. If Intel would use a copper IHS then the temps would be better, but not matter how hard you try to cool an intel CPU their shit TIM and IHS will always limit you.
@@-Highlander-42 Ok. But the fact still stands that for instance a 7800X3D will do with 60 watts what a 14900k needs about 140 to do. And thats just when gaming and I have seen these CPUs degrade themselves just from gaming.
But in this case, the wattage spikes are around 253watts in some games depending on many factors. I actually dont think you have looked at power draw from the 14900k at all. The fact is these things are happening to general normal users, not people running the CPU extremely hard all day. It is a poorly made product.
@@-Highlander-42ah yes, 600$ for a CPU + 600 more for the misc shit just to get an unstable chip that's impossible to cool
@@-Highlander-42Sit down intel shill.
@@sirdetmist3204My Alder Lake i7-12700K obliterates any of those i9s in perfomance per watt on gaming, it's Ryzen 5 5600X levels of perfomance per watt at stock (igor's lab measured 0.31 watts per fps at stock), with an adaptative undervolt, is even better.
The IPC basically hasn't changed so i only would be behind a 7800X3D (the 12700K has a slow DDR5 memory controller).
I did it ASAP when I got my 13th gen platform, and I suggest all my friend do it as well.
And it is quite crazy that not many big tech channels talk about this until now.
The only bigger channel that had talked about it is Hardware Canucks.
I think you nailed it, Jay, and the longer people run at high temperatures, the more failures there will be. I just built a new computer for the first time in a decade. I used at 14700K because Microcenter had them on sale. I'm used to CPUs that draw 65-130 watts, so it never occurred to me to consider water cooling. I built it, and fired it up, and on launching CPUMARK, it blasted almost instantly to 100 C and thermal throttled before I could shut it down. There is no way that 100C is OK, so I cut my limits way down, to 170 watts short duration, 150 long duration. The cooler was then able to keep things at 70C, which I consider to be a reasonable worst-case max. On the other and, Cinebench was running 13% under spec, so I had lost an almost noticeable amount of speed.
I haven't gone to water cooling yet, but I did improve my air-cooling by adding a Thermalright "bending correct frame", liquid metal for thermal paste, and an extra cpu cooler fan. I also underclocked the cpu 4% and undervolted by 0.195 volt. Now I can draw 195 volts without going over 70C. I'm still 6% under spec on Cinebench, but I'd rather be a bit low on speed than to fry the CPU.
Thanks for all you do in keeping people informed.