7 ms·

Or just disable overclocking.

ajross 3y ago
Why is this downvoted? That's exactly what's happening here. The affected devices are being overclocked, and the instructions at the end of the linked support document detail how to find the correct limits for your CPU and set them in your BIOS.
- sandworm101 3y ago
  I think it is because overclocking has become so normal that it is an expected feature on most chips. Being told to disable it is like being told to disable the supercharger on your new Ferrari: you are no longer getting what you thought you had paid for.
  - crazygringo 3y ago
    Is that true? I thought the entire premise of overclocking was that it's not officially supported and it may break things. The whole point is that you're not paying for it and it's entirely at-risk. Because if you do want a higher level of guaranteed performance, you do need to pay for a faster chip (if it exists).
    - Kluggy 3y ago
      CPU manufacturers certainly hold the line you stated but motherboard venders have jumped over the line and now sell motherboards that overlock for the end user entirely transparently. It’s fair for the end user who bought a motherboard that promises a higher clock speed to expect that clock speed.
      - crazygringo 3y ago
        Do these motherboards explicitly provide a warranty that covers not just damage from overclocking but also CPU errors? If you can provide links, I'd be curious to see what guarantees they make. "What's fair" depends very specifically on what language they use.
        Red_Leaves_Flyy 3y ago
        From my limited knowledge the motherboard manufacturers hide behind disclaimers. Iirc even using fast ram at their rated clock speed with a cpu that does not support that speed is a warranty violation.
        Kluggy 3y ago
        https://www.asus.com/motherboards-components/motherboards/tuf-gaming/tuf-z370-plus-gaming/ https://www.asus.com/motherboards-components/motherboards/tu... has "ASUS Multicore Enhancement" bios setting which defaulted to Auto which is documented as "This item allows you to maximize the overclocking performance optimized by ASUS core ratio settings." They have now entered the AI bubble with https://www.asus.com/microsite/motherboard/Intelligent-motherboard/AI-Overclocking.html https://www.asus.com/microsite/motherboard/Intelligent-mothe... MSI has a similar setting, although I don't know exactly what models have it nor what it's called
    - sandworm101 3y ago
      Well, Ferrari also tells people not to break speed limits. But if their cars started breaking apart at 85mph they would still be blamed. This might not be warranty repair, intel is probably not liable legally, but this should have impact on their reputation: intel put out a chip that does not handle overclocking very well. Ok. I'll remember that when I am shopping for my next chip.
    - simondotau 3y ago
      > The whole point is that you're not paying for it Tell that to anyone who paid extra for a K-series Intel chip.
    - me_me_me 3y ago
      Nah, chips are manufactured in best version and then damaged/fused/lock to downgrade them to create cheaper version (in the same series) Its cheaper to have a single production line and then lock off features. As crazy as i sounds it actually cost a little bit more to produce inferior version sold at cheaper prices. The overclocking was a 'premium' feature due to possibility of melting the chip. But nowadays the temp sensors cut power to prevent catastrophic failure. Also worth mention the downside to upclocking voltage is increased physical degradation of cores, ie lower lifespawn of cpu.
  - bee_rider 3y ago
    I don’t think there’s a great car analogy because the ecosystems and stakes are different. These chips require motherboards to function, and these unlocked chips get their configuration from the motherboard. There’s no analogous entity to Ferrari the company here, it is like you bought an engine from one company, a gearbox from another, and the gearbox had a “responsiveness enhancement” setting that always redlined your RPMs or something (I don’t know cars).
  - ajross 3y ago
    Ferrari for sure warrants their cars as sold. But if you take it to a mod shop and put in an aftermarket turbo that damages your valves, you don't go whining to HN with an article with "Ferrari Engine Instability" in the title, do you? I don't know what you want Intel to do here. They tell you upfront what the power and clock limits are on the parts. But the market has a three decade history of people pushing the chips a little past their limit for fun and profit, so they "allow" it even if they know it won't work for everything.
    - kuschku 3y ago
      These Motherboards are Intel certified. If I get a mod shop to install a ferrari certified part, I expect the part to work.
      - ajross 3y ago
        Meh. So you're in the "Intel should take affirmative action to prevent overclocking" camp. And as mentioned the response to that is that they've tried that (on multiple occasions, using multiple techniques) and people freaked out about that too. They can't win, I guess.
        kuschku 3y ago
        Absolutely not. There are two opinions that I hold that are relevant here: - If I buy parts that are certified to work together, and I use them according to their respective manuals, they should work as specified. - If I desire to manually change or customise something, I should be able to modify whatever I'd like. - As soon as my changes go outside the certified range, I'm liable myself. But as long as I'm within of the certified range, warranty should still apply and the product should continue working as specified.
      - xcv123 3y ago
        Ferrari does not allow modifications of their cars. If you take it to a mod shop, they will void the warranty and you will be banned from purchasing a new Ferrari.
  - johnklos 3y ago
    If you put your foot to the floor in a supercharged car, you're going to eventually have to let it up lest you melt things or you burn all your oil because your rings aren't making contact with the cylinder walls any more. It's an apt metaphor since the same is true of CPUs. You can't run a CPU at 400 watts continuously for more than a handful of seconds at a time. The problem is that Intel has normalized it so much that all their high end CPUs do this, and apparently do it often. It's not unexpected that they might be too close to the point where things are melting, so to speak. I'd rather slower and more stable any day - I chose a Ryzen 7900 over a 7900X intentionally - but that isn't what all the marketing out there is trying to sell. The fancy motherboards, the water coolers, the highly clocked memory all account for lots of markup, so that's what's marketed. I'm not a fan. It is worth noting a distinction between the terms "overclocking" and "turbo clocking". "Overclocking" has traditionally meant running the clock "over" the rating. "Turbo clocking" is now built in to almost every CPU out there. One technically can void your warranty, whereas the other doesn't. Since we're mostly technical people here, we should use the appropriate term where the context makes that choice more accurate. It's like virus and Trojan - we SHOULD be technically correct, but that doesn't mean highly technical people aren't still calling Trojans viruses now and then.
- cduzz 3y ago
  I think "overclock" implies that the end-user is doing something that's out-of-spec for the thing they're operating. This "I can run a core at a faster speed" is a documented feature so not really overclocking.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - TylerE 3y ago
    That's literally overclocking. You're clocking it at a rate over the nameplate value. Just because the BIOS is factory-unlocked doesn't really change anything.
    - LoganDark 3y ago
      Yeah. Intel advertises the ability to overclock, but that doesn't mean overclocking is in spec. It just means Intel allows you to run it out of spec if you so choose. The spec says you can set the clock multiplier, it doesn't say anything above the stock range will actually be stable.
      - TylerE 3y ago
        Plus almost always people are tweaking voltages and such also.
        LoganDark 3y ago
        This article is about automatic / enabled-by-default overclocking, which isn't actually specified by Intel but is done by the motherboard manufacturers anyway. At least the "GAMING GAMING GAMING" oriented ones like MSI and friends. As an example of motherboard manufacturers going outside specifications, my MSI motherboard has a built-in option to change BCLK, which is the clock reference for the entire PCIe bus. Changing it not only overclocks the CPU, but also the GPU's connection (not the GPU itself), as well as the NVMe SSD. This was so not-endorsed by Intel that they quickly pushed microcode that shuts the CPU down if it detects BCLK tampering. In response, MSI added a dropdown that allows you to downgrade the microcode of the CPU. So yeah. Very not within specifications.
bee_rider 3y ago
At least the built in “multicore enhancement” type overclocks that are popular nowadays with motherboard manufacturers. I wonder if the old style “bump it up and memtest” type overclocking would catch this. Actually, what is the good testing tool nowadays? Does memtest check AVX frequencies?
- wmf 3y ago
  Intel Performance Maximizer is from Intel so I'd hope it has good tests.
Kon-Peki 3y ago
But isn't overclocking the entire point of buying the K version of these chips?
- secondcoming 3y ago
  Yes it is but there's more to overclocking than just the CPU. You also need adequate cooling and fine-tuning of parameters I'll never truly understand. There are so many moving parts that you're not guaranteed anything. It seems like the CPUs were actually running at their overclocked speeds, but the rest of the system couldn't keep up.
  - szundi 3y ago
    Also might need to raise voltage etc
- rygorous 3y ago
  Definitely not. These are supposed to be higher-quality bins that also ship with higher stock clock rates (both base and boost) and are rated for them. I don't know how common this is across the whole population of PC buyers, but personally, I have for sure bought K-series parts then not clocked them past their stock settings, trusting that they are rated for it and deeply uninterested in any OCing past that. (I prefer my machines stable, thank you very much.)
  - b112 3y ago
    Decades ago I visited a fellow Amiga user's house. He had an overclocked 68060 Apollo board. He was so happy with the speed. Would not stop telling everyone, and talking about it. Yet as I watched him demo it, it rebooted every minute or so. Most unstable thing ever. Sure it booted in 2 seconds, and he just went about his merry way, but.. what?! Guy could have still overclocked a little less and had stability, but nope. Some overclockers are weird.
zenonu 3y ago
Intel is already running their CPUs at the red line. We're seeing the margin breaking down as Intel tries to remain competitive. The latest 14900KS can even pull > 400W. It's utter insanity.
- refulgentis 3y ago
  I wish I kept up with them better, I swear every 3 months I see a headline that is "Intel says N nodes in {N-1 duration - 3 months}. I think I just saw 5 nodes in 4 years? And we've had 2 in the last 4? Sigh.

Why is this downvoted? That's exactly what's happening here. The affected devices are being overclocked, and the instructions at the end of the linked support document detail how to find the correct limits for your CPU and set them in your BIOS.

sandworm101 3y ago
I think it is because overclocking has become so normal that it is an expected feature on most chips. Being told to disable it is like being told to disable the supercharger on your new Ferrari: you are no longer getting what you thought you had paid for.
- crazygringo 3y ago
  Is that true? I thought the entire premise of overclocking was that it's not officially supported and it may break things. The whole point is that you're not paying for it and it's entirely at-risk. Because if you do want a higher level of guaranteed performance, you do need to pay for a faster chip (if it exists).
  - Kluggy 3y ago
    CPU manufacturers certainly hold the line you stated but motherboard venders have jumped over the line and now sell motherboards that overlock for the end user entirely transparently. It’s fair for the end user who bought a motherboard that promises a higher clock speed to expect that clock speed.
    - crazygringo 3y ago
      Do these motherboards explicitly provide a warranty that covers not just damage from overclocking but also CPU errors? If you can provide links, I'd be curious to see what guarantees they make. "What's fair" depends very specifically on what language they use.
      - Red_Leaves_Flyy 3y ago
        From my limited knowledge the motherboard manufacturers hide behind disclaimers. Iirc even using fast ram at their rated clock speed with a cpu that does not support that speed is a warranty violation.
      - Kluggy 3y ago
        https://www.asus.com/motherboards-components/motherboards/tuf-gaming/tuf-z370-plus-gaming/ https://www.asus.com/motherboards-components/motherboards/tu... has "ASUS Multicore Enhancement" bios setting which defaulted to Auto which is documented as "This item allows you to maximize the overclocking performance optimized by ASUS core ratio settings." They have now entered the AI bubble with https://www.asus.com/microsite/motherboard/Intelligent-motherboard/AI-Overclocking.html https://www.asus.com/microsite/motherboard/Intelligent-mothe... MSI has a similar setting, although I don't know exactly what models have it nor what it's called
  - sandworm101 3y ago
    Well, Ferrari also tells people not to break speed limits. But if their cars started breaking apart at 85mph they would still be blamed. This might not be warranty repair, intel is probably not liable legally, but this should have impact on their reputation: intel put out a chip that does not handle overclocking very well. Ok. I'll remember that when I am shopping for my next chip.
  - simondotau 3y ago
    > The whole point is that you're not paying for it Tell that to anyone who paid extra for a K-series Intel chip.
  - me_me_me 3y ago
    Nah, chips are manufactured in best version and then damaged/fused/lock to downgrade them to create cheaper version (in the same series) Its cheaper to have a single production line and then lock off features. As crazy as i sounds it actually cost a little bit more to produce inferior version sold at cheaper prices. The overclocking was a 'premium' feature due to possibility of melting the chip. But nowadays the temp sensors cut power to prevent catastrophic failure. Also worth mention the downside to upclocking voltage is increased physical degradation of cores, ie lower lifespawn of cpu.
- bee_rider 3y ago
  I don’t think there’s a great car analogy because the ecosystems and stakes are different. These chips require motherboards to function, and these unlocked chips get their configuration from the motherboard. There’s no analogous entity to Ferrari the company here, it is like you bought an engine from one company, a gearbox from another, and the gearbox had a “responsiveness enhancement” setting that always redlined your RPMs or something (I don’t know cars).
- ajross 3y ago
  Ferrari for sure warrants their cars as sold. But if you take it to a mod shop and put in an aftermarket turbo that damages your valves, you don't go whining to HN with an article with "Ferrari Engine Instability" in the title, do you? I don't know what you want Intel to do here. They tell you upfront what the power and clock limits are on the parts. But the market has a three decade history of people pushing the chips a little past their limit for fun and profit, so they "allow" it even if they know it won't work for everything.
  - kuschku 3y ago
    These Motherboards are Intel certified. If I get a mod shop to install a ferrari certified part, I expect the part to work.
    - ajross 3y ago
      Meh. So you're in the "Intel should take affirmative action to prevent overclocking" camp. And as mentioned the response to that is that they've tried that (on multiple occasions, using multiple techniques) and people freaked out about that too. They can't win, I guess.
      - kuschku 3y ago
        Absolutely not. There are two opinions that I hold that are relevant here: - If I buy parts that are certified to work together, and I use them according to their respective manuals, they should work as specified. - If I desire to manually change or customise something, I should be able to modify whatever I'd like. - As soon as my changes go outside the certified range, I'm liable myself. But as long as I'm within of the certified range, warranty should still apply and the product should continue working as specified.
    - xcv123 3y ago
      Ferrari does not allow modifications of their cars. If you take it to a mod shop, they will void the warranty and you will be banned from purchasing a new Ferrari.
- johnklos 3y ago
  If you put your foot to the floor in a supercharged car, you're going to eventually have to let it up lest you melt things or you burn all your oil because your rings aren't making contact with the cylinder walls any more. It's an apt metaphor since the same is true of CPUs. You can't run a CPU at 400 watts continuously for more than a handful of seconds at a time. The problem is that Intel has normalized it so much that all their high end CPUs do this, and apparently do it often. It's not unexpected that they might be too close to the point where things are melting, so to speak. I'd rather slower and more stable any day - I chose a Ryzen 7900 over a 7900X intentionally - but that isn't what all the marketing out there is trying to sell. The fancy motherboards, the water coolers, the highly clocked memory all account for lots of markup, so that's what's marketed. I'm not a fan. It is worth noting a distinction between the terms "overclocking" and "turbo clocking". "Overclocking" has traditionally meant running the clock "over" the rating. "Turbo clocking" is now built in to almost every CPU out there. One technically can void your warranty, whereas the other doesn't. Since we're mostly technical people here, we should use the appropriate term where the context makes that choice more accurate. It's like virus and Trojan - we SHOULD be technically correct, but that doesn't mean highly technical people aren't still calling Trojans viruses now and then.
cduzz 3y ago
I think "overclock" implies that the end-user is doing something that's out-of-spec for the thing they're operating. This "I can run a core at a faster speed" is a documented feature so not really overclocking.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- TylerE 3y ago
  That's literally overclocking. You're clocking it at a rate over the nameplate value. Just because the BIOS is factory-unlocked doesn't really change anything.
  - LoganDark 3y ago
    Yeah. Intel advertises the ability to overclock, but that doesn't mean overclocking is in spec. It just means Intel allows you to run it out of spec if you so choose. The spec says you can set the clock multiplier, it doesn't say anything above the stock range will actually be stable.
    - TylerE 3y ago
      Plus almost always people are tweaking voltages and such also.
      - LoganDark 3y ago
        This article is about automatic / enabled-by-default overclocking, which isn't actually specified by Intel but is done by the motherboard manufacturers anyway. At least the "GAMING GAMING GAMING" oriented ones like MSI and friends. As an example of motherboard manufacturers going outside specifications, my MSI motherboard has a built-in option to change BCLK, which is the clock reference for the entire PCIe bus. Changing it not only overclocks the CPU, but also the GPU's connection (not the GPU itself), as well as the NVMe SSD. This was so not-endorsed by Intel that they quickly pushed microcode that shuts the CPU down if it detects BCLK tampering. In response, MSI added a dropdown that allows you to downgrade the microcode of the CPU. So yeah. Very not within specifications.

bee_rider 3y ago

At least the built in “multicore enhancement” type overclocks that are popular nowadays with motherboard manufacturers. I wonder if the old style “bump it up and memtest” type overclocking would catch this. Actually, what is the good testing tool nowadays? Does memtest check AVX frequencies?

wmf 3y ago
Intel Performance Maximizer is from Intel so I'd hope it has good tests.

Kon-Peki 3y ago

But isn't overclocking the entire point of buying the K version of these chips?

secondcoming 3y ago
Yes it is but there's more to overclocking than just the CPU. You also need adequate cooling and fine-tuning of parameters I'll never truly understand. There are so many moving parts that you're not guaranteed anything. It seems like the CPUs were actually running at their overclocked speeds, but the rest of the system couldn't keep up.
- szundi 3y ago
  Also might need to raise voltage etc
rygorous 3y ago
Definitely not. These are supposed to be higher-quality bins that also ship with higher stock clock rates (both base and boost) and are rated for them. I don't know how common this is across the whole population of PC buyers, but personally, I have for sure bought K-series parts then not clocked them past their stock settings, trusting that they are rated for it and deeply uninterested in any OCing past that. (I prefer my machines stable, thank you very much.)
- b112 3y ago
  Decades ago I visited a fellow Amiga user's house. He had an overclocked 68060 Apollo board. He was so happy with the speed. Would not stop telling everyone, and talking about it. Yet as I watched him demo it, it rebooted every minute or so. Most unstable thing ever. Sure it booted in 2 seconds, and he just went about his merry way, but.. what?! Guy could have still overclocked a little less and had stability, but nope. Some overclockers are weird.

zenonu 3y ago

Intel is already running their CPUs at the red line. We're seeing the margin breaking down as Intel tries to remain competitive. The latest 14900KS can even pull > 400W. It's utter insanity.

refulgentis 3y ago
I wish I kept up with them better, I swear every 3 months I see a headline that is "Intel says N nodes in {N-1 duration - 3 months}. I think I just saw 5 nodes in 4 years? And we've had 2 in the last 4? Sigh.