arstechnica , Englisch
@arstechnica@mastodon.social avatar

Intel reportedly blames motherboard makers for Core i9 CPU crashes

Motherboard makers "disable thermal and power delivery safeguards" by default.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/04/intel-reportedly-blames-motherboard-makers-for-core-i9-cpu-crashes/?utm_brand=arstechnica&utm_social-type=owned&utm_source=mastodon&utm_medium=social

CerebralHawks ,
@CerebralHawks@geekdom.social avatar

@arstechnica With too many cooks in the kitchen and no one wants to admit fault, it falls to the buyer. If I have an issue, it’s either Apple or it’s me, sometimes it’s even obvious. I like the idea of versatility in PC and Android, but I don’t see the actual benefit.

Bandersnatch ,
@Bandersnatch@mastodon.social avatar

@arstechnica Sounds like those are things that should be in the CPU.

aapis ,
@aapis@mastodon.world avatar

@arstechnica wait so intel knows and it’s somehow not their fault? Not believable, sorry suits

LeoBurr ,
@LeoBurr@tiggi.es avatar

@arstechnica I mean, they're complicit since they apparently allowed this in search of the ultimate in performance.

You can even take the "t" CPUs and Non-Ks and run them with as much power as they can pull on these boards. To be fair, the CPUs, as long as they're cooled adequately, do very well maxed out with their wattage limited to their cooling capabilities, but shoving 300+w into one of these CPUs for any period of time is asking for early degradation.

My MSI motherboard would set itself to 4095w (max) if you told it you had an AIO cooler...insanity. I've since limited it to 160w long term and 250w short term. Still above recommendations, but the CPU is cooled at 70C or under in OCCT with 160w.

  • Alle
  • Abonniert
  • Moderiert
  • Favoriten
  • random
  • haupteingang
  • Alle Magazine