Intel 13、14代酷睿i9頻繁崩潰、藍屏！降頻之後居然就好了

ThomasRhin wrote:
我倒覺得baseline就是intel授意，不然怎那麼剛好每家都叫做baseline，intel不自己出來推是為了出問題還能繼續卸責

Going all the way back to 2017, with the Intel 8700K processor, we published an article titled Why Do Hardware Reviewers Get Different Benchmark Results? which helped call attention to the fact that motherboards were shipping with “Multicore Enhancement” enabled, which set the CPU “All Core Turbo” to be equal to the “Single Core Turbo” frequency. This essentially was overclocking the CPU, by pushing it past official Intel specifications, and had negative effects on stability and temperatures.

Since that time, our stance at Puget Systems has been to mistrust the default settings on any motherboard. Instead, we commit internally to test and apply BIOS settings — especially power settings — according to our own best practices, with an emphasis on following Intel and AMD guidelines.

Based on this information, we are definitely experiencing CPU failures higher than our historical average, especially with 14th Gen. We have enough data to know that we don’t have an acute problem on the horizon with 13th Gen — it is more of a slow burn. We do expect an elevated failure rate on 14th Gen while Intel finishes finding a root cause and issuing a microcode update. While the number of failures we are experiencing is definitely higher than our historical average, it is difficult to classify 5-7 failures a month in the field as a huge issue, and it is definitely a lower rate of failure than we are hearing about from others in the industry. The recent spike in 14th Gen failure rates stands out mostly because how incredibly low historical CPU failure rates tend to be.

In the majority of cases, we are staying the course for now. Various BIOS updates have been launched by motherboard manufacturers to provide more conservative power settings, but in our opinion, they don’t quite hit the mark. They are either too conservative in some places (leading to unacceptable loss in performance) or they are not conservative enough. We trust our internally developed settings more. We also are concerned with the rise in failure rate, but it is not at a level of severity that changes our CPU recommendations for our customer workflows.