Technology

59612 readers

2783 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

988

There is no fix for Intel’s crashing 13th and 14th Gen CPUs — any damage is permanent (www.theverge.com)

submitted 4 months ago by mox@lemmy.sdf.org to c/technology@lemmy.world

266 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 14 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

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

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

[–] w2tpmf@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

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

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

[–] w2tpmf@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

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

I was replying to this ...

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

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

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

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 0 points 4 months ago

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