Either Intel is extremely incompetent and genuinely has no idea what is causing this problem or it knows full well is doing all it can to drag this out and avoid recalls. This saga has been going on all year now this is getting ridiculous.
this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2024
75 points (98.7% liked)
Technology
34975 readers
108 users here now
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
All I can say is I would absolutely not buy an Intel processor right now and maybe not for the next few years.
It’s just not worth the hassle finding out in six months that your system is unstable and you need to change the processor to fix it, and not knowing if that new chip is any better than the one you just removed.
I'd imagine chip design is sufficiently complex that you could both be competent and not have a fucking clue what's causing this. A recall is bound to be cheaper than the impact this is going to have on customer trust. Not only are they the lower performance chips, they're buggy lower performance chips.
They have a clue...probably had a clue before they shipped. I chat up the engineers where I work and they always figure out the what, how and why somethings fucked when more than expected failures pop up on a wafer or God forbid in the customer's production units like a car or radar or medical equipment.
Ask the c suite, they'll say no clue. Ask the engineers, they'll say give me x time and I'll tell you why.
*Pats my all AMD system on its chassis.
(Its a joke, don't fanboy for corporations)
I’m just glad that there is another option.
Virtually me:
AI..
Obviously. I'm not an Artist.
Then don't do art. But that's only my two cents
How dare they not commission a piece.
Yeah. I'm not going to pay 50+ bucks, wait a few days and have direct human interaction for a bad joke on the internet
So all their products are breaking...
To be honest, I'm not sure if it would be more concerning for them to have just one fatal issue with their process, or two unrelated ones.
Indeed. This is giving me distinctly Boeing vibes.
the boeing 686(tm) series processors, new from intel.
Intel gave more detail to Tom's Hardware and they updated the article up top. This still sounds a little disingenuous to me, like they're still trying to minimize the issue with words and no action.
Gamer's Nexus has a recent video with some possible explanations.
AMD is faster, more efficient and now even less likely to crash.
Why is anybody still buying Intel?
If these are known common problems, shouldn't Intel have accounted for them in their chip design?
In comparison. Some time ago when the amd Ryzen 5600 was new, i bought one. There was a bios upgrade problem with some boards, you needed to upgrade the board, otherwise the cpu wouldn't work. To solve this issue, Amd themselve sent me a cpu to be able to do the bios update myself. I was impressed they did this for someone who bought the cheapest cpu of the new line (it was about 100€)
Are the Core Ultra mobile chips affected as well?