In Light of Stability Concerns, Intel Issues Request to Motherboards Vendors to Actually Follow Stock Power Settings
Across the internet, from online forums such as Reddit to various other tech media outlets, there's a lot of furor around reports of Intel's top-end 14th and 13th Gen K series of processors running into stability issues. As Intel's flagship chips, these parts come aggressively clocked in order to maximize performance through various implementations of boost and turbo, leaving them running close to their limits out of the box. But with high-end motherboards further goosing these chips to wring even more performance out of them, it would seem that the Intel desktop ecosystem has finally reached a tipping point where all of these efforts to boost performance have pushed these flagship chips to unstable conditions. To that end, Intel has released new gudiance to its consumer motherboard partners, strongly encouraging them to actually implment Intel's stock power settings, and to use those baseline settings as their out-of-the-box default.
While the underlying conditions are nothing new – we've published stories time and time again about motherboard features such as multi-core enhancement (MCE) and raised power consumption limits that seek to maximize how hard and how long systems are able to turbo boost – the issue has finally come to a head in the last couple of months thanks to accumulating reports of system instability with Intel's 13900K and 14900K processors. These instability problems are eventually solved by either tamping down on these motherboard performance-boosting features – bringing the chips back down to something closer to Intel's official operating parameters – or downclocking the chips entirely.
Intel first began publicly investigating the matter on the 27th of February, when Intel's Communications Manager, Thomas Hannaford, posted a thread on Intel's Community Product Support Forms titled "Regarding Reports of 13th/14th Gen Unlocked Desktop Users Experiencing Stability Issues". In this thread, Thomas Hannaford said, "Intel is aware of reports regarding Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen unlocked desktop processors experiencing issues with certain workloads. We're engaged with our partners and are conducting analysis of the reported issues. If you are experiencing these issues, please reach out to Intel Customer Support for further assistance in the interim."
Since that post went up, additional reports have been circulating about instability issues across various online forums and message boards. The underlying culprit has been theorized to be motherboards implementing an array of strategies to improve chip performance, including aggressive multi-core enhancement settings, "unlimited" PL2 turbo, and reduced load line calibration settings. At no point do any of these settings overclock a CPU and push it to a higher clockspeed than it's validated for, but these settings do everything possible to keep a chip at the highest clockspeed possible at all times – and in the process seem to have gone a step too far.
From "Why Intel Processors Draw More Power Than Expected: TDP and Turbo Explained"
We wrote a piece initially covering multi-core enhancement in 2012, detailing how motherboard manufacturers try to stay competitive with each other and leverage any headroom within the silicon to output the highest performance levels. And more recently, we've talked about how desktop systems with Intel chips are now regularly exceeding their rated TDPs – sometimes by extreme amounts – as motherboard vendors continue to push them to run as hard as possible for the best performance.
But things have changed since 2012. At the time, this wasn't so much of an issue, as overclocking was actually very favorable to increasing the performance of processors. But in 2024 with chips such as the Intel Core i9-14900K, we have CPUs shipping with a maximum turbo clock speed of 6.0 GHz and a peak power consumption of over 400 Watts, figures that were only a pipe dream a decade ago.
Jumping to the present time, over the weekend Intel released a statement about the matter to its partners, outlining their investigation so far and their sug... CPUs
Posted by The Techinical Support
The Endorfy Fortis 5 Dual Fan CPU Cooler Review: Towering Value Standard CPU coolers, while adequate for managing basic thermal loads, often fall short in terms of noise reduction and superior cooling efficiency. This limitation drives advanced users and system builders to seek aftermarket solutions tailored to their specific needs. The high-end aftermarket cooler market is highly competitive, with manufacturers striving to offer products with exceptional performance.
Endorfy, previously known as SilentiumPC, is a Polish manufacturer that has undergone a significant transformation to expand its presence in global markets. The brand is known for delivering high-performance cooling solutions with a strong focus on balancing efficiency and affordability. By rebranding as Endorfy, the company aims to enter premium market segments while continuing to offer reliable, high-quality cooling products.
SilentiumPC became very popular in the value/mainstream segments of the PC market with their products, the spearhead of which probably was the Fera 5 cooler that we reviewed a little over two years ago and had a remarkable value for money. Today’s review places Endorfy’s largest CPU cooler, the Fortis 5 Dual Fan, on our laboratory test bench. The Fortis 5 is the largest CPU air cooler the company currently offers and is significantly more expensive than the Fera 5, yet it still is a single-tower cooler that strives to strike a balance between value, compatibility, and performance.
Cases/Cooling/PSUs
Kioxia Details BiCS 8 NAND at FMS 2024: 218 Layers With Superior Scaling 
Kioxia's booth at FMS 2024 was a busy one with multiple technology demonstrations keeping visitors occupied. A walk-through of the BiCS 8 manufacturing process was the first to grab my attention. Kioxia and Western Digital announced the sampling of BiCS 8 in March 2023. We had touched briefly upon its CMOS Bonded Array (CBA) scheme in our coverage of Kioxial's 2Tb QLC NAND device and coverage of Western Digital's 128 TB QLC enterprise SSD proof-of-concept demonstration. At Kioxia's booth, we got more insights.
Traditionally, fabrication of flash chips involved placement of the associate logic circuitry (CMOS process) around the periphery of the flash array. The process then moved on to putting the CMOS under the cell array, but the wafer development process was serialized with the CMOS logic getting fabricated first followed by the cell array on top. However, this has some challenges because the cell array requires a high-temperature processing step to ensure higher reliability that can be detrimental to the health of the CMOS logic. Thanks to recent advancements in wafer bonding techniques, the new CBA process allows the CMOS wafer and cell array wafer to be processed independently in parallel and then pieced together, as shown in the models above.
The BiCS 8 3D NAND incorporates 218 layers, compared to 112 layers in BiCS 5 and 162 layers in BiCS 6. The company decided to skip over BiCS 7 (or, rather, it was probably a short-lived generation meant as an internal test vehicle). The generation retains the four-plane charge trap structure of BiCS 6. In its TLC avatar, it is available as a 1 Tbit device. The QLC version is available in two capacities - 1 Tbit and 2 Tbit.
Kioxia also noted that while the number of layers (218) doesn't compare favorably with the latest layer counts from the competition, its lateral scaling / cell shrinkage has enabled it to be competitive in terms of bit density as well as operating speeds (3200 MT/s). For reference, the latest shipping NAND from Micron - the G9 - has 276 layers with a bit density in TLC mode of 21 Gbit/mm2, and operates at up to 3600 MT/s. However, its 232L NAND operates only up to 2400 MT/s and has a bit density of 14.6 Gbit/mm2.
It must be noted that the CBA hybrid bonding process has advantages over the current processes used by other vendors - including Micron's CMOS under array (CuA) and SK hynix's 4D PUC (periphery-under-chip) developed in the late 2010s. It is expected that other NAND vendors will also move eventually to some variant of the hybrid bonding scheme used by Kioxia.
Storage
Intel Issues Official Statement Regarding 14th and 13th Gen Instability, Recommends Intel Default Settings 
Further to our last piece which we detailed Intel's issue to motherboard vendors to follow with stock power settings for Intel's 14th and 13th Gen Core series processors, Intel has now issued a follow-up statement to this. Over the last week or so, motherboard vendors quickly released firmware updates with a new profile called 'Intel Baseline', which motherboard vendors assumed would address the instability issues.
As it turns out, Intel doesn't seem to accept this as technically, these Intel Baseline profiles are not to be confused with Intel's default specifications. This means that Intel's Baseline profiles seemingly give the impression that they are operating at default settings, hence the terminology 'baseline' used, but this still opens motherboard vendors to use their interpretations of MCE or Multi-Core Enhancement.
To clarify things for consumers, Intel has sent us the following statement:
Several motherboard manufacturers have released BIOS profiles labeled ‘Intel Baseline Profile’. However, these BIOS profiles are not the same as the 'Intel Default Settings' recommendations that Intel has recently shared with its partners regarding the instability issues reported on 13th and 14th gen K SKU processors.
These ‘Intel Baseline Profile’ BIOS settings appear to be based on power delivery guidance previously provided by Intel to manufacturers describing the various power delivery options for 13th and 14th Generation K SKU processors based on motherboard capabilities.
Intel is not recommending motherboard manufacturers to use ‘baseline’ power delivery settings on boards capable of higher values.
Intel’s recommended ‘Intel Default Settings’ are a combination of thermal and power delivery features along with a selection of possible power delivery profiles based on motherboard capabilities.
Intel recommends customers to implement the highest power delivery profile compatible with each individual motherboard design as noted in the table below:
Click to Enlarge Intel's Default Settings
What Intel's statement is effectively saying to consumers, is that users shouldn't be using the Baseline Power Delivery profiles which are offered by motherboard vendors through a plethora of firmware updates. Instead, Intel is recommending users opt for Intel Default Settings, which follows what the specific processor is rated for by Intel out of the box to achieve the clock speeds advertised, without users having to worry about firmware 'over' optimization which can cause instability as there have been many reports of happening.
Not only this, but the Intel Default settings offer a combination of thermal specifications and power capabilities, including voltage and frequency curve settings that apply to the capability of the motherboard used, and the power delivery equipped on the motherboard. At least for the most part, Intel is recommending users with 14th and 13th-Gen Core series K, KF, and KS SKUs that they do not recommend users opt in using the Baseline profiles offered by motherboard vendors.
Digesting the contrast between the two statements, the key differential is that Intel's priority is reducing the current going through the processor, which for both the 14th and 13th Gen Core series processors is a maximum of 400 A, even when using the Extreme profile. We know those motherboard vendors on their Z790 and Z690 motherboards opt for an unrestricted power profile, which is essentially 'unlimited' power and current to maximize performance at the cost of power consumption and heat, which does exacerbate problems and can lead to frequent bouts of instability, especially on high-intensity workloads.
Another variable Intel is recommending is that the AC Load Line must match the design target of the processor, with a maximum value of 1.1 mOhm, and that the DC Load Line must be ... CPUs
Several motherboard manufacturers have released BIOS profiles labeled ‘Intel Baseline Profile’. However, these BIOS profiles are not the same as the 'Intel Default Settings' recommendations that Intel has recently shared with its partners regarding the instability issues reported on 13th and 14th gen K SKU processors.
These ‘Intel Baseline Profile’ BIOS settings appear to be based on power delivery guidance previously provided by Intel to manufacturers describing the various power delivery options for 13th and 14th Generation K SKU processors based on motherboard capabilities.
Intel is not recommending motherboard manufacturers to use ‘baseline’ power delivery settings on boards capable of higher values.
Intel’s recommended ‘Intel Default Settings’ are a combination of thermal and power delivery features along with a selection of possible power delivery profiles based on motherboard capabilities.
Intel recommends customers to implement the highest power delivery profile compatible with each individual motherboard design as noted in the table below:
Click to Enlarge Intel's Default Settings
The Endorfy Fortis 5 Dual Fan CPU Cooler Review: Towering Value Standard CPU coolers, while adequate for managing basic thermal loads, often fall short in terms of noise reduction and superior cooling efficiency. This limitation drives advanced users and system builders to seek aftermarket solutions tailored to their specific needs. The high-end aftermarket cooler market is highly competitive, with manufacturers striving to offer products with exceptional performance.
Endorfy, previously known as SilentiumPC, is a Polish manufacturer that has undergone a significant transformation to expand its presence in global markets. The brand is known for delivering high-performance cooling solutions with a strong focus on balancing efficiency and affordability. By rebranding as Endorfy, the company aims to enter premium market segments while continuing to offer reliable, high-quality cooling products.
SilentiumPC became very popular in the value/mainstream segments of the PC market with their products, the spearhead of which probably was the Fera 5 cooler that we reviewed a little over two years ago and had a remarkable value for money. Today’s review places Endorfy’s largest CPU cooler, the Fortis 5 Dual Fan, on our laboratory test bench. The Fortis 5 is the largest CPU air cooler the company currently offers and is significantly more expensive than the Fera 5, yet it still is a single-tower cooler that strives to strike a balance between value, compatibility, and performance.
Cases/Cooling/PSUs
Kioxia Details BiCS 8 NAND at FMS 2024: 218 Layers With Superior Scaling
Kioxia's booth at FMS 2024 was a busy one with multiple technology demonstrations keeping visitors occupied. A walk-through of the BiCS 8 manufacturing process was the first to grab my attention. Kioxia and Western Digital announced the sampling of BiCS 8 in March 2023. We had touched briefly upon its CMOS Bonded Array (CBA) scheme in our coverage of Kioxial's 2Tb QLC NAND device and coverage of Western Digital's 128 TB QLC enterprise SSD proof-of-concept demonstration. At Kioxia's booth, we got more insights.
Traditionally, fabrication of flash chips involved placement of the associate logic circuitry (CMOS process) around the periphery of the flash array. The process then moved on to putting the CMOS under the cell array, but the wafer development process was serialized with the CMOS logic getting fabricated first followed by the cell array on top. However, this has some challenges because the cell array requires a high-temperature processing step to ensure higher reliability that can be detrimental to the health of the CMOS logic. Thanks to recent advancements in wafer bonding techniques, the new CBA process allows the CMOS wafer and cell array wafer to be processed independently in parallel and then pieced together, as shown in the models above.
The BiCS 8 3D NAND incorporates 218 layers, compared to 112 layers in BiCS 5 and 162 layers in BiCS 6. The company decided to skip over BiCS 7 (or, rather, it was probably a short-lived generation meant as an internal test vehicle). The generation retains the four-plane charge trap structure of BiCS 6. In its TLC avatar, it is available as a 1 Tbit device. The QLC version is available in two capacities - 1 Tbit and 2 Tbit.
Kioxia also noted that while the number of layers (218) doesn't compare favorably with the latest layer counts from the competition, its lateral scaling / cell shrinkage has enabled it to be competitive in terms of bit density as well as operating speeds (3200 MT/s). For reference, the latest shipping NAND from Micron - the G9 - has 276 layers with a bit density in TLC mode of 21 Gbit/mm2, and operates at up to 3600 MT/s. However, its 232L NAND operates only up to 2400 MT/s and has a bit density of 14.6 Gbit/mm2.
It must be noted that the CBA hybrid bonding process has advantages over the current processes used by other vendors - including Micron's CMOS under array (CuA) and SK hynix's 4D PUC (periphery-under-chip) developed in the late 2010s. It is expected that other NAND vendors will also move eventually to some variant of the hybrid bonding scheme used by Kioxia.
Storage
Intel Issues Official Statement Regarding 14th and 13th Gen Instability, Recommends Intel Default Settings
Further to our last piece which we detailed Intel's issue to motherboard vendors to follow with stock power settings for Intel's 14th and 13th Gen Core series processors, Intel has now issued a follow-up statement to this. Over the last week or so, motherboard vendors quickly released firmware updates with a new profile called 'Intel Baseline', which motherboard vendors assumed would address the instability issues.
As it turns out, Intel doesn't seem to accept this as technically, these Intel Baseline profiles are not to be confused with Intel's default specifications. This means that Intel's Baseline profiles seemingly give the impression that they are operating at default settings, hence the terminology 'baseline' used, but this still opens motherboard vendors to use their interpretations of MCE or Multi-Core Enhancement.
To clarify things for consumers, Intel has sent us the following statement:
Several motherboard manufacturers have released BIOS profiles labeled ‘Intel Baseline Profile’. However, these BIOS profiles are not the same as the 'Intel Default Settings' recommendations that Intel has recently shared with its partners regarding the instability issues reported on 13th and 14th gen K SKU processors.
These ‘Intel Baseline Profile’ BIOS settings appear to be based on power delivery guidance previously provided by Intel to manufacturers describing the various power delivery options for 13th and 14th Generation K SKU processors based on motherboard capabilities.
Intel is not recommending motherboard manufacturers to use ‘baseline’ power delivery settings on boards capable of higher values.
Intel’s recommended ‘Intel Default Settings’ are a combination of thermal and power delivery features along with a selection of possible power delivery profiles based on motherboard capabilities.
Intel recommends customers to implement the highest power delivery profile compatible with each individual motherboard design as noted in the table below:
Click to Enlarge Intel's Default Settings
What Intel's statement is effectively saying to consumers, is that users shouldn't be using the Baseline Power Delivery profiles which are offered by motherboard vendors through a plethora of firmware updates. Instead, Intel is recommending users opt for Intel Default Settings, which follows what the specific processor is rated for by Intel out of the box to achieve the clock speeds advertised, without users having to worry about firmware 'over' optimization which can cause instability as there have been many reports of happening.
Not only this, but the Intel Default settings offer a combination of thermal specifications and power capabilities, including voltage and frequency curve settings that apply to the capability of the motherboard used, and the power delivery equipped on the motherboard. At least for the most part, Intel is recommending users with 14th and 13th-Gen Core series K, KF, and KS SKUs that they do not recommend users opt in using the Baseline profiles offered by motherboard vendors.
Digesting the contrast between the two statements, the key differential is that Intel's priority is reducing the current going through the processor, which for both the 14th and 13th Gen Core series processors is a maximum of 400 A, even when using the Extreme profile. We know those motherboard vendors on their Z790 and Z690 motherboards opt for an unrestricted power profile, which is essentially 'unlimited' power and current to maximize performance at the cost of power consumption and heat, which does exacerbate problems and can lead to frequent bouts of instability, especially on high-intensity workloads.
Another variable Intel is recommending is that the AC Load Line must match the design target of the processor, with a maximum value of 1.1 mOhm, and that the DC Load Line must be ... CPUs
Several motherboard manufacturers have released BIOS profiles labeled ‘Intel Baseline Profile’. However, these BIOS profiles are not the same as the 'Intel Default Settings' recommendations that Intel has recently shared with its partners regarding the instability issues reported on 13th and 14th gen K SKU processors.
These ‘Intel Baseline Profile’ BIOS settings appear to be based on power delivery guidance previously provided by Intel to manufacturers describing the various power delivery options for 13th and 14th Generation K SKU processors based on motherboard capabilities.
Intel is not recommending motherboard manufacturers to use ‘baseline’ power delivery settings on boards capable of higher values.
Intel’s recommended ‘Intel Default Settings’ are a combination of thermal and power delivery features along with a selection of possible power delivery profiles based on motherboard capabilities.
Intel recommends customers to implement the highest power delivery profile compatible with each individual motherboard design as noted in the table below:
Click to Enlarge Intel's Default Settings
 and raised power consumption limits that seek to maximize how hard and how long systems are able to turbo boost – the issue has finally come to a head in the last couple of months thanks to accumulating reports of system instability with Intel's 13900K and 14900K processors. These instability problems are eventually solved by either tamping down on these motherboard performance-boosting features – bringing the chips back down to something closer to Intel's official operating parameters – or downclocking the chips entirely.</p>
<p>Intel first began publicly investigating the matter on the 27th of February, when Intel's Communications Manager, Thomas Hannaford, posted a thread on Intel's Community Product Support Forms titled "Regarding Reports of 13th/14th Gen Unlocked Desktop Users Experiencing Stability Issues". In this thread, Thomas Hannaford said, "<em>Intel is aware of reports regarding Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen unlocked desktop processors experiencing issues with certain workloads. We're engaged with our partners and are conducting analysis of the reported issues. If you are experiencing these issues, please reach out to Intel Customer Support for further assistance in the interim.</em>"</p>
<p>Since that post went up, additional reports have been circulating about instability issues across various online forums and message boards. The underlying culprit has been theorized to be motherboards implementing an array of strategies to improve chip performance, including aggressive multi-core enhancement settings, "unlimited" PL2 turbo, and reduced load line calibration settings. At no point do any of these settings overclock a CPU and push it to a higher clockspeed than it's validated for, but these settings do everything possible to keep a chip at the highest clockspeed possible at all times – and in the process seem to have gone a step too far.</p>
<p align="center"><a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/21374/intel-issues-request-to-mobo-vendors-to-use-stock-power-settings-for-stability"><img alt="" src="https://images.anandtech.com/doci/21374/95WTau_575px.png" /></a><br />
<small><em>From "<a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/13544/why-intel-processors-draw-more-power-than-expected-tdp-turbo">Why Intel Processors Draw More Power Than Expected: TDP and Turbo Explained</a>"</em></small></p>
<p><a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/6214/multicore-enhancement-the-debate-about-free-mhz">We wrote a piece initially covering multi-core enhancement in 2012</a>, detailing how motherboard manufacturers try to stay competitive with each other and leverage any headroom within the silicon to output the highest performance levels. And more recently, <a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/13544/why-intel-processors-draw-more-power-than-expected-tdp-turbo">we've talked about how desktop systems with Intel chips are now regularly exceeding their rated TDPs</a> – sometimes by extreme amounts – as motherboard vendors continue to push them to run as hard as possible for the best performance.</p>
<p>But things have changed since 2012. At the time, this wasn't so much of an issue, as overclocking was actually very favorable to increasing the performance of processors. But in 2024 with chips such as the Intel Core i9-14900K, we have CPUs shipping with a maximum turbo clock speed of 6.0 GHz and a peak power consumption of over <a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/21084/intel-core-i9-14900k-core-i7-14700k-and-core-i5-14600k-review-raptor-lake-refreshed/6">400 Watts</a>, figures that were only a pipe dream a decade ago.</p>
<p>Jumping to the present time, over the weekend Intel released a statement about the matter to its partners, outlining their investigation so far and their sug... CPUs){kind=link}
 and raised power consumption limits that seek to maximize how hard and how long systems are able to turbo boost – the issue has finally come to a head in the last couple of months thanks to accumulating reports of system instability with Intel's 13900K and 14900K processors. These instability problems are eventually solved by either tamping down on these motherboard performance-boosting features – bringing the chips back down to something closer to Intel's official operating parameters – or downclocking the chips entirely.</p>
<p>Intel first began publicly investigating the matter on the 27th of February, when Intel's Communications Manager, Thomas Hannaford, posted a thread on Intel's Community Product Support Forms titled "Regarding Reports of 13th/14th Gen Unlocked Desktop Users Experiencing Stability Issues". In this thread, Thomas Hannaford said, "<em>Intel is aware of reports regarding Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen unlocked desktop processors experiencing issues with certain workloads. We're engaged with our partners and are conducting analysis of the reported issues. If you are experiencing these issues, please reach out to Intel Customer Support for further assistance in the interim.</em>"</p>
<p>Since that post went up, additional reports have been circulating about instability issues across various online forums and message boards. The underlying culprit has been theorized to be motherboards implementing an array of strategies to improve chip performance, including aggressive multi-core enhancement settings, "unlimited" PL2 turbo, and reduced load line calibration settings. At no point do any of these settings overclock a CPU and push it to a higher clockspeed than it's validated for, but these settings do everything possible to keep a chip at the highest clockspeed possible at all times – and in the process seem to have gone a step too far.</p>
<p align="center"><a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/21374/intel-issues-request-to-mobo-vendors-to-use-stock-power-settings-for-stability"><img alt="" src="https://images.anandtech.com/doci/21374/95WTau_575px.png" /></a><br />
<small><em>From "<a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/13544/why-intel-processors-draw-more-power-than-expected-tdp-turbo">Why Intel Processors Draw More Power Than Expected: TDP and Turbo Explained</a>"</em></small></p>
<p><a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/6214/multicore-enhancement-the-debate-about-free-mhz">We wrote a piece initially covering multi-core enhancement in 2012</a>, detailing how motherboard manufacturers try to stay competitive with each other and leverage any headroom within the silicon to output the highest performance levels. And more recently, <a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/13544/why-intel-processors-draw-more-power-than-expected-tdp-turbo">we've talked about how desktop systems with Intel chips are now regularly exceeding their rated TDPs</a> – sometimes by extreme amounts – as motherboard vendors continue to push them to run as hard as possible for the best performance.</p>
<p>But things have changed since 2012. At the time, this wasn't so much of an issue, as overclocking was actually very favorable to increasing the performance of processors. But in 2024 with chips such as the Intel Core i9-14900K, we have CPUs shipping with a maximum turbo clock speed of 6.0 GHz and a peak power consumption of over <a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/21084/intel-core-i9-14900k-core-i7-14700k-and-core-i5-14600k-review-raptor-lake-refreshed/6">400 Watts</a>, figures that were only a pipe dream a decade ago.</p>
<p>Jumping to the present time, over the weekend Intel released a statement about the matter to its partners, outlining their investigation so far and their sug... CPUs){kind=link}
 and raised power consumption limits that seek to maximize how hard and how long systems are able to turbo boost – the issue has finally come to a head in the last couple of months thanks to accumulating reports of system instability with Intel's 13900K and 14900K processors. These instability problems are eventually solved by either tamping down on these motherboard performance-boosting features – bringing the chips back down to something closer to Intel's official operating parameters – or downclocking the chips entirely.</p>
<p>Intel first began publicly investigating the matter on the 27th of February, when Intel's Communications Manager, Thomas Hannaford, posted a thread on Intel's Community Product Support Forms titled "Regarding Reports of 13th/14th Gen Unlocked Desktop Users Experiencing Stability Issues". In this thread, Thomas Hannaford said, "<em>Intel is aware of reports regarding Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen unlocked desktop processors experiencing issues with certain workloads. We're engaged with our partners and are conducting analysis of the reported issues. If you are experiencing these issues, please reach out to Intel Customer Support for further assistance in the interim.</em>"</p>
<p>Since that post went up, additional reports have been circulating about instability issues across various online forums and message boards. The underlying culprit has been theorized to be motherboards implementing an array of strategies to improve chip performance, including aggressive multi-core enhancement settings, "unlimited" PL2 turbo, and reduced load line calibration settings. At no point do any of these settings overclock a CPU and push it to a higher clockspeed than it's validated for, but these settings do everything possible to keep a chip at the highest clockspeed possible at all times – and in the process seem to have gone a step too far.</p>
<p align="center"><a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/21374/intel-issues-request-to-mobo-vendors-to-use-stock-power-settings-for-stability"><img alt="" src="https://images.anandtech.com/doci/21374/95WTau_575px.png" /></a><br />
<small><em>From "<a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/13544/why-intel-processors-draw-more-power-than-expected-tdp-turbo">Why Intel Processors Draw More Power Than Expected: TDP and Turbo Explained</a>"</em></small></p>
<p><a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/6214/multicore-enhancement-the-debate-about-free-mhz">We wrote a piece initially covering multi-core enhancement in 2012</a>, detailing how motherboard manufacturers try to stay competitive with each other and leverage any headroom within the silicon to output the highest performance levels. And more recently, <a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/13544/why-intel-processors-draw-more-power-than-expected-tdp-turbo">we've talked about how desktop systems with Intel chips are now regularly exceeding their rated TDPs</a> – sometimes by extreme amounts – as motherboard vendors continue to push them to run as hard as possible for the best performance.</p>
<p>But things have changed since 2012. At the time, this wasn't so much of an issue, as overclocking was actually very favorable to increasing the performance of processors. But in 2024 with chips such as the Intel Core i9-14900K, we have CPUs shipping with a maximum turbo clock speed of 6.0 GHz and a peak power consumption of over <a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/21084/intel-core-i9-14900k-core-i7-14700k-and-core-i5-14600k-review-raptor-lake-refreshed/6">400 Watts</a>, figures that were only a pipe dream a decade ago.</p>
<p>Jumping to the present time, over the weekend Intel released a statement about the matter to its partners, outlining their investigation so far and their sug... CPUs | https://compbuddey.blogspot.com/2024/04/in-light-of-stability-concerns-intel.html){kind=link}
 and raised power consumption limits that seek to maximize how hard and how long systems are able to turbo boost – the issue has finally come to a head in the last couple of months thanks to accumulating reports of system instability with Intel's 13900K and 14900K processors. These instability problems are eventually solved by either tamping down on these motherboard performance-boosting features – bringing the chips back down to something closer to Intel's official operating parameters – or downclocking the chips entirely.</p>
<p>Intel first began publicly investigating the matter on the 27th of February, when Intel's Communications Manager, Thomas Hannaford, posted a thread on Intel's Community Product Support Forms titled "Regarding Reports of 13th/14th Gen Unlocked Desktop Users Experiencing Stability Issues". In this thread, Thomas Hannaford said, "<em>Intel is aware of reports regarding Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen unlocked desktop processors experiencing issues with certain workloads. We're engaged with our partners and are conducting analysis of the reported issues. If you are experiencing these issues, please reach out to Intel Customer Support for further assistance in the interim.</em>"</p>
<p>Since that post went up, additional reports have been circulating about instability issues across various online forums and message boards. The underlying culprit has been theorized to be motherboards implementing an array of strategies to improve chip performance, including aggressive multi-core enhancement settings, "unlimited" PL2 turbo, and reduced load line calibration settings. At no point do any of these settings overclock a CPU and push it to a higher clockspeed than it's validated for, but these settings do everything possible to keep a chip at the highest clockspeed possible at all times – and in the process seem to have gone a step too far.</p>
<p align="center"><a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/21374/intel-issues-request-to-mobo-vendors-to-use-stock-power-settings-for-stability"><img alt="" src="https://images.anandtech.com/doci/21374/95WTau_575px.png" /></a><br />
<small><em>From "<a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/13544/why-intel-processors-draw-more-power-than-expected-tdp-turbo">Why Intel Processors Draw More Power Than Expected: TDP and Turbo Explained</a>"</em></small></p>
<p><a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/6214/multicore-enhancement-the-debate-about-free-mhz">We wrote a piece initially covering multi-core enhancement in 2012</a>, detailing how motherboard manufacturers try to stay competitive with each other and leverage any headroom within the silicon to output the highest performance levels. And more recently, <a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/13544/why-intel-processors-draw-more-power-than-expected-tdp-turbo">we've talked about how desktop systems with Intel chips are now regularly exceeding their rated TDPs</a> – sometimes by extreme amounts – as motherboard vendors continue to push them to run as hard as possible for the best performance.</p>
<p>But things have changed since 2012. At the time, this wasn't so much of an issue, as overclocking was actually very favorable to increasing the performance of processors. But in 2024 with chips such as the Intel Core i9-14900K, we have CPUs shipping with a maximum turbo clock speed of 6.0 GHz and a peak power consumption of over <a href="https://www.anandtech.com/show/21084/intel-core-i9-14900k-core-i7-14700k-and-core-i5-14600k-review-raptor-lake-refreshed/6">400 Watts</a>, figures that were only a pipe dream a decade ago.</p>
<p>Jumping to the present time, over the weekend Intel released a statement about the matter to its partners, outlining their investigation so far and their sug... CPUs&body=https://compbuddey.blogspot.com/2024/04/in-light-of-stability-concerns-intel.html){kind=link}
SK hynix Platinum P51 Gen5 SSD with 238L NAND Spotted at GTC 
SK hynix is set to unveil their first Gen5 consumer NVMe SSD lineup shortly, based on the products at display in their GTC 2024 booth. The Platinum P51 M.2 2280 NVMe SSD will take over flagship duties from the Platinum P41 that has been serving the market for more than a year.
Similar to the Gold P31 and the Platinum P41, the Platinum P51 also uses an in-house SSD controller. The key updates are the move to PCIe Gen5 and the use of SK hynix's 238L TLC NAND. Other details are scarce, and we have reached out for additional information.
| SK hynix Platinum P51 Gen5 NVMe SSD Specifications | ||||
| Capacity | 500 GB | 1 TB | 2 TB | |
| Controller | SK hynix In-House (Alistar) | |||
| NAND Flash | SK hynix 238L 3D TLC NAND at ?? MT/s ('4D' with CMOS circuitry under the NAND as per SK hynix marketing) | |||
| Form-Factor, Interface | M.2-2280, PCIe 5.0 x4, NVMe 2.0 | |||
| Sequential Read | 13500 MB/s | |||
| Sequential Write | 11500 MB/s | |||
| Random Read IOPS | TBD | |||
| Random Write IOPS | TBD | |||
| SLC Caching | Yes | |||
| TCG Opal Encryption | TBD | |||
| Warranty | TBD | |||
| Write Endurance | TBD | TBD | TBD | |
Only the peak sequential access numbers were available at the GTC booth, indicating that the drive's firmware is still undergoing tweaks. It is also unclear how these numbers are going to vary based on capacity. Availability and pricing are also not public yet.
This is a significant launch for the Gen5 consumer SSD market, where the number of available options are quite limited. The Phison E26 controller and Micron's B58R NAND combination is already in its second generation (with the NAND operating at 2400 MT/s in the newest avatar), but other vertically integrated vendors such as Samsung, Western Digital / Kioxia, and SK hynix (till now) are focusing more on the Gen4 market which has much higher adoption.
We will update the piece with additional information once the specifications are officially available.
Storage
Lorem Ipsum is simply dummy text of the printing and typesetting industry. Lorem Ipsum has been the industry's.
The Endorfy Fortis 5 Dual Fan CPU Cooler Review: Towering Value Standard CPU coolers, while adequate for managing basic thermal loads, often fall short in terms of noise reduction and superior cooling efficiency. This limitation drives advanced users and system builders to seek aftermarket solutions tailored to their specific needs. The high-end aftermarket cooler market is highly competitive, with manufacturers striving to offer products with exceptional performance.
Endorfy, previously known as SilentiumPC, is a Polish manufacturer that has undergone a significant transformation to expand its presence in global markets. The brand is known for delivering high-performance cooling solutions with a strong focus on balancing efficiency and affordability. By rebranding as Endorfy, the company aims to enter premium market segments while continuing to offer reliable, high-quality cooling products.
SilentiumPC became very popular in the value/mainstream segments of the PC market with their products, the spearhead of which probably was the Fera 5 cooler that we reviewed a little over two years ago and had a remarkable value for money. Today’s review places Endorfy’s largest CPU cooler, the Fortis 5 Dual Fan, on our laboratory test bench. The Fortis 5 is the largest CPU air cooler the company currently offers and is significantly more expensive than the Fera 5, yet it still is a single-tower cooler that strives to strike a balance between value, compatibility, and performance.
Cases/Cooling/PSUs
Kioxia Details BiCS 8 NAND at FMS 2024: 218 Layers With Superior Scaling
Kioxia's booth at FMS 2024 was a busy one with multiple technology demonstrations keeping visitors occupied. A walk-through of the BiCS 8 manufacturing process was the first to grab my attention. Kioxia and Western Digital announced the sampling of BiCS 8 in March 2023. We had touched briefly upon its CMOS Bonded Array (CBA) scheme in our coverage of Kioxial's 2Tb QLC NAND device and coverage of Western Digital's 128 TB QLC enterprise SSD proof-of-concept demonstration. At Kioxia's booth, we got more insights.
Traditionally, fabrication of flash chips involved placement of the associate logic circuitry (CMOS process) around the periphery of the flash array. The process then moved on to putting the CMOS under the cell array, but the wafer development process was serialized with the CMOS logic getting fabricated first followed by the cell array on top. However, this has some challenges because the cell array requires a high-temperature processing step to ensure higher reliability that can be detrimental to the health of the CMOS logic. Thanks to recent advancements in wafer bonding techniques, the new CBA process allows the CMOS wafer and cell array wafer to be processed independently in parallel and then pieced together, as shown in the models above.
The BiCS 8 3D NAND incorporates 218 layers, compared to 112 layers in BiCS 5 and 162 layers in BiCS 6. The company decided to skip over BiCS 7 (or, rather, it was probably a short-lived generation meant as an internal test vehicle). The generation retains the four-plane charge trap structure of BiCS 6. In its TLC avatar, it is available as a 1 Tbit device. The QLC version is available in two capacities - 1 Tbit and 2 Tbit.
Kioxia also noted that while the number of layers (218) doesn't compare favorably with the latest layer counts from the competition, its lateral scaling / cell shrinkage has enabled it to be competitive in terms of bit density as well as operating speeds (3200 MT/s). For reference, the latest shipping NAND from Micron - the G9 - has 276 layers with a bit density in TLC mode of 21 Gbit/mm2, and operates at up to 3600 MT/s. However, its 232L NAND operates only up to 2400 MT/s and has a bit density of 14.6 Gbit/mm2.
It must be noted that the CBA hybrid bonding process has advantages over the current processes used by other vendors - including Micron's CMOS under array (CuA) and SK hynix's 4D PUC (periphery-under-chip) developed in the late 2010s. It is expected that other NAND vendors will also move eventually to some variant of the hybrid bonding scheme used by Kioxia.
Storage
0 Comments