Need some help convincing an "amateur" overclocker that degredation is not happening on his brand new 13900K

[Storm-Chaser]

Can someone help me explain to this guy what the deal is here? He thinks because he overclocked ALL of THREE cores to 6.1GHz @ 1.45v that after a BSOD he had to pump more voltage to the CPU to get it to be stable, therefore in his mind, degradation is the only reasonable cause. I told him that his first OC was probably to blame, and then he said it happened before this as well... and I told him it was most likely BOTH of his OCs were wrong and unstable and he was just finding the limits of the CPU and was miss interpreting the facts. But for some reason he is'nt seeing this clearly. Any documentation or advice here would be appreciated so the guy isn't going around spreading miss-information about the so called "fragility" of Intel 13th gen CPUs.

 

For example, what is your take on this chart? 

[ENTERPRISE]

Going from past and current Overclocking experiences, CPU degradation happens over a LONG period of time. The only time you will quickly damage the CPU is if you push an insane voltage through it, and I mean insane in order to murder it instantly/quickly. You can get degradation (like any hardware) if you run a CPU over its recommended V-core/Other voltage specs, but this happen over a very long period of time.

 

No way would CPU degradation be achieved through your friends scenario. The boot issues is due to the wrong OC settings from either CPU or Memory.  This is the silicon lottery, you can get anything to boot once on a dodgy voltage if you are lucky, but may never boot again at the voltage, that is just luck of the draw and poor OC settings, not a damaged CPU. The 13th gen is not any different from any other CPU so far as fragility. You have to treat it a little differently so far as Overclocking it successfully, but that is it. It will not die just looking at it haha.

[pio]

I can't speak about MODERN Intel, but my experience with Sandy, Ivy, and Haswell tells me that its easier than we're led to believe to degrade a chip.  HOWEVER......my chips have always tended to degrade on the IMC moreso than a core overclock.  My 2600k will still work at 4.5GHz, 1.50v (it was a REALLY bad chip) for example, but it refuses to run DDR3-1866 anymore.

 

Heat is the killer of our parts, not voltage.  Yes, voltage CAN kill, but the majority of overclockers will never put a killer amount of voltage through their kit anyway.  If he's keeping it cool enough, he didn't hurt anything.  Especially for just 2 test overclocks, no the chip is fine and like new.  But if he's soooo sure, I'll buy his "dead" CPU for half off...... 

[bonami2]

11 hours ago, pioneerisloud said:

I can't speak about MODERN Intel, but my experience with Sandy, Ivy, and Haswell tells me that its easier than we're led to believe to degrade a chip.  HOWEVER......my chips have always tended to degrade on the IMC moreso than a core overclock.  My 2600k will still work at 4.5GHz, 1.50v (it was a REALLY bad chip) for example, but it refuses to run DDR3-1866 anymore.

 

Heat is the killer of our parts, not voltage.  Yes, voltage CAN kill, but the majority of overclockers will never put a killer amount of voltage through their kit anyway.  If he's keeping it cool enough, he didn't hurt anything.  Especially for just 2 test overclocks, no the chip is fine and like new.  But if he's soooo sure, I'll buy his "dead" CPU for half off...... 

Exactly as Pio says. Lot of people don't realise the IMC failing or even stability issue from the start.

 

As i said to you about my cl14 4000mhz ram being stable in all stress test. But failing in less 30 second if i run any cpu stress test at the same time as i run the ram test.

12900ks is a really good example of high voltage. 

[Storm-Chaser]

12 hours ago, pioneerisloud said:

I can't speak about MODERN Intel, but my experience with Sandy, Ivy, and Haswell tells me that its easier than we're led to believe to degrade a chip.  HOWEVER......my chips have always tended to degrade on the IMC moreso than a core overclock.  My 2600k will still work at 4.5GHz, 1.50v (it was a REALLY bad chip) for example, but it refuses to run DDR3-1866 anymore.

 

Heat is the killer of our parts, not voltage.  Yes, voltage CAN kill, but the majority of overclockers will never put a killer amount of voltage through their kit anyway.  If he's keeping it cool enough, he didn't hurt anything.  Especially for just 2 test overclocks, no the chip is fine and like new.  But if he's soooo sure, I'll buy his "dead" CPU for half off...... 

Obviously, there are other factors including current and temperature in addition to voltage that factor in, and generally speaking if two are under control he should be alright. And they were fine, so he's just paranoid or something...

 

Interested to know what makes you think Sandy, Ivy and haswell degrade easier than other chips?

 

 

[bonami2]

42 minutes ago, Storm-Chaser said:

Obviously, there are other factors including current and temperature in addition to voltage that factor in, and generally speaking if two are under control he should be alright. And they were fine, so he's just paranoid or something...

 

Interested to know what makes you think Sandy, Ivy and haswell degrade easier than other chips?

 

 

I remember reading somewhere that Haswell chip died suddently. Not too sure if it was true or not.

[pio]

1 hour ago, Storm-Chaser said:

Obviously, there are other factors including current and temperature in addition to voltage that factor in, and generally speaking if two are under control he should be alright. And they were fine, so he's just paranoid or something...

 

Interested to know what makes you think Sandy, Ivy and haswell degrade easier than other chips?

 

 

Because I've personally degraded those chips, but I have yet to degrade an AMD chip.   I've killed RAM sticks on an AMD setup, but not the IMC yet anyway *knocks on wood