JSmith
Master Contributor
Quite a good roundup on why CPU's fail and why failure is more frequent now;
JSmith
JSmith
Anyone seeing CPU failures uptick in recent gen CPU's?
That's unfortunate as @AnastasiInTech tends to really know her subject areas quite well.everything about the video was more FUD than useful
Yes - they are more sensitive to overheat/overvoltage issues - but if used properly, and coddled as they should be, there is no reason they should not have a long life.That's unfortunate as @AnastasiInTech tends to really know her subject areas quite well.
It is quite factual to state logic gates are physically smaller in size and it makes them less durable so they can reach EOL sooner.
JSmith
As I said, everything is true. As far as that goes. You provided info that servers are seeing more failure rates. I view her site from time to time. It seemed like an effort to make someone worry about their CPU having limited life. It doesn't appear to me that it is a worry yet, but hey maybe in a few years we'll see lots of failures. I'm typing this on a home server with a Haswell CPU which is not so far from that 100,000 hrs of use she mentioned. Should I expect if I upgrade, which I actually will do soon I think, that I shouldn't expect 10 years of life? Obviously many devices aren't on 24/7, but this home server I have is and has been since it was new.That's unfortunate as @AnastasiInTech tends to really know her subject areas quite well.
It is quite factual to state logic gates are physically smaller in size and it makes them less durable so they can reach EOL sooner.
JSmith
Your CPU is an entirely different beast than Rocket Lake for the desktop (different process, package and everything). I'd have more to worry about, being the proud owner of an i7-11700.also notice the 11th gen Intels have a higher failure rate than the AMD units, but the AMD units are a smaller process. So more than just process size. Doesn't make me feel good about the 2020 11th gen I7 Macbook Pro I have though.
Very... Cool...I have never experienced a CPU gone totally dead on me. However, I've experienced multiple times were AMD cpu's have been the cause for applications failure.
Probably the best CPU I have been operating are the IBM Power CPU's, 90% load running for years and years without any problems.
Tho - our cooling system is quite impressive, we have a pipe 100 meters down into the sea giving a consistent temperature of approx 8 Celcius. The sea water is cooling our fresh water systems which is then pumped to datacenter cubes, sending cold air at the front of the servers, trapping the heat at the back.
To be fair, I think memory fails much easier than any CPU. An 8 GB DDR4 stick has about 70 billion transistors. An i9-12900K has "only" about 3 billion transistors. That is a massive difference indeed. But density-wise, they are usually not made with the smallest process: 10 nm, while the i9 is 7 nm. More impressive is the 57 billion transistors of the Apple M1 Max at 5 nm. The M2 Max will probably add another 20%. This is excluding memory. The latest 4 nm Nvidia GPUs exceed the DDR4 stick with 76 billion transistors! Talk about heat-death...By far the highest density semiconductors are memories. If density is the problem, why isn't she talking about them dying instead of CPUs?