Nvidia advises crash-prone gamers to look to Intel for assistance

Far from am Intel fan, but if the new driver crashes and the old one doesn't then it does seem like nVidia made a change that caused the crash.

Now it's pretty much proved that Intel is unstable and those who want stable system should go for AMD. Techspot didn't even consider this possibility on their 13900K/14900K review. Despite awful power draw, they believed Intel promises.

This is problem with modern reviews: if benchmarks don't show something, it does not and can not exist.

HardReset said:

Now it's pretty much proved that Intel is unstable and those who want stable system should go for AMD. Techspot didn't even consider this possibility on their 13900K/14900K review. Despite awful power draw, they believed Intel promises.

This is problem with modern reviews: if benchmarks don't show something, it does not and can not exist.

Click to expand...

Techspot (as well as others) don't seem impartial sometimes. CPU reviews and benches clearly show Ryzen commanding the performance lead (especially in games), Yet no shortage of praise on buying Intel over and over when it's subjectively worse for performance, heat, price and power usage.

And don't even get me started on the fangirl crush for Nvidia: "We know the RX 7900 XTX is slightly faster than the RTX 4080, and it has bigger VRAM for the future while being considerably cheaper. We still think it's worth the extra £200-300 to get DLSS."

Disappointing.

themastergoose said:

Techspot (as well as others) don't seem impartial sometimes. CPU reviews and benches clearly show Ryzen commanding the performance lead (especially in games), Yet no shortage of praise on buying Intel over and over when it's subjectively worse for performance, heat, price and power usage.

And don't even get me started on the fangirl crush for Nvidia: "We know the RX 7900 XTX is slightly faster than the RTX 4080, and it has bigger VRAM for the future while being considerably cheaper. We still think it's worth the extra £200-300 to get DLSS."

Disappointing.

Click to expand...

Honestly, even if Techspot told you to buy a 500W TDP Intel CPU over the AMD equivalent and you did, the joke is still on you.

It's common sense for an enthusiast that Intel CPUs suck just by looking at their TDP and power consumption.

If someone would still buy Intel after all these fails, I have a statue in NYC to sell them.

themastergoose said:

Techspot (as well as others) don't seem impartial sometimes. CPU reviews and benches clearly show Ryzen commanding the performance lead (especially in games), Yet no shortage of praise on buying Intel over and over when it's subjectively worse for performance, heat, price and power usage.

Click to expand...

Exactly. All of this clearly shows that Intel is pushing their architecture right off the cliff.

Friends don't let friends buy Intel.

trparky said:

Exactly. All of this clearly shows that Intel is pushing their architecture right off the cliff.

Friends don't let friends buy Intel.

Click to expand...

Not the first time Intels been in this position tho, perhaps readership here is too young to remember Intels Netburst architecture that underpin the Pentium 4’s.

It was hot, slow, expensive and fell way short of the clock speeds they were aiming for. It also had terrible queue depth performance penalties depending on workload. AMD’s K6 and original FX 64 CPUs ran rings around Intel.

They managed to turn it around with the arrival of Core architecture, but it seems they’ve gone full circle with that too now as they can’t get it to go faster because of the heat, just like Netburst some 20 or so years ago.

HardReset said:

Now it's pretty much proved that Intel is unstable and those who want stable system should go for AMD. Techspot didn't even consider this possibility on their 13900K/14900K review. Despite awful power draw, they believed Intel promises.

This is problem with modern reviews: if benchmarks don't show something, it does not and can not exist.

Click to expand...

So, you rather would have had Techspot recommend you avoid these CPUs based on crashes they cannot prove happened and did not occur in their testing? Recommendations based on conjecture, that's what we are stooping to? Besides, IIRC, Techspot did slag intel off for their power use and did point out the 7800x3d was cheaper and performed just as well while consuming significantly less power.

People have accused Techspot of being fanbois for Nvidia, AMD, intel, Apple, Qualcomm, and everywhere in between. Maybe there's a reason the critics who act like this are not running review sites?

Theinsanegamer said:

So, you rather would have had Techspot recommend you avoid these CPUs based on crashes they cannot prove happened and did not occur in their testing? Recommendations based on conjecture, that's what we are stooping to? Besides, IIRC, Techspot did slag intel off for their power use and did point out the 7800x3d was cheaper and performed just as well while consuming significantly less power.

People have accused Techspot of being fanbois for Nvidia, AMD, intel, Apple, Qualcomm, and everywhere in between. Maybe there's a reason the critics who act like this are not running review sites?

Click to expand...

I've noticed a pattern with how techspot criticises products and its really our own fault. The fanbois attack techspot the moment they say something bad about a product so they stick to just trying to say positive and unbiased things in all their reviews. This also angers the fanbois but in the opposite way.

And now we're here

Theinsanegamer said:

So, you rather would have had Techspot recommend you avoid these CPUs based on crashes they cannot prove happened and did not occur in their testing? Recommendations based on conjecture, that's what we are stooping to? Besides, IIRC, Techspot did slag intel off for their power use and did point out the 7800x3d was cheaper and performed just as well while consuming significantly less power.

People have accused Techspot of being fanbois for Nvidia, AMD, intel, Apple, Qualcomm, and everywhere in between. Maybe there's a reason the critics who act like this are not running review sites?

Click to expand...

I feel like all we can do is sit back and laugh at people calling Techspot Intel shills, in the comment section of an article posted by Techspot which is highlighting an apparent flaw with some Intel CPUs.
Maybe they'll connect the dots eventually.

Everyone on the bandwagon like that huh? Did you guys even read the article?

It's unreal engine. That's it..

I just built a 14700K system with 8000MHz memory. Yknow what caused the most instability in that system? The stupid af CPU contact frame, if anyone has one and has instability then throw that frame in trash. Rock solid now. Passes stability testing with overclocks now. Where before it would hardly boot. Also people, turn off fast boot.

themastergoose said:

Not the first time Intels been in this position tho, perhaps readership here is too young to remember Intels Netburst architecture that underpin the Pentium 4’s.

It was hot, slow, expensive and fell way short of the clock speeds they were aiming for. It also had terrible queue depth performance penalties depending on workload. AMD’s K6 and original FX 64 CPUs ran rings around Intel.

They managed to turn it around with the arrival of Core architecture, but it seems they’ve gone full circle with that too now as they can’t get it to go faster because of the heat, just like Netburst some 20 or so years ago.

Click to expand...

Oh yes, I remember. The Pentium 4 Prescott. What a piece of crap.

And here we are again with AMD smacking the crap out of Intel. Intel really needs to go back to the damn drawing board already and design a whole new microarchitecture from the ground up much like AMD did with Ryzen. Until that happens, Intel will continue being a joke that nobody's laughing at.

So glad we’re all giving Intel billions to keep making such great products in a brand new fab.

trparky said:

Until that happens, Intel will continue being a joke that nobody's laughing at.

Click to expand...

despite being a joke, it seems that many people still buy Intel CPUs..

You would think after so many refreshes they would get the basics down by now.

https://www.radgametools.com/oodleintel.htm

Seems to be on the mobo makers. Perhaps too optimistic with their Auto settings.

Theinsanegamer said:

So, you rather would have had Techspot recommend you avoid these CPUs based on crashes they cannot prove happened and did not occur in their testing? Recommendations based on conjecture, that's what we are stooping to? Besides, IIRC, Techspot did slag intel off for their power use and did point out the 7800x3d was cheaper and performed just as well while consuming significantly less power.

People have accused Techspot of being fanbois for Nvidia, AMD, intel, Apple, Qualcomm, and everywhere in between. Maybe there's a reason the critics who act like this are not running review sites?

Click to expand...

Of course I expect. That's like using brains. CPU A has double power draw vs CPU B, there is nothing that Could go wrong on CPU A on long term because short term testing do not show any problems, right? For around 40 years Intel has x86 compatible CPU with two different architectures on chip, there is nothing that Could go wrong because short term testing... Thread director, background processes, nothing Could go wrong because Our testing...

That's like using brains. Another excellent example is Samsung 840 SSD. There were tons of MLC SSDs that had no problem because of NAND used. Then there is Samsung 840 that uses worse (that's absolute) TLC NAND. And no, Samsung was not even cheaper. But because short testing shows TLC works just fine, there is Nothing that Could go wrong. It took Samsung around 3 years to fix that.

Brainless benchmarking is what causes this type of anomalies.

trparky said:

Oh yes, I remember. The Pentium 4 Prescott. What a piece of crap.

And here we are again with AMD smacking the crap out of Intel. Intel really needs to go back to the damn drawing board already and design a whole new microarchitecture from the ground up much like AMD did with Ryzen. Until that happens, Intel will continue being a joke that nobody's laughing at.

Click to expand...

Do people seem to forget that ryzen wasn't trading blows with Intel until the 5000 series? It took almost 5 years for zen to start beating Intel. Most people liked ryzen because it was "good enough" and it was cheap. People currently aren't complaining about AMD or Intel prices and I think they're both high aside from AMDs top teir chips.

Skjorn said:

Everyone on the bandwagon like that huh? Did you guys even read the article?

It's unreal engine. That's it..

I just built a 14700K system with 8000MHz memory. Yknow what caused the most instability in that system? The stupid af CPU contact frame, if anyone has one and has instability then throw that frame in trash. Rock solid now. Passes stability testing with overclocks now. Where before it would hardly boot. Also people, turn off fast boot.

Click to expand...

The Oodle asset streaming function seems to also be a culprit in this, and recall it being mentioned as a reason for this in an article about the same issue, 13th and 14th Gen Intel CPUs crashing games, which was also posted here like a month or two ago.

Same information in that article at the time as well. Unreal Engine and games using Oodle but not Unreal (such as cp2077) seemed to be prone to crashing on the same CPUs listed in this article, only it was the team behind Oodle that pointed out it was an Intel issue at the time.

Edit: after reading up a bit I see you linked directly to oodles site explaining the above as well.
I'd give you an awesome home made cookie for being one of the few here that payed attention, but not sure how to send that via email.

Skjorn said:

Everyone on the bandwagon like that huh? Did you guys even read the article?

It's unreal engine. That's it..

Click to expand...

Nah, because it's not like Unreal Engine is used much is it? /s Don't overlook the issues with Chrome and Chromium based apps too causing some issues. People can point the finger at Epic or Nvidia for causing the issue, but the problems aren't being reported by Nvidia users using Ryzen CPU's.

And in the last 24 hours, Pat Gelsinger no less, was on stage mocking the very company he is CEO of. He took the **** out of Intel for being slow, incremental updates, running hot and just adding more cores "because we needed something to do".

Intel CPU's are clearly a must buy right now, if you live in a vacuum, with amnesia....

Its 2024...Chipzilla is actually Nvidia now. Intel is even a smaller company than AMD by market cap. Just fyi.

themastergoose said:

And in the last 24 hours, Pat Gelsinger no less, was on stage mocking the very company he is CEO of. He took the **** out of Intel for being slow, incremental updates, running hot and just adding more cores "because we needed something to do".

Click to expand...

Basically, that’s all that Intel’s recent chips have been. There’s been nothing new that they’ve come up with. Meanwhile, both Apple and AMD have figuratively been leaving them in the dust.

No wonder why Apple told Intel goodbye and started to do their own thing.

The bigger problem is that pretty much everything these days can give errors.
Earlier Ark survival had some engine problems causing it to crash on any configuration. And a lot of people crashed time to time.
And each software and hardware is not safe from that. My entire life, I came across games I liked and played for a long time that were having issues.
At least with Windows, MS seem to fix them and it does not take too long in my experience.