Hi everyone, wanted to say thanks for the awesome discussion. Best part is the dissenting opinions. That is how healthy debate happens. If we all agreed, there would be no debate. A couple things to add: 1) I realize the format of the video might not be ideal. The first time I show BOIS settings and test results is to show how 0x129 fix fares, and the negative aspects of that fix. I actually recommend people try the Intel baseline to see the negative aspect of it, and go on Intel discussion thread (posted in description) to report the undesirable aspect of the fix as is. Later in the video I go back in BIOS and adjust, then show how adjusted settings are what we are after. While waiting for Intel to release something better, one can use adjusted settings that go a long way towards helping with stability (though not guaranteeing it of course). 2) When I say there is no "issue" I am referring to the super-hyped atmosphere of fear, as opposed to the Intel-acknowledged issues (which of course I consider issues, as I show in the video the details of those issues and the BIOS releases that address them). Based on my analysis, I see path ahead for people to use 13/14 gen CPUs. Otherwise I think a lot of people will be caught in this infuriating waiting game of "Has Intel declared it 100% fixed?" Technically they won't know the answer to that for years... So I am just offering a way to look at the situation that can help with decision making. Thanks again!
Thank you so much sir, nowni dont have problem about temperature. Before all my p core temperature reach 100 cel but nowni follow this video my higher temperature only 78 cel in my score reach 38000 wit multicore and my single core is 2292. Thank you so much!
@@rephepz Glad it helped, and the real thanks goes to the guy on the Intel reddit post I link to in the description, as what I show in this video is based on his reddit post.
Thank you for the video. Nice to hear a calm voice from time to time. I just uploaded videos of my 13600K running full boost R23 at 1.0V and me 14700K running R23 at full boost at 1.2V! It took my 30 minutes to get them there including the time to flash my BIOSs. 0x1259 and 0x129 they work as they promise and no one will convince me otherwise.
@@BrianHuetherI've done both AC/DC LL to Mode 9(0.4/1.1 mOhms) also -ve offset by 0.030V on my i7 14700K using MSI Z790 Tomahawk but I also under clocked to 5.1/3.9Ghz for both P/E cores 😂 stays under 1.2V and consumes 180w-190w during R23 multicore test. Do you think 0.1/1.1 AD/DC LL safe while disabling CEP? Because with that option turning on this CPU significantly lowers the Cinebench score to almost 50%.
@@gameotic1 Here is good thread on topic of CEP disable vs enable: www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1ev89cz/different_undervolting_methods_with_ia_cep I think given how many people are disabling and reporting positive results, that it likely is ok disabling. If you want to keep enabled, then I think in that thread there is link to procedure for keeping enabled and maintaining performance.
I've seen many videos about CPU undervolting, and each one does it differently. In my case, I did it this way: I manually set the vcore to 1,3000 I manually set the P-cores to 53 I left the IA CEP on auto I set the loadline to 3 I've had this system running for a week now and I haven't had any blue screens. I've played games like cyberpunk/bf2042/tarkov without any problems Benchmark XTU 2.0 11,347 Mark Cinebench r23 33,500 Max temp 85 C Bios Microcode 0x129
@@NegativeROG Thanks. I thought there would be risk of people not understanding it, and maybe that is the case as no one has made any "more cowbell" comments.
You can also undervolt with Cep. Just not in the loadline. I would always set AC and DC equal. If Cep intervenes then your loadline settings are not correct. To do an undervolt with Cep you have to use the adaptive Vcore so that Cep does not intervene. And your system is also faster and more stable. CEP or Current Excursion Protection is actually intended as a protective function and is intended to prevent processors from running unstable when the voltage is too low. For this purpose, the clock speed of the processors is reduced above a certain voltage. My Score on R23 is 38800 CEP on
@@onlinegaming4826 Is that with 14700k? That is definitely way higher than average score. I just noticed recently that my bios shows a number. SP or something. Mine shows 71 typically. I read this is indicator of silicon quality. Some people report in 90's. Anyway, as much as I would love to improve performance, for now I am just trying to get similar to stock Asus profile performance, with lower temp/power/score. Thanks
@@onlinegaming4826 I also meant to say, I stopped trying to adjust DC loadline when I realized my mb Asus z790 Proart being no die sense board will not provide accurate enough sensor readings to achieve this sort of precision tuning.
@@BrianHuether no its a i9 13900kf. Just wanted to show that you can get good scores with cep With my Gigabyteboard, the loadline is set to high and AC DC 45 that is 0.450 milliohms, which is always different on other boards. but this way I can have CEP on without any problems you just have to find the sweet spot yourself
Buildzoid has resolved this issue already; lower the AC/DC loadline to around 70, and put a VID limit if your board has the option, no more suicide voltages
@@gameotic1 Yes, it plateaus the vid requests, but is unavailable on msi boards, A high loadline setting blows up the vid requests on the i9s and i7s, so lowering the loadline helps keep the voltage sensible, the cpu can be undervolted too
@@AndroidBeacshire on the latest BIOS update with micro code 0x12B MSI had included this option named as "CPU VR Voltage Limit" which can be manually adjusted. Go check it out.
Thank you. Subed! I'm on a gigabyte board and the BIOS values are kinda different. The AC Loadline range is basically 0 to unlimited, Intel's stock is 90. Does the 0.1 value on yours mean the lowest possible value?
@@serajr If you go to that reddit post in the description, the one by user Janitorus, he shows how this all looks for various motherboards including MSI. On Asus, I used 0.1, just because stress tests started failing if it was down to 0.06.
Your method is fine, but if you turn on IA CEP it will reduce your clock speed by around 50% under load. IA CEP should be enabled to prevent current spikes as for intel recommendation. I wouldn't turn it off after all that fiasco. It's better to undervolt manually by VID offset or vf curve points (sadly the latter is broken on msi boards) and increase AC LL gradually untill it doesn't trigger IA CEP. This way you also get lower max VID (on idle / single core load). Keep in mind increasing AC LL too much could be dangerous too (if it's a lot higher than LLC). Do it slowly in increments of 0,1 mohm and never go past 1,1 mohm.
@@Savigo. This is the topic that I think needs the most discussion. The pros and cons of various approaches. When reducing ac loadline I see reduction in vcore. Your approach is reduce via offsets, then raise ac loadline? As well as enable cep? If you do that approach, are you also adjusting CPU loadline calibration level? In Asus bios this is default level 3. You also mention adjusting til CEP is not engaged. Are you looking at some param in hwinfo to visually see when that is engaged. Anyway, would be interested to learn more! Thanks
@@BrianHuether You can see whether or not CEP is kicking in by comparing cinebench multicore scores. First do one run with it disabled for reference. Then enable it. Worst case scenario it will reduce your score even by 60%. If it's barely triggered it will reduce score by around 5%. Typical variance in CB scores is within 1%, so if you get that close it means CEP is not engaged. AC load line is the value that tells the CPU how much v-droop it should compensate. For example if AC = 0,6 mOhm and current = 150A, the CPU will receive extra 0,6*150 mV = 90 mV under that load. Load Line calibration (sometimes called vrm load line, but it could be also called CPU load line on asus boards, because naming scheme is a mess) does the oposite. So if your ACLL = LLC you should have 0 vdroop under load. For this reason AC LL should be equall or less than LLC because you don't want to overcompensate voltage. BUT it has to be at least at 70% impedance of the VRM load line to not trigger CEP. There is a big problem though. VRM load line value is not disclosed anywhere. But most of the Z-boards have flat LLC (8 on asus boards) set to 0,01 mohm and steepest (1 in case of asus) set to 1,1 mohm. So if you go for LLC mode 1 you can get away with ACLL = 0,8 mohm. If all the above doesn't make sense I recommend Buildzoid's video on that topic "YOU DON'T HAVE TO TURN OFF CEP to undervolt intel 13/14th gen CPUs". He explains in detail how IA CEP works and shows different settings on the osciloscope.
@@Savigo.What is meant by ac ll=LLC? On Asus, LLC is a level. When that level is default 3, ac ll is 1. When it is, say, 7, it is 0.45. If we set a low ac ll should we also be raising LLC level? Thanks
@@BrianHuether Each LLC has hidden value in mohms that dictates how steep the curve is. On asus LLC1 = 0.01 mohm, LLC8 = 1,1 mohm. The rest is something in between, but I don't know exact values since I use MSI board. AC LL should be within 70% - 100% of that hidden value if you don't want to trigger IA CEP but keep it enabled.
I wouldn't do it. CEP on! and then set your loadline so that your score is back to normal, then your loadline is set correctly. Then equate AC and DC. Then you can set an undervolt with adaptive vcore. And with Asus you can also set an IA VR voltage limit to 1.4v watch Buildzoid
Hey Brian, thanks a lot for the video! I was wondering, what are the graphs windows you used to display HWinfo stats in realtime? I'm talking about the 4 windows in the bottom left area in the Windows test! Thanks a lot in advance!
@@BrianHuether I’ve been searching for that options for ages, installed a lot of addons and searched the internet for hwinfo graph forever! Now you showed me the most obvious options ever! Thanks man, for real! I feel soo dumb 😂
I appreciate it man, thanks for making this video. I was thinking maybe I should super-simplify my full guide into one minute monkey-see-monkey-do type videos. But end of the day, I want users to know *what* they are actually editing and *why*.
I think the less TH-cam shorts the better. The method you outline involves a good amount of time to digest. Oddly, the only reason I made the video was because I have a video series on building a Windows/Mac computer with 14700k and realized as part of that series I really need to be sure I can honestly recommend a 13/14 gen CPU. Your reddit post shows what one needs to do. You definitely should make video as well, and get into nuances. I think talking about CPU loadline calibration, how that relates to ac, dc loadline would be useful. For instance, I notice with Asus, its enhanced oc profile sets loadline calibration level to 7, then hwinfo I see ac loadline 0.45. In my case, I have the level as 3 per Intel default baseline, but curious if I should adjust loadline calibration level.
@@BrianHuether I wouldn't want to repeat what guys like Buildzoid already have done, although sometimes a more to the point format can help some people out too. Don't get me wrong, I like how he does his testing and impromptu stuff in between as well, for me, that works fine. Some people hate reading, but sometimes you just can't get around it. As simple as possible, the lower LLC required for stability, the better. But low LLC has more Vdroop as well. Higher LLC potentially has more overshoot, but will allow you to undervolt more due to Vdroop (and undershoot) affecting things less. But that depends on the type of hardware implemented. And here we are, three sentences later and it's no longer simple. Medium/Medium-High LLC is fine for either method (AC LL, Adaptive offset) without getting too complicated.
From Intel's community post: "Intel’s current analysis finds there is a significant increase to the minimum operating voltage (Vmin) across multiple cores on affected processors due to elevated voltages." This is the key point: "Elevated voltage events can accumulate over time and contribute to the increase in Vmin for the processor." "accumulate over time" is no bueno. That causes accelerated degradation. Basically its aging the CPU faster than normal. The problem is the BIOS update and adjustments won't reverse damage caused by accelerated degradation.
@@kxmode The fixes from Intel aim to prevent those unnecessarily elevated voltages from occuring and setting IA VR Voltage Limit in BIOS is yet another means to further keep a ceiling on voltage. So yes, over time, elevated voltages could cause trouble, especially on high workload systems, but the whole point of Intel microcode fixes plus additional settings that people have arrived at after sound analysis is to force CPU to operate at lower vcore avg and spikes.
While I have different methods that work better for me, I cannot disagree with your results. You have a simple way (and a redundancy in this regard for extra insurance) to keep Vcore voltages at a safe level (at or below 1.4v) that will lead to long term stability, and to make 13th and 14th gen CPUs run quieter and cooler. I was getting a little worked up when I saw the Intel failsafe SVID being implemented but in just a few clicks you had things running better. I hope you inspire many to set their bios to run their chips as well as yours.
@@rluker5344 Thanks for the comments. Yeah, this whole business is about inspiration, and my inspiration came from the reddit post I linked to, so hopefully over time more people see the easy steps they can take to lower power/temp/vcore and keep performance nearly the same
Set the SVID behavior to Auto. Intel Fail Safe would increase the voltage which would increase temperature and degrade your cpu in the long run. Also set the CPU load-line calibration to leave 1 it helps to protect the cpu from voltage over shoot after the load is removed. Read the information under this setting. I Guarantee it would give you low temperature with a lower power consumption. Also stop running benchmark softwares on these CPUs for the sake of satisfaction by seeing the scores. People are deliberately killing their CPUs running these softwares. Like prime95. Normal work load doesn't stress the CPU that hard. I use CPU z bench only.
@@warraichlabs5154 I am using typical scenario for SVID, load line calibration level 3, which sets ac loadline to 1.1, but I then lower to 0.1. Yeah, those benchmarks can be rabbit hole. I just ran cinebench for 5 minutes, Geekbench, and that's it. Thanks for tips!
Cinebench r23 is pretty safe and a lot of workloads can stress the cpu to similar levels. It's basically a render. You could damage a CPU with something based on AVX instructions if your AC loadline and VRM loadline is set improperly. It also pushes a lot more current through cpu, so not having Icc max set to intel recommended could also be dangerous.
You are correct about the Intel Fail Safe SVID as if I only change that setting, SVID to IFS, my all core voltage goes up 200mv over Asus Auto and about 350 mv over Best case scenario, under CPUZ stress test load at 5.5ghz on my 13900kf. IFS is a throttling 1.5v+, Asus Auto is 1.312v and Best Case is 1.156v VID with everything else auto on my Asus Z690. Using Intel Fail Safe will destroy your performance and is likely to degrade your CPU with volts frequently going over 1.5v. You should stay bat or below 1.4v. This is the problem with LLC 1. It lets your volts droop so much under all core load that you have to compensate with a much higher voltage that doesn't droop under low use or single core load and leads to much higher voltage spikes than you would get from your VRM if you chose a higher LLC (Asus scale is higher LLC = lower vdroop, but other motherboard manufacturers use a different nomenclature.) The higher voltage spikes are bad for your CPU's longevity. Actually Hardcore Overclocking has done a lot of testing with oscilloscope monitoring verifying this and has it in a lot of his recent videos. Probably has the most relevant testing for the real voltage behavior of 13th and 14th gen CPUs. The missed by internal monitoring spikes from the VRMs when load drops are less than 50mv. I recommend his videos. I use LLC 6 (which may be a bit high for some), Best case scenario SVID (which likely doesn't provide enough volts to be stable for some, even at LLC 6) and my overclock setting (which is still undervolted from these settings) with boost clocks to 6GHz (2-core) never get up to 1.4v under any scenario. I'm not saying my settings are guaranteed better than yours for your particular setup, I'm just suggesting you try a lower vdroop LLC setting, undervolt from there to stable and see how much lower your low use volt spikes go. Also if you are using HWinfo it is better to look at Vcore than VID since VID is just the volts your CPU is requesting and Vcore is what it gets per the monitoring of an external sensor. Edit: I watched to the end of the video and the Intel Failsafe SVID setting was changed and everything became better.
Hi, from what I understand, seeing Current Throttling in HWInfo64 or Intel XTU is normal when you apply intel baseline limits. I was also seeing this in intel XTU and HWInfo and looked into it and learned that the monitor is comparing to projected current values. Because in BIOS current is limited to 307 when using the intel baseline, seems monitoring tools see that as "current throttling". Someone here asked about this: www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1c9tk9d/currentedp_throttling_after_undervolting/ Bottom line: it isn't something to worry about
@@BrianHuether so it's normal thank you! I returned everything to default just in case. I use the XTU tool and found that I can reduce the voltage to (-200) without problems, the temperature in stress tests is 75 s maximum, I have I7 14700k.asus z790 when testing the result is 12300
I run a 14700k 1.38v 2x5.8 4x 5.7 8x 5.6 ecores @4.4 adaptive voltage with - 0,060 @5.6 no power limit cinebench r23 is around 37k . Never gets over 80c because i delid it and use a costum water loop .
The easiest and the best thing to increase the 13/14th gen cpu's longevity is reducing clock speed of all cores by around 300 MHz. It's basically a free undervolt by roughly 0,1V - 0,15V. Especially on i9s that are often pushed to 1,5V out of the box. Intel will never admit that because that would put them in pretty rough legal situation (false advertisement). On the other had you will never notice a drop from say 5,7 GHz to 5,4 GHz, but it will drastically reduce voltage and temps. I wouldn't trust intel's 1,55V either (maximum vid request on the new microcode). CPU can get around 0,1V more if you include transients and voltage regulation quality of your vrm. Yes, since Intel extended the warranty, they have to have some faith in that 1,55V but it's a balancing act for them between: 1) Suppling enough voltage for chips that are already degraded so custemers won't notice instability. 2) Reducing the voltage to the level that won't degrade healthy CPUs *untill they run of of warranty*. 3) Not cutting off the upper part of VF curve because these cpus were advertised for higher frequency. And sure you can also add undervolt on top of that but how much depends on the silicon lottery and how much is your cpu already degraded.
@@Savigo. That makes sense, and in fact during stress tests I see that 5.3 is where performance cores pretty much average at. Definitely something I have thought about as I have been reading about people setting fixed freqs.
@@aligams232 It comes down to personal decision, but if you are comfortable with bios settings, and if the laptop you buy has the sort of settings shown in the video, then I see no reason to not purchase. I am with Puget Sound on their analysis of the situation, which is currently not seeing reasons to avoid 13/14. But you should be comfortable applying new bios, modding it as shown, and checking if more bios updates come out. Then running stress tests and looking at temps, vcore in Hwinfo64 would be good way to see if things are running in a way that fosters stability and longevity. Good luck!
I have been using an overclocked 12th gen for 2.5 years without issue. It would be damaged also if the voltage and current exceeded it's design abilities. Just use Intel POR and limit the current and/or voltage. It's not rocket science just stop these excessive voltages. I'm buying a 13900K or a 14700k as soon as the prices bottom. I'm not afraid of these cpu's.
Hey i just did everything you said on this video with my i5 13600kf and when benchmarking I'm getting a stable 1.05vcore, 4992mhz core clock (should be 5100mhz), and 70c 125w on whole package. The highest spike i get on vcores is 1.177v. I believe it is safe to say that I've lost 100mhz of performance here for getting a much cooler and stable cpu, right?
If you set both PL1 and PL2 to 125W you could be power limited. But 5GHz all core under 125W is still great! Check your frequency during single core test to see if it was some kind of throttling. Single core shouldn't be limited by either power or temps.
Hi, there is a down-the-rabbit-hole aspect to this crazy business. People are getting things such that they are seeing no performance loss, but that involves some next-level tuning (and sometimes is best suited for boards that have so-called die sense sensors). I suspect if you go to the Reddit Overclockers forum you could get some advice. But from what I am seeing in my tests, for instance what I show at 21:44 in the video, is that multicore performance drops by about 1%. That certainly also corresponds to a slight reduction in avg CPU freq. Some people are taking an approach where they set a constant freq and make other adjustments. Also there are some crazy settings related to frequency binning and temp limits such that you tell the CPU at which temps to start dropping freq. Plus RAM related settings... Deep rabbit hole! But I haven't tried any of the next level stuff. At this point I am just glad I came across a reddit thread that showed this fairly simple approach to get power/temp/vcore more under control with "nearly" no performance hit. Good luck!
@@Savigo.@BrianHuether The power and frequency tend to shoot up to 5090mhz 130w 1.16v for split seconds while doing the multithread benchmark but they're mostly stuck on 4990mhz 125w 1.05v during the workload. Cinebench gave me a score of 23350. Idk if it's good or bad. Edit: for future reference i did some research and turns out it's a decent score for this cpu. Appearantly this cpu has a score 23k-24k on cinebench on average with default settings.
My main question is, when should I be worried? I have an i5-14700KF and there's all this talk about that the CPU slowly and permanently destroys some parts of it. My computer is very new, about a month old but I don't feel like running even a slightly destroyed CPU. I have a 5200 MT/S RAM (saw somewhere that this may be useful). So should I be worried? Could my CPU be in any way shape or form faulty?
Hi, do you mean i5 14600, or i7 14700? Computer builder Puget Sound recently reported on how their Intel vs AMD CPUs are faring. They found AMD is failing more frequently. They also apply bios settings that help ensure stability. So I think the bottom line is that using Intel baseline settings to limit power and current, in addition to some form of undervolting as shown in the reddit post I linked to, maximizes likelihood that everything will be ok. Of course one can never be certain of anything, but at least we have good info out there on measures we can take. And of course get your latest BIOS and watch for subsequent updates. And definitely ask on that reddit thread in the description, as that is a very active thread on this very topic. Good luck!
@@nemesis762 I don't plan on having a tech channel direction, the channel is aimed at independent music/video producers, but in that realm it is tough to not get into computer tech. As it is, producing these tech videos has taken me away from music 🎶 and time to return!
@@BrianHuether they made this generation and everyone are doing or watching tech channels to fix there problems . the main point is that they manage to f up even music guys and that is mind blowing . you are not first one , i saw many other musician , editor and etc to make almost same videos
I think i do something wrong, i have 19 14900k on a asus z790-e strix mobo, i loaded intel default profile on performance mode, extreme for some reason is worst, i set a limit on cpu voltage at 1.4V, disabled turbo boost, undervolt enabled, CEP enabled, eTVB enabled, so the benchmarks are mediocre, but one i'm starting to do an undervolt on core SVID, i get a huge boost on performance, i got to -160mV and i expected somewhere araound -100mV the undervolt protection to kick in, but no, and cinebench r24 get me on 2260+ points, r23 get me in 39500 point and r15 on 6110+ points, i dont understand whats happening, are the sensors reporting wrong values? it should not increase in performance, right? And cpu voltages dont go over 1.34V.
@@empty-us5zd It comes down to personal decision. If you buy one, it is best to update bios and apply the sort of bios settings shown here, or ask on the reddit Intel forum about your particular setup. Settings in bios are all about reducing temps, voltage, power (with very little performance impact) so that CPU is running as stable as possible. Good luck!
@@spgolder107 Thanks, good to know. Oddly though, with fixed ac ll and svid behavior altered, I see benchmarks change, but maybe the changes are just test to test differences.
My CPU is still brand new and unopened, Can I just undervolt it just right after installing and first boot instead of BIOS update? since bios Update is bad,
I suggest going here: www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/1eebdid/1314th_gen_intel_baseline_can_still_degrade_cpu/, and this guy Janitorus will have better advice than me. I don't think the view is that the new BIOS is bad, just that a lot of people have improved on it with the approach shown at that link and which I show in the video
Just put it in your mb you will be fine great advice for you have a good cooler as the do run hot mine hits 85 full load on stress test but in game get 65 to 72°c paired with a artic freezer III 280 aio with upgraded p14max fans in the cooler
@@emirmisel2446 I suppose you could try. I used Intel xtu app in windows and set ac loadline lower and lower each time (in bios I set it), til stress test in xtu showed failure. Then to be safe, I upped it from there. So, 0.06 was failure, 0.07 seemed ok, but I wanted a safety margin and then set to 0.1. You might get some ideas from the guy that posted the method on reddit. I link to his thread in description, he is quite the incredibly helpful person, and he'll have great advice in terms of additional nuances of the method. Good luck!
I have an i9 14900k, I just received my RMA'd CPU because my previous one was degraded. This video is astonishingly ignorant and disregards all of the REAL issues people were and are having with their CPUs. Yes, as of the 0x129 BIOS update a brand new i9 13900k & 14900k will be safe - but that's only a fix that came a week ago. These CPU's are safe as of just now. Any of the CPU's that are experiencing crashing/out of video memory errors are degraded beyond repair and need an RMA (like mine did).
@@jeffamunoz The only thing one can ever be sure of is the present. This video is about maximizing likelihood of CPU longevity. Puget Sound reports higher failure rates of their AMD equipped systems and in August stated they see no reason to adjust their course. They are simply being rigorous with BIOS settings. Ignorance is willful resistance to knowledge. The research and rigor that I put into producing this video is actually the complete opposite of ignorance. Anyway, I know RMA'ing tech sucks. This Intel situation comes down to personal decision making. If you decide to stay with your Intel chip, then just consider doing the things shown in this video, which are based on an excellent reddit post I link to in description, where large number of users are reporting favorable results. That way you change your probability space and get your CPU situated to have higher likelihood of longevity. Thanks for the discussion!
@@BrianHuether maybe better knowledge is reading WHY they have lower failure rates, rather than just reading a headline. -"Puget Systems attributes their more modest failure rates of Intel processors to their conservative approach to power management settings. By adhering strictly to Intel's specifications and developing their own power settings that don't hurt performance, they've managed to mitigate some of the stability issues plaguing other users." Yes, because this is reasonable for most people tossing this into their gaming rig XD, even if you do this, 95% of people that build their systems do not, they trust that the manufacturer of both the motherboard and the cpu have put in limits that are reasonable and will not cause harm to the cpu. So your argument is "if you do some things and know 100% what you are doing, maybe even beyond what the manufacturer of the motherboard knows and is willing to implement, and if you did this since install, than you would be in better condition than an amd setup" Sounds reasonable
@@AnthraxVX Yeah, I read the whole article just yesterday, prior to that had seen it referenced. They don't mention what settings they use, other than a custom version of Intel baseline. But it is just sensible. I am trying to show people a probabilistic way of thinking about this, and how this way of thinking can help people overcome fear. I mean there are thousands of prospective buyers (and existing customers) maybe they don't want to wait for 15 gen, maybe don't want AMD, but there are things they can do to change their probability space, which is just a bios update and s few custom settings. I think people are misinterpreting when I say it's not an issue. What I refer to as "issue" in the video is the hyper fearful sentiment of many, and how social media is part of that fear. Anyway, contentious topic, and it is actually a good thing that not everyone agrees. That is how healthy debate occurs! Thanks
@@BrianHuether Yeah man. You lost a viewer today. Maybe two. Don't talk to your viewers in a condescending way, we're here as your audience not as your personal therapist
I politely explained to the guy why I don't view the video as ignorance, expressed sympathy for his RMA situation, and offered advice. Where is the condescension there? Thanks@@AJ-iu6nw
@@BLACK_POWER02 Yes, as x125 fixed the eTVB bug and x129 then is supposed to better control voltage requests. But with x129 people are still seeing voltage going above 1.5, and so the IA VR Voltage Limit set to , say, 1.4, and reducing ac loadline (technically, that is a resistance value) is a further means to help put ceiling on voltage.
@@BrianHuether So 1.4 volts is pretty high. In general I recommend never going over 1.4 volts. Unless you change the CPU every 4 years, but most people don't do that. Otherwise good video.
Its REALLY an issue for 99% of people who plug in their CPU and never update bios and also reduce voltage to prevent 1.4v+ single core boosting... Also new intel bios fix DOES NOT reduce single core voltage above 1.4-1.5v. There is NO 100% fix yet... Both hardware unboxed and gamers nexus have pointed this out.
@@defectiveclone8450 I see 1.52 spikes in Intel default settings with 0x129. That is why second time in video where I change settings I make adjustments and after that I don't see vcore going above 1.34 ish. That is the thing that might not be clear enough up front in the video. The first time where I just update to new bios and run tests is to show why the bios is undesirable at default. Then after adjustment results are radically different. That said, I am not using oscilloscope so maybe I am not seeing big picture. I think the Puget Sound report needs more attention and I wish I had posted info on it in the video, but I read their full report yesterday. They highlight their not seeing anything alarming (yet) with 13/14 gen namely because of their rigor in setting power and other limits (though they don't mention settings). So I still think people can minimize their worries by maximizing use of settings that many people are reporting good results with, such as method I am using based on the linked reddit post. Thanks for comments.
@@BrianHuether all true.. the issue is the average joe doesnt do anything but use their PC and when it starts to crash take it back to the store.. OEMs are not happy with intel :)
Six months from now no one will remember this issue as RMAs are processed and the microcode patches mitigate the issue. It was massively hyped by TH-camrs but intel and motherboard manufacturers share responsibility for overlocking the cpu out of the box. Hopefully arrow lake will be good.
@@westfield90 Yes, Intel in a weird way became a gaslighting victim. That forced them to play a certain card, and I think ultimate result is positive. Their engineering will only be improved, despite hype around this.
its not the performance hit with the microcode... its the incredible instability. even after the bios updates and the DAYS of bios tweaking, i still get random crashes for absolutely no reason. the 13/14th gen higher end CPUs are so incredibly unstable because intel cant keep up with AMD high end CPU's so they crank the voltage up, screw the longevity of the chip, it will fail and it will be unstable while doing so.
@@wildwilco Troubleshooting this stuff is nightmarishly difficult because of interaction of motherboard and CPU. Motherboard makers, Intel, gaming industry, they all share accountability in this. They have been enjoying this wild west atmosphere, chasing after something unshackled. What I was trying to get across in video is that the important thing is to try and reduce likelihood of trouble via settings. Now that won't help in all cases, but statistically, it should help in majority. Do you get instability regardless of BIOS? Even with most conservative settings? Do you have good cooling?
@@BrianHuether i went completely conservative, everything basic, going lower than basic even... still unstable a.f. its allready in RMA, but i doubt i will get a new one, so i allready got over to AMD. i have lost all faith in intell so far, ESPECIALLY in the way they have dealt with the issue. they kept selling faulty CPUs even though they KNEW about oxidation and degradation issues, and they outright refuse a recall. why? to keep shareholders happy. they dont want to take the relatively ''small'' financial hit on short term right now, instead they will be getting a huge financial hit in the near future.. and its allready happening. server hosts all jumping ship to AMD, less power draw for equal and sometimes more performance. thats the money hit. the gamer portion aint even that big., its somewhat on intell, like i said, AMD has a better architecture which gave them way more performance with way less power draw, and intell couldnt keep up, so they just cranked up the voltage, cranked up the MHz to try and keep up with AMD and say they have the ''fastest cpu'' thats the issue, the old architecture they keep relying on instead of innovating (in other words, intell doesnt want to spend too much money developing) its all the fault of shareholders having the company in a chokehold.
Ihave same processer and asus prime z790 a wifi same bios type i recently update my bios last time i get worst thermal issu now i its safe i currently set to intel profile
"The new BIOS includes Intel microcode 0x129 and adjusts the factory default settings for the non-K processors, enhancing the stability of Intel Core 13th and 14th gen desktop processors.
@@bloviatormaximus1766 Hi, I think the format of my video is not ideal, and I should have made the main point up front. What I am trying to convey is that 0x129 bios as is still results in thermal throttling, still results in vcore peaking above 1.5. With the modified 0x129 bios settings as I refer to them as, one can significantly reduce power, temps (getting rid of thermal throttling), and vcore, and at same time have nearly no performance impact. That is the analysis I show from 17:00 in video, and I really should have put that at start. Thanks
Hi, that is why that guy on reddit posted a method to address that. Maybe the structure of my video isn't ideal, but the first time I set BIOS is with Intel baseline and in that case vcore spikes at 1.52. After using the method in that reddit post vcore avg around 1.18 and max 1.36 ish. This why right now it seems best to apply these additional settings.
@@BrianHuether that is well & good but the fact that the VID (not Vcore) is going above 1.55 means the microcode voltage cap isn't working for me at all. I saw another person complaining about the same on Intel community forums...there may be a bug that Intel/motherboard makers need to address.
@@BrianHuether I haven't tried that as it requires deviating from Intel Defaults and giving them a potential reason to deny RMA should I need it. Anyway, the point is that being on Intel Defaults should ensure that VID is capped at 1.55v but for some reason it isn't doing that for me.
@@gessler555 Ahhh, ok, understood. The craziest thing about all this is the shared accountability among Intel, motherboard manufacturers, and gaming industry. It has been wild west in the performance chase. Good thing is this fiasco will result in better engineering. A German economist, forgot the name, coined a term creative destruction. Sometimes something has to fail hard, then something better replaces it. So will be interesting to see what rises from the ashes.
Intel is out of chips so no more RMAs of new chips, now its a shell game of intel playing the shell game. I spent about a day working with a new 14900k and I can just about get it to match the old 13900k which was in the corrosion date range. The punch line is download intels overclocking software recommends putting the amps up to 475 and the wattage up to 400watts. 😂
Advising people to buy known bad CPUs? How very shilly of you. Sorry bud, even if it's 1% of units that have a defect - Intel's scummy behaviour in dealing with this, refusal of RMAs when they KNOW they put out defective chips tells me they can't be trusted. Buy one if you want - but don't come crying.
@@Bryanhaproff A lot of the drama is self inflicted, which is why I am fear free on Intel for now. I wanted to go amd route, but because I wanted Intel virtualization features, and because I run Mac Sonoma on the system as well, Intel makes sense. I will gladly look at amd if 1) it is as solid as Intel in music production 2) has similar virtualization features 3) can work as well as Intel in a hackintosh system. Thanks
@@AndroidBeacshire So you think gaming means Low clock speeds and Low ram speeds as opposed to high ram speeds how interesting... the correct answer was the 7800x3d nand chips arent very good at zip compression and the like... Fast ram fast chip fast gpu all gaming buddy.
It still takes forever to install a large compressed game... the game just plays better after is all. Also for Creation Content like Video Creation.. You are correct its not very good i suspect or at least it takes me forever.
@@cuongtang9539 I probably should have mentioned, at the step where I show how to set ac loadline, one could probably just set that to 0.4 ish and results would be similar. So the easiest instructions would be 1. Update bios 2. Select Intel baseline 3. Disable adaptive boost technology 4. Disable IA CEP 5. Set AC loadline 0.4 or 0.5 6. Set IS VR Voltage Limit to 1.4 7. Set svid behavior Auto I know even that will be tough for some people, but there just isn't a super user friendly way about this, since large number of users won't touch BIOS. So yeah, that is always the dilemma with technology. Making it accessible to add many as possible. I guess this video has target audience of people who aren't super tech savvy, but can update, adjust BIOS. Thanks
I think fear problem is best addressed by information. The Puget Sound report, which unfortunately I didn't read til after posting video shows higher failure rate of their amd equipped systems. So are we to fear amd too? I thought about AMD but on music production side there are some plugins that require Intel from what I gathered. Also quicksync on Intel is great for video editing workflows. So what I am trying to do with this video is say, "look, situation is what it is, if your computer needs dictate Intel 's highest end consumer options, and you aren't waiting for 15 gen, then here is what to do to maximize likelihood that your CPU will have longevity. By the way, Puget Sound believes the key to stability/longevity is making good bios settings. So the approach here is also in line with that view, though I don't know exactly what they are adjusting. Thanks
“It’s not an issue”. Great, you know more than Intel, seeing as how they have actually come out and said it IS an issue, have them hire you, please. The hubris in this video is astonishing. And, btw, you said in another comment the only thing you can be sire of is the present, which is wrong. The only thing you can be sure of is the past, and the past proves this is an issue and Intel themselves said there are further bios updates coming soon so the issue is not completely fixed. Way to use your brain, could you be more condescending?
@@estebanfigueroa9177 If the issue was as serious as the online fear mongering horde makes it out to be, Intel would have recalled all 13/14 gen CPUs, every retailer would remove from shelves, etc. And thousands of companies would be coming forward with same failure stats due to stationary nature of these sorts of statistics. Sure, there is a certain issue, not a show stopper obviously, and those that have the willingness to watch this video and take from it the true meaning, will better understand the issue, will understand what to do, and will understand how to reduce likelihood of short longevity. It takes a certain courage to watch the video if you are already predetermined to be part of the fear mongering crowd. That said, if one is willing to take an objective, rational stance, the video should help overcome fear. That is a good thing. Trying to help people. What are you trying to do?
Hi everyone, wanted to say thanks for the awesome discussion. Best part is the dissenting opinions. That is how healthy debate happens. If we all agreed, there would be no debate. A couple things to add:
1) I realize the format of the video might not be ideal. The first time I show BOIS settings and test results is to show how 0x129 fix fares, and the negative aspects of that fix. I actually recommend people try the Intel baseline to see the negative aspect of it, and go on Intel discussion thread (posted in description) to report the undesirable aspect of the fix as is. Later in the video I go back in BIOS and adjust, then show how adjusted settings are what we are after. While waiting for Intel to release something better, one can use adjusted settings that go a long way towards helping with stability (though not guaranteeing it of course).
2) When I say there is no "issue" I am referring to the super-hyped atmosphere of fear, as opposed to the Intel-acknowledged issues (which of course I consider issues, as I show in the video the details of those issues and the BIOS releases that address them). Based on my analysis, I see path ahead for people to use 13/14 gen CPUs. Otherwise I think a lot of people will be caught in this infuriating waiting game of "Has Intel declared it 100% fixed?" Technically they won't know the answer to that for years... So I am just offering a way to look at the situation that can help with decision making.
Thanks again!
0:15 0:28 0:30
0:42 0:44
1:09 1:10 1:12 1:12
Thank you so much sir, nowni dont have problem about temperature. Before all my p core temperature reach 100 cel but nowni follow this video my higher temperature only 78 cel in my score reach 38000 wit multicore and my single core is 2292. Thank you so much!
@@rephepz Glad it helped, and the real thanks goes to the guy on the Intel reddit post I link to in the description, as what I show in this video is based on his reddit post.
Thank you for the video. Nice to hear a calm voice from time to time. I just uploaded videos of my 13600K running full boost R23 at 1.0V and me 14700K running R23 at full boost at 1.2V! It took my 30 minutes to get them there including the time to flash my BIOSs. 0x1259 and 0x129 they work as they promise and no one will convince me otherwise.
Do you undervolt via offsets as well as ac loadline at same time, or just offsets?
@@BrianHuether First I found the sweet spot of my offsets and this was the 90% of my results. Then I done Loadline calibration and AC/DC liteloads.
@@BrianHuetherI've done both AC/DC LL to Mode 9(0.4/1.1 mOhms) also -ve offset by 0.030V on my i7 14700K using MSI Z790 Tomahawk but I also under clocked to 5.1/3.9Ghz for both P/E cores 😂 stays under 1.2V and consumes 180w-190w during R23 multicore test. Do you think 0.1/1.1 AD/DC LL safe while disabling CEP? Because with that option turning on this CPU significantly lowers the Cinebench score to almost 50%.
@@gameotic1 Here is good thread on topic of CEP disable vs enable: www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1ev89cz/different_undervolting_methods_with_ia_cep I think given how many people are disabling and reporting positive results, that it likely is ok disabling. If you want to keep enabled, then I think in that thread there is link to procedure for keeping enabled and maintaining performance.
I've seen many videos about CPU undervolting, and each one does it differently. In my case, I did it this way:
I manually set the vcore to 1,3000
I manually set the P-cores to 53
I left the IA CEP on auto
I set the loadline to 3
I've had this system running for a week now and I haven't had any blue screens.
I've played games like cyberpunk/bf2042/tarkov without any problems
Benchmark XTU 2.0 11,347 Mark
Cinebench r23 33,500
Max temp 85 C
Bios Microcode 0x129
Simply wonderful, thanks for helping those of us who don't know
@@serchoz Glad the info is useful!
That's the best thumbnail I've seen in MONTHS!
@@NegativeROG Thanks. I thought there would be risk of people not understanding it, and maybe that is the case as no one has made any "more cowbell" comments.
@@BrianHuether Their mom's wouldn't let them stay up late enough. Don't worry about what idiots think, your thumbnail is fucking funny, bro!
You can also undervolt with Cep. Just not in the loadline. I would always set AC and DC equal. If Cep intervenes then your loadline settings are not correct. To do an undervolt with Cep you have to use the adaptive Vcore so that Cep does not intervene. And your system is also faster and more stable.
CEP or Current Excursion Protection is actually intended as a protective function and is intended to prevent processors from running unstable when the voltage is too low. For this purpose, the clock speed of the processors is reduced above a certain voltage.
My Score on R23 is 38800 CEP on
@@onlinegaming4826 Is that with 14700k? That is definitely way higher than average score.
I just noticed recently that my bios shows a number. SP or something. Mine shows 71 typically. I read this is indicator of silicon quality. Some people report in 90's. Anyway, as much as I would love to improve performance, for now I am just trying to get similar to stock Asus profile performance, with lower temp/power/score. Thanks
@@onlinegaming4826 I also meant to say, I stopped trying to adjust DC loadline when I realized my mb Asus z790 Proart being no die sense board will not provide accurate enough sensor readings to achieve this sort of precision tuning.
@@BrianHuether no its a i9 13900kf. Just wanted to show that you can get good scores with cep
With my Gigabyteboard, the loadline is set to high and AC DC 45 that is 0.450 milliohms, which is always different on other boards. but this way I can have CEP on without any problems you just have to find the sweet spot yourself
@@onlinegaming4826 ok, thanks, understood!
Buildzoid has resolved this issue already; lower the AC/DC loadline to around 70, and put a VID limit if your board has the option, no more suicide voltages
VID limit? Are you talking about Core VID(voltage requested by the CPU)? Vcore(Voltage provided to the CPU). What value buildzoid recommended?
@@gameotic1 Yes, it plateaus the vid requests, but is unavailable on msi boards,
A high loadline setting blows up the vid requests on the i9s and i7s, so lowering the loadline helps keep the voltage sensible, the cpu can be undervolted too
@@AndroidBeacshire on the latest BIOS update with micro code 0x12B MSI had included this option named as "CPU VR Voltage Limit" which can be manually adjusted. Go check it out.
I LOVED THE SOUNDTRACK!! ITS SO SARCASTIC and FUN!! If you wanna stay safe whit intel just go for 14600k/13700k the best CPUs ever in this generation!
Glad you enjoyed the sarcastic nature of the sound track!
Thank you. Subed!
I'm on a gigabyte board and the BIOS values are kinda different. The AC Loadline range is basically 0 to unlimited, Intel's stock is 90. Does the 0.1 value on yours mean the lowest possible value?
@@serajr If you go to that reddit post in the description, the one by user Janitorus, he shows how this all looks for various motherboards including MSI. On Asus, I used 0.1, just because stress tests started failing if it was down to 0.06.
Your method is fine, but if you turn on IA CEP it will reduce your clock speed by around 50% under load. IA CEP should be enabled to prevent current spikes as for intel recommendation. I wouldn't turn it off after all that fiasco.
It's better to undervolt manually by VID offset or vf curve points (sadly the latter is broken on msi boards) and increase AC LL gradually untill it doesn't trigger IA CEP. This way you also get lower max VID (on idle / single core load).
Keep in mind increasing AC LL too much could be dangerous too (if it's a lot higher than LLC). Do it slowly in increments of 0,1 mohm and never go past 1,1 mohm.
@@Savigo. This is the topic that I think needs the most discussion. The pros and cons of various approaches. When reducing ac loadline I see reduction in vcore. Your approach is reduce via offsets, then raise ac loadline? As well as enable cep? If you do that approach, are you also adjusting CPU loadline calibration level? In Asus bios this is default level 3. You also mention adjusting til CEP is not engaged. Are you looking at some param in hwinfo to visually see when that is engaged. Anyway, would be interested to learn more! Thanks
@@BrianHuether You can see whether or not CEP is kicking in by comparing cinebench multicore scores. First do one run with it disabled for reference. Then enable it. Worst case scenario it will reduce your score even by 60%. If it's barely triggered it will reduce score by around 5%. Typical variance in CB scores is within 1%, so if you get that close it means CEP is not engaged.
AC load line is the value that tells the CPU how much v-droop it should compensate. For example if AC = 0,6 mOhm and current = 150A, the CPU will receive extra 0,6*150 mV = 90 mV under that load. Load Line calibration (sometimes called vrm load line, but it could be also called CPU load line on asus boards, because naming scheme is a mess) does the oposite. So if your ACLL = LLC you should have 0 vdroop under load.
For this reason AC LL should be equall or less than LLC because you don't want to overcompensate voltage. BUT it has to be at least at 70% impedance of the VRM load line to not trigger CEP.
There is a big problem though. VRM load line value is not disclosed anywhere. But most of the Z-boards have flat LLC (8 on asus boards) set to 0,01 mohm and steepest (1 in case of asus) set to 1,1 mohm. So if you go for LLC mode 1 you can get away with ACLL = 0,8 mohm.
If all the above doesn't make sense I recommend Buildzoid's video on that topic "YOU DON'T HAVE TO TURN OFF CEP to undervolt intel 13/14th gen CPUs". He explains in detail how IA CEP works and shows different settings on the osciloscope.
@@Savigo.What is meant by ac ll=LLC? On Asus, LLC is a level. When that level is default 3, ac ll is 1. When it is, say, 7, it is 0.45. If we set a low ac ll should we also be raising LLC level?
Thanks
@@BrianHuether Each LLC has hidden value in mohms that dictates how steep the curve is. On asus LLC1 = 0.01 mohm, LLC8 = 1,1 mohm. The rest is something in between, but I don't know exact values since I use MSI board. AC LL should be within 70% - 100% of that hidden value if you don't want to trigger IA CEP but keep it enabled.
I have I9 13900kf with 0x129 bios update, is it safe to apply same bios settings
I wouldn't do it. CEP on! and then set your loadline so that your score is back to normal, then your loadline is set correctly. Then equate AC and DC. Then you can set an undervolt with adaptive vcore. And with Asus you can also set an IA VR voltage limit to 1.4v watch Buildzoid
Hey Brian, thanks a lot for the video!
I was wondering, what are the graphs windows you used to display HWinfo stats in realtime?
I'm talking about the 4 windows in the bottom left area in the Windows test!
Thanks a lot in advance!
@@Madd3e Hi, glad the video is of use. If you have the sensors window open, right click on any parameter and you will see option to add it as a graph.
@@BrianHuether I’ve been searching for that options for ages, installed a lot of addons and searched the internet for hwinfo graph forever!
Now you showed me the most obvious options ever! Thanks man, for real! I feel soo dumb 😂
I appreciate it man, thanks for making this video. I was thinking maybe I should super-simplify my full guide into one minute monkey-see-monkey-do type videos. But end of the day, I want users to know *what* they are actually editing and *why*.
I think the less TH-cam shorts the better. The method you outline involves a good amount of time to digest. Oddly, the only reason I made the video was because I have a video series on building a Windows/Mac computer with 14700k and realized as part of that series I really need to be sure I can honestly recommend a 13/14 gen CPU. Your reddit post shows what one needs to do. You definitely should make video as well, and get into nuances. I think talking about CPU loadline calibration, how that relates to ac, dc loadline would be useful. For instance, I notice with Asus, its enhanced oc profile sets loadline calibration level to 7, then hwinfo I see ac loadline 0.45. In my case, I have the level as 3 per Intel default baseline, but curious if I should adjust loadline calibration level.
@@BrianHuether I wouldn't want to repeat what guys like Buildzoid already have done, although sometimes a more to the point format can help some people out too. Don't get me wrong, I like how he does his testing and impromptu stuff in between as well, for me, that works fine. Some people hate reading, but sometimes you just can't get around it.
As simple as possible, the lower LLC required for stability, the better. But low LLC has more Vdroop as well. Higher LLC potentially has more overshoot, but will allow you to undervolt more due to Vdroop (and undershoot) affecting things less. But that depends on the type of hardware implemented. And here we are, three sentences later and it's no longer simple.
Medium/Medium-High LLC is fine for either method (AC LL, Adaptive offset) without getting too complicated.
From Intel's community post: "Intel’s current analysis finds there is a significant increase to the minimum operating voltage (Vmin) across multiple cores on affected processors due to elevated voltages."
This is the key point: "Elevated voltage events can accumulate over time and contribute to the increase in Vmin for the processor."
"accumulate over time" is no bueno. That causes accelerated degradation. Basically its aging the CPU faster than normal. The problem is the BIOS update and adjustments won't reverse damage caused by accelerated degradation.
@@kxmode The fixes from Intel aim to prevent those unnecessarily elevated voltages from occuring and setting IA VR Voltage Limit in BIOS is yet another means to further keep a ceiling on voltage. So yes, over time, elevated voltages could cause trouble, especially on high workload systems, but the whole point of Intel microcode fixes plus additional settings that people have arrived at after sound analysis is to force CPU to operate at lower vcore avg and spikes.
While I have different methods that work better for me, I cannot disagree with your results. You have a simple way (and a redundancy in this regard for extra insurance) to keep Vcore voltages at a safe level (at or below 1.4v) that will lead to long term stability, and to make 13th and 14th gen CPUs run quieter and cooler. I was getting a little worked up when I saw the Intel failsafe SVID being implemented but in just a few clicks you had things running better.
I hope you inspire many to set their bios to run their chips as well as yours.
@@rluker5344 Thanks for the comments. Yeah, this whole business is about inspiration, and my inspiration came from the reddit post I linked to, so hopefully over time more people see the easy steps they can take to lower power/temp/vcore and keep performance nearly the same
Set the SVID behavior to Auto. Intel Fail Safe would increase the voltage which would increase temperature and degrade your cpu in the long run. Also set the CPU load-line calibration to leave 1 it helps to protect the cpu from voltage over shoot after the load is removed. Read the information under this setting. I Guarantee it would give you low temperature with a lower power consumption. Also stop running benchmark softwares on these CPUs for the sake of satisfaction by seeing the scores. People are deliberately killing their CPUs running these softwares. Like prime95. Normal work load doesn't stress the CPU that hard. I use CPU z bench only.
@@warraichlabs5154 I am using typical scenario for SVID, load line calibration level 3, which sets ac loadline to 1.1, but I then lower to 0.1. Yeah, those benchmarks can be rabbit hole. I just ran cinebench for 5 minutes, Geekbench, and that's it. Thanks for tips!
Cinebench r23 is pretty safe and a lot of workloads can stress the cpu to similar levels. It's basically a render. You could damage a CPU with something based on AVX instructions if your AC loadline and VRM loadline is set improperly. It also pushes a lot more current through cpu, so not having Icc max set to intel recommended could also be dangerous.
You are correct about the Intel Fail Safe SVID as if I only change that setting, SVID to IFS, my all core voltage goes up 200mv over Asus Auto and about 350 mv over Best case scenario, under CPUZ stress test load at 5.5ghz on my 13900kf. IFS is a throttling 1.5v+, Asus Auto is 1.312v and Best Case is 1.156v VID with everything else auto on my Asus Z690.
Using Intel Fail Safe will destroy your performance and is likely to degrade your CPU with volts frequently going over 1.5v. You should stay bat or below 1.4v.
This is the problem with LLC 1. It lets your volts droop so much under all core load that you have to compensate with a much higher voltage that doesn't droop under low use or single core load and leads to much higher voltage spikes than you would get from your VRM if you chose a higher LLC (Asus scale is higher LLC = lower vdroop, but other motherboard manufacturers use a different nomenclature.) The higher voltage spikes are bad for your CPU's longevity.
Actually Hardcore Overclocking has done a lot of testing with oscilloscope monitoring verifying this and has it in a lot of his recent videos. Probably has the most relevant testing for the real voltage behavior of 13th and 14th gen CPUs. The missed by internal monitoring spikes from the VRMs when load drops are less than 50mv. I recommend his videos.
I use LLC 6 (which may be a bit high for some), Best case scenario SVID (which likely doesn't provide enough volts to be stable for some, even at LLC 6) and my overclock setting (which is still undervolted from these settings) with boost clocks to 6GHz (2-core) never get up to 1.4v under any scenario.
I'm not saying my settings are guaranteed better than yours for your particular setup, I'm just suggesting you try a lower vdroop LLC setting, undervolt from there to stable and see how much lower your low use volt spikes go.
Also if you are using HWinfo it is better to look at Vcore than VID since VID is just the volts your CPU is requesting and Vcore is what it gets per the monitoring of an external sensor.
Edit: I watched to the end of the video and the Intel Failsafe SVID setting was changed and everything became better.
When he manually adjusted the AC LL the SVID Behavior is overridden, fairly positive, so I hear. Could be wrong
@@Savigo.I have iccmax 307, but in stress tests I don't see anything near that, though who knows when transients are happening and not being detected
really this unique special helped me, But ( Curent /EDP Limit Trotling ) YES . How to fix this?
Hi, from what I understand, seeing Current Throttling in HWInfo64 or Intel XTU is normal when you apply intel baseline limits. I was also seeing this in intel XTU and HWInfo and looked into it and learned that the monitor is comparing to projected current values. Because in BIOS current is limited to 307 when using the intel baseline, seems monitoring tools see that as "current throttling". Someone here asked about this: www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1c9tk9d/currentedp_throttling_after_undervolting/
Bottom line: it isn't something to worry about
@@BrianHuether so it's normal thank you! I returned everything to default just in case. I use the XTU tool and found that I can reduce the voltage to (-200) without problems, the temperature in stress tests is 75 s maximum, I have I7 14700k.asus z790 when testing the result is 12300
I run a 14700k 1.38v 2x5.8 4x 5.7 8x 5.6 ecores @4.4 adaptive voltage with - 0,060 @5.6 no power limit cinebench r23 is around 37k . Never gets over 80c because i delid it and use a costum water loop .
The easiest and the best thing to increase the 13/14th gen cpu's longevity is reducing clock speed of all cores by around 300 MHz. It's basically a free undervolt by roughly 0,1V - 0,15V. Especially on i9s that are often pushed to 1,5V out of the box.
Intel will never admit that because that would put them in pretty rough legal situation (false advertisement).
On the other had you will never notice a drop from say 5,7 GHz to 5,4 GHz, but it will drastically reduce voltage and temps. I wouldn't trust intel's 1,55V either (maximum vid request on the new microcode). CPU can get around 0,1V more if you include transients and voltage regulation quality of your vrm. Yes, since Intel extended the warranty, they have to have some faith in that 1,55V but it's a balancing act for them between:
1) Suppling enough voltage for chips that are already degraded so custemers won't notice instability.
2) Reducing the voltage to the level that won't degrade healthy CPUs *untill they run of of warranty*.
3) Not cutting off the upper part of VF curve because these cpus were advertised for higher frequency.
And sure you can also add undervolt on top of that but how much depends on the silicon lottery and how much is your cpu already degraded.
@@Savigo. That makes sense, and in fact during stress tests I see that 5.3 is where performance cores pretty much average at. Definitely something I have thought about as I have been reading about people setting fixed freqs.
so should i buy i7 13650HX or no ?
@@aligams232 It comes down to personal decision, but if you are comfortable with bios settings, and if the laptop you buy has the sort of settings shown in the video, then I see no reason to not purchase. I am with Puget Sound on their analysis of the situation, which is currently not seeing reasons to avoid 13/14. But you should be comfortable applying new bios, modding it as shown, and checking if more bios updates come out. Then running stress tests and looking at temps, vcore in Hwinfo64 would be good way to see if things are running in a way that fosters stability and longevity. Good luck!
I have been using an overclocked 12th gen for 2.5 years without issue. It would be damaged also if the voltage and current exceeded it's design abilities. Just use Intel POR and limit the current and/or voltage. It's not rocket science just stop these excessive voltages.
I'm buying a 13900K or a 14700k as soon as the prices bottom. I'm not afraid of these cpu's.
Hey i just did everything you said on this video with my i5 13600kf and when benchmarking I'm getting a stable 1.05vcore, 4992mhz core clock (should be 5100mhz), and 70c 125w on whole package. The highest spike i get on vcores is 1.177v.
I believe it is safe to say that I've lost 100mhz of performance here for getting a much cooler and stable cpu, right?
If you set both PL1 and PL2 to 125W you could be power limited. But 5GHz all core under 125W is still great! Check your frequency during single core test to see if it was some kind of throttling. Single core shouldn't be limited by either power or temps.
Hi, there is a down-the-rabbit-hole aspect to this crazy business. People are getting things such that they are seeing no performance loss, but that involves some next-level tuning (and sometimes is best suited for boards that have so-called die sense sensors). I suspect if you go to the Reddit Overclockers forum you could get some advice. But from what I am seeing in my tests, for instance what I show at 21:44 in the video, is that multicore performance drops by about 1%. That certainly also corresponds to a slight reduction in avg CPU freq. Some people are taking an approach where they set a constant freq and make other adjustments. Also there are some crazy settings related to frequency binning and temp limits such that you tell the CPU at which temps to start dropping freq. Plus RAM related settings... Deep rabbit hole! But I haven't tried any of the next level stuff. At this point I am just glad I came across a reddit thread that showed this fairly simple approach to get power/temp/vcore more under control with "nearly" no performance hit. Good luck!
@@Savigo.@BrianHuether The power and frequency tend to shoot up to 5090mhz 130w 1.16v for split seconds while doing the multithread benchmark but they're mostly stuck on 4990mhz 125w 1.05v during the workload.
Cinebench gave me a score of 23350. Idk if it's good or bad.
Edit: for future reference i did some research and turns out it's a decent score for this cpu. Appearantly this cpu has a score 23k-24k on cinebench on average with default settings.
@@teramir4302 hey, would you still recommend these settings for a 13600kf?
@@2DollarGargoyle yes I'm still using it.
I have the 13700HX 16-core cpu in my gaming laptop Legion 5i Pro gen 8.
My main question is, when should I be worried? I have an i5-14700KF and there's all this talk about that the CPU slowly and permanently destroys some parts of it. My computer is very new, about a month old but I don't feel like running even a slightly destroyed CPU. I have a 5200 MT/S RAM (saw somewhere that this may be useful). So should I be worried? Could my CPU be in any way shape or form faulty?
Hi, do you mean i5 14600, or i7 14700? Computer builder Puget Sound recently reported on how their Intel vs AMD CPUs are faring. They found AMD is failing more frequently. They also apply bios settings that help ensure stability. So I think the bottom line is that using Intel baseline settings to limit power and current, in addition to some form of undervolting as shown in the reddit post I linked to, maximizes likelihood that everything will be ok. Of course one can never be certain of anything, but at least we have good info out there on measures we can take. And of course get your latest BIOS and watch for subsequent updates. And definitely ask on that reddit thread in the description, as that is a very active thread on this very topic. Good luck!
Your CPU is perfectly fine half the people that are saying they have bad CP’s don’t even earn Intel CPU’s. It’s blown out of proportion.
@@AphillyatedYT That is super accurate one sentence summary of the situation.
intel made this dude going from guitar andy to tech channel , this is how 13th and 14th gens are
@@nemesis762 I don't plan on having a tech channel direction, the channel is aimed at independent music/video producers, but in that realm it is tough to not get into computer tech. As it is, producing these tech videos has taken me away from music 🎶 and time to return!
@@BrianHuether they made this generation and everyone are doing or watching tech channels to fix there problems . the main point is that they manage to f up even music guys and that is mind blowing . you are not first one , i saw many other musician , editor and etc to make almost same videos
I think i do something wrong, i have 19 14900k on a asus z790-e strix mobo, i loaded intel default profile on performance mode, extreme for some reason is worst, i set a limit on cpu voltage at 1.4V, disabled turbo boost, undervolt enabled, CEP enabled, eTVB enabled, so the benchmarks are mediocre, but one i'm starting to do an undervolt on core SVID, i get a huge boost on performance, i got to -160mV and i expected somewhere araound -100mV the undervolt protection to kick in, but no, and cinebench r24 get me on 2260+ points, r23 get me in 39500 point and r15 on 6110+ points, i dont understand whats happening, are the sensors reporting wrong values? it should not increase in performance, right? And cpu voltages dont go over 1.34V.
Bro shall i buy intel i9 13900h 13 gen processor lap now it is safe or not please tell bro ?
@@empty-us5zd It comes down to personal decision. If you buy one, it is best to update bios and apply the sort of bios settings shown here, or ask on the reddit Intel forum about your particular setup. Settings in bios are all about reducing temps, voltage, power (with very little performance impact) so that CPU is running as stable as possible. Good luck!
SVID Behavior changes AC LL. If the AC LL is taken out of AUTO and manually changed, changing SVID Behavior does nothing.
@@spgolder107 Thanks, good to know. Oddly though, with fixed ac ll and svid behavior altered, I see benchmarks change, but maybe the changes are just test to test differences.
My CPU is still brand new and unopened, Can I just undervolt it just right after installing and first boot instead of BIOS update? since bios Update is bad,
I suggest going here: www.reddit.com/r/intel/comments/1eebdid/1314th_gen_intel_baseline_can_still_degrade_cpu/, and this guy Janitorus will have better advice than me. I don't think the view is that the new BIOS is bad, just that a lot of people have improved on it with the approach shown at that link and which I show in the video
Just put it in your mb you will be fine great advice for you have a good cooler as the do run hot mine hits 85 full load on stress test but in game get 65 to 72°c paired with a artic freezer III 280 aio with upgraded p14max fans in the cooler
Can I put these values for the 14900k 0.1 IA AC Load Line?
@@emirmisel2446 I suppose you could try. I used Intel xtu app in windows and set ac loadline lower and lower each time (in bios I set it), til stress test in xtu showed failure. Then to be safe, I upped it from there. So, 0.06 was failure, 0.07 seemed ok, but I wanted a safety margin and then set to 0.1. You might get some ideas from the guy that posted the method on reddit. I link to his thread in description, he is quite the incredibly helpful person, and he'll have great advice in terms of additional nuances of the method. Good luck!
I have an i9 14900k, I just received my RMA'd CPU because my previous one was degraded. This video is astonishingly ignorant and disregards all of the REAL issues people were and are having with their CPUs. Yes, as of the 0x129 BIOS update a brand new i9 13900k & 14900k will be safe - but that's only a fix that came a week ago. These CPU's are safe as of just now. Any of the CPU's that are experiencing crashing/out of video memory errors are degraded beyond repair and need an RMA (like mine did).
@@jeffamunoz The only thing one can ever be sure of is the present. This video is about maximizing likelihood of CPU longevity. Puget Sound reports higher failure rates of their AMD equipped systems and in August stated they see no reason to adjust their course. They are simply being rigorous with BIOS settings.
Ignorance is willful resistance to knowledge. The research and rigor that I put into producing this video is actually the complete opposite of ignorance.
Anyway, I know RMA'ing tech sucks. This Intel situation comes down to personal decision making. If you decide to stay with your Intel chip, then just consider doing the things shown in this video, which are based on an excellent reddit post I link to in description, where large number of users are reporting favorable results. That way you change your probability space and get your CPU situated to have higher likelihood of longevity.
Thanks for the discussion!
@@BrianHuether maybe better knowledge is reading WHY they have lower failure rates, rather than just reading a headline.
-"Puget Systems attributes their more modest failure rates of Intel processors to their conservative approach to power management settings. By adhering strictly to Intel's specifications and developing their own power settings that don't hurt performance, they've managed to mitigate some of the stability issues plaguing other users."
Yes, because this is reasonable for most people tossing this into their gaming rig XD, even if you do this, 95% of people that build their systems do not, they trust that the manufacturer of both the motherboard and the cpu have put in limits that are reasonable and will not cause harm to the cpu.
So your argument is "if you do some things and know 100% what you are doing, maybe even beyond what the manufacturer of the motherboard knows and is willing to implement, and if you did this since install, than you would be in better condition than an amd setup"
Sounds reasonable
@@AnthraxVX Yeah, I read the whole article just yesterday, prior to that had seen it referenced. They don't mention what settings they use, other than a custom version of Intel baseline. But it is just sensible. I am trying to show people a probabilistic way of thinking about this, and how this way of thinking can help people overcome fear. I mean there are thousands of prospective buyers (and existing customers) maybe they don't want to wait for 15 gen, maybe don't want AMD, but there are things they can do to change their probability space, which is just a bios update and s few custom settings. I think people are misinterpreting when I say it's not an issue. What I refer to as "issue" in the video is the hyper fearful sentiment of many, and how social media is part of that fear. Anyway, contentious topic, and it is actually a good thing that not everyone agrees. That is how healthy debate occurs! Thanks
@@BrianHuether Yeah man. You lost a viewer today. Maybe two. Don't talk to your viewers in a condescending way, we're here as your audience not as your personal therapist
I politely explained to the guy why I don't view the video as ignorance, expressed sympathy for his RMA situation, and offered advice. Where is the condescension there? Thanks@@AJ-iu6nw
I updated in microcode 0x125, do I need to really update 0x129?
@@BLACK_POWER02 Yes, as x125 fixed the eTVB bug and x129 then is supposed to better control voltage requests. But with x129 people are still seeing voltage going above 1.5, and so the IA VR Voltage Limit set to , say, 1.4, and reducing ac loadline (technically, that is a resistance value) is a further means to help put ceiling on voltage.
@@BrianHuether So 1.4 volts is pretty high. In general I recommend never going over 1.4 volts. Unless you change the CPU every 4 years, but most people don't do that. Otherwise good video.
@@AcidGubba Are you referring to IA VR Voltage Limit? Thanks
Its REALLY an issue for 99% of people who plug in their CPU and never update bios and also reduce voltage to prevent 1.4v+ single core boosting... Also new intel bios fix DOES NOT reduce single core voltage above 1.4-1.5v. There is NO 100% fix yet... Both hardware unboxed and gamers nexus have pointed this out.
@@defectiveclone8450 I see 1.52 spikes in Intel default settings with 0x129. That is why second time in video where I change settings I make adjustments and after that I don't see vcore going above 1.34 ish. That is the thing that might not be clear enough up front in the video. The first time where I just update to new bios and run tests is to show why the bios is undesirable at default. Then after adjustment results are radically different. That said, I am not using oscilloscope so maybe I am not seeing big picture. I think the Puget Sound report needs more attention and I wish I had posted info on it in the video, but I read their full report yesterday. They highlight their not seeing anything alarming (yet) with 13/14 gen namely because of their rigor in setting power and other limits (though they don't mention settings). So I still think people can minimize their worries by maximizing use of settings that many people are reporting good results with, such as method I am using based on the linked reddit post. Thanks for comments.
@@BrianHuether all true.. the issue is the average joe doesnt do anything but use their PC and when it starts to crash take it back to the store.. OEMs are not happy with intel :)
Six months from now no one will remember this issue as RMAs are processed and the microcode patches mitigate the issue. It was massively hyped by TH-camrs but intel and motherboard manufacturers share responsibility for overlocking the cpu out of the box. Hopefully arrow lake will be good.
@@westfield90 Yes, Intel in a weird way became a gaslighting victim. That forced them to play a certain card, and I think ultimate result is positive. Their engineering will only be improved, despite hype around this.
its not the performance hit with the microcode...
its the incredible instability.
even after the bios updates and the DAYS of bios tweaking, i still get random crashes for absolutely no reason. the 13/14th gen higher end CPUs are so incredibly unstable because intel cant keep up with AMD high end CPU's so they crank the voltage up, screw the longevity of the chip, it will fail and it will be unstable while doing so.
@@wildwilco Troubleshooting this stuff is nightmarishly difficult because of interaction of motherboard and CPU. Motherboard makers, Intel, gaming industry, they all share accountability in this. They have been enjoying this wild west atmosphere, chasing after something unshackled. What I was trying to get across in video is that the important thing is to try and reduce likelihood of trouble via settings. Now that won't help in all cases, but statistically, it should help in majority. Do you get instability regardless of BIOS? Even with most conservative settings? Do you have good cooling?
@@BrianHuether i went completely conservative, everything basic, going lower than basic even... still unstable a.f. its allready in RMA, but i doubt i will get a new one, so i allready got over to AMD. i have lost all faith in intell so far, ESPECIALLY in the way they have dealt with the issue.
they kept selling faulty CPUs even though they KNEW about oxidation and degradation issues, and they outright refuse a recall. why? to keep shareholders happy. they dont want to take the relatively ''small'' financial hit on short term right now, instead they will be getting a huge financial hit in the near future.. and its allready happening. server hosts all jumping ship to AMD, less power draw for equal and sometimes more performance. thats the money hit. the gamer portion aint even that big.,
its somewhat on intell, like i said, AMD has a better architecture which gave them way more performance with way less power draw, and intell couldnt keep up, so they just cranked up the voltage, cranked up the MHz to try and keep up with AMD and say they have the ''fastest cpu''
thats the issue, the old architecture they keep relying on instead of innovating (in other words, intell doesnt want to spend too much money developing)
its all the fault of shareholders having the company in a chokehold.
Ihave same processer and asus prime z790 a wifi same bios type i recently update my bios last time i get worst thermal issu now i its safe i currently set to intel profile
"The new BIOS includes Intel microcode 0x129 and adjusts the factory default settings for the non-K processors, enhancing the stability of Intel Core 13th and 14th gen desktop processors.
@@bloviatormaximus1766 Hi, I think the format of my video is not ideal, and I should have made the main point up front. What I am trying to convey is that 0x129 bios as is still results in thermal throttling, still results in vcore peaking above 1.5. With the modified 0x129 bios settings as I refer to them as, one can significantly reduce power, temps (getting rid of thermal throttling), and vcore, and at same time have nearly no performance impact. That is the analysis I show from 17:00 in video, and I really should have put that at start. Thanks
Intel has released another microcode update, 0x12B. This one would truly fix the root causes of instability issue, Intel said.
@@tvgerbil1984 Thanks for the info. Will definitely check it out!
My 14700k VIDs are going above 1.55v despite applying the x129 update and setting BIOS to Intel Defaults.
Hi, that is why that guy on reddit posted a method to address that. Maybe the structure of my video isn't ideal, but the first time I set BIOS is with Intel baseline and in that case vcore spikes at 1.52. After using the method in that reddit post vcore avg around 1.18 and max 1.36 ish. This why right now it seems best to apply these additional settings.
@@BrianHuether that is well & good but the fact that the VID (not Vcore) is going above 1.55 means the microcode voltage cap isn't working for me at all. I saw another person complaining about the same on Intel community forums...there may be a bug that Intel/motherboard makers need to address.
@@gessler555 Does setting IA VR Voltage Limit impact that?
@@BrianHuether I haven't tried that as it requires deviating from Intel Defaults and giving them a potential reason to deny RMA should I need it. Anyway, the point is that being on Intel Defaults should ensure that VID is capped at 1.55v but for some reason it isn't doing that for me.
@@gessler555 Ahhh, ok, understood. The craziest thing about all this is the shared accountability among Intel, motherboard manufacturers, and gaming industry. It has been wild west in the performance chase. Good thing is this fiasco will result in better engineering. A German economist, forgot the name, coined a term creative destruction. Sometimes something has to fail hard, then something better replaces it. So will be interesting to see what rises from the ashes.
Intel the fear!
Intel is out of chips so no more RMAs of new chips, now its a shell game of intel playing the shell game. I spent about a day working with a new 14900k and I can just about get it to match the old 13900k which was in the corrosion date range. The punch line is download intels overclocking software recommends putting the amps up to 475 and the wattage up to 400watts. 😂
Just all amd haters ripping into us intel users but I read something about amd haven problems to on the 9 edition cpu
@@marcusthorburn7414 If you don't go along with the Intel Cancel Culture then you definitely get the fear pushers coming out from all corners...
@BrianHuether mines been fine up to now paired with 4080 ddr5 MAG z790 tomahawk motherboard it's a beast
Just dont buy it, and sell it asap for cheap
Advising people to buy known bad CPUs? How very shilly of you.
Sorry bud, even if it's 1% of units that have a defect - Intel's scummy behaviour in dealing with this, refusal of RMAs when they KNOW they put out defective chips tells me they can't be trusted.
Buy one if you want - but don't come crying.
@@monkinsane Crying is not my style as you noticed.
I dont have Fear. I have a 7800x3d. Why bother with all the drama.
@@Bryanhaproff A lot of the drama is self inflicted, which is why I am fear free on Intel for now. I wanted to go amd route, but because I wanted Intel virtualization features, and because I run Mac Sonoma on the system as well, Intel makes sense. I will gladly look at amd if 1) it is as solid as Intel in music production 2) has similar virtualization features 3) can work as well as Intel in a hackintosh system. Thanks
@@BrianHuether Hackintosh system... interesting question.
Some people use computers for non gaming, and like having fast ram and high clock speeds
@@AndroidBeacshire So you think gaming means Low clock speeds and Low ram speeds as opposed to high ram speeds how interesting... the correct answer was the 7800x3d nand chips arent very good at zip compression and the like... Fast ram fast chip fast gpu all gaming buddy.
It still takes forever to install a large compressed game... the game just plays better after is all. Also for Creation Content like Video Creation.. You are correct its not very good i suspect or at least it takes me forever.
How is this supposed to be normal for regular users that have no clue. Dumbster fire
@@cuongtang9539 I probably should have mentioned, at the step where I show how to set ac loadline, one could probably just set that to 0.4 ish and results would be similar.
So the easiest instructions would be
1. Update bios
2. Select Intel baseline
3. Disable adaptive boost technology
4. Disable IA CEP
5. Set AC loadline 0.4 or 0.5
6. Set IS VR Voltage Limit to 1.4
7. Set svid behavior Auto
I know even that will be tough for some people, but there just isn't a super user friendly way about this, since large number of users won't touch BIOS.
So yeah, that is always the dilemma with technology. Making it accessible to add many as possible. I guess this video has target audience of people who aren't super tech savvy, but can update, adjust BIOS.
Thanks
Music is sooooo annoying.
@@boestube5805 This is exactly why TH-cam needs to support multi track audio, so listeners could then mute music, adjust volume, etc.
buy amd, fear problem solved
I think fear problem is best addressed by information. The Puget Sound report, which unfortunately I didn't read til after posting video shows higher failure rate of their amd equipped systems. So are we to fear amd too?
I thought about AMD but on music production side there are some plugins that require Intel from what I gathered. Also quicksync on Intel is great for video editing workflows.
So what I am trying to do with this video is say, "look, situation is what it is, if your computer needs dictate Intel 's highest end consumer options, and you aren't waiting for 15 gen, then here is what to do to maximize likelihood that your CPU will have longevity.
By the way, Puget Sound believes the key to stability/longevity is making good bios settings. So the approach here is also in line with that view, though I don't know exactly what they are adjusting.
Thanks
I fear my ram is too fast for amd
“It’s not an issue”. Great, you know more than Intel, seeing as how they have actually come out and said it IS an issue, have them hire you, please. The hubris in this video is astonishing. And, btw, you said in another comment the only thing you can be sire of is the present, which is wrong. The only thing you can be sure of is the past, and the past proves this is an issue and Intel themselves said there are further bios updates coming soon so the issue is not completely fixed. Way to use your brain, could you be more condescending?
@@estebanfigueroa9177 If the issue was as serious as the online fear mongering horde makes it out to be, Intel would have recalled all 13/14 gen CPUs, every retailer would remove from shelves, etc. And thousands of companies would be coming forward with same failure stats due to stationary nature of these sorts of statistics. Sure, there is a certain issue, not a show stopper obviously, and those that have the willingness to watch this video and take from it the true meaning, will better understand the issue, will understand what to do, and will understand how to reduce likelihood of short longevity. It takes a certain courage to watch the video if you are already predetermined to be part of the fear mongering crowd. That said, if one is willing to take an objective, rational stance, the video should help overcome fear. That is a good thing. Trying to help people. What are you trying to do?
😂😂😂