this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2024
311 points (98.1% liked)

Technology

59988 readers
2387 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Sanctus 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I have one in the box from Christmas. Kinda scared to use it.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

If I had a known unused one, I would absolutely not use it until Intel finishes putting out their patch to motherboards to address this. You have no idea whether you could cause damage that won't be detected, leaving you with a slightly damaged processor that malfunctions occasionally.

Intel may publish guidance on how to use unpatched processors. If they don't -- they sure have not been forthcoming with information thus far -- here's my own suggestion.

When I do use it, I would, prior to booting any OS on the CPU, go into the BIOS and turn everything related to the CPU to minimal performance. Memory speed down, disable Intel turbo boost, everything. If you can disable cores there, disable all but one -- even my severely-damaged pair of CPUs could still boot without corrupting my root filesystem as long as I ran using only a single core (though two cores induced problems), and I'd take that as an argument in favor of one core being preferable, though I cannot say for sure that doing so helps avoid damaging the chip rather then just avoiding being affected by the damage once incurred.

And the first thing I'd do, booted into that minimal-performance-CPU-environment, would be to do that motherboard BIOS update. Then go back and reset the motherboard to defaults and use the thing normally.

Maybe that's over-cautious, but we know that the processors destroy themselves with use, and we have no idea what the minimum amount of time -- if any -- to incur damage is. Unless Intel can come out with some kind of diagnostic to reliably detect damaged CPUs, you won't know if you damaged your CPU in that window before the BIOS update, and it is maybe occasionally corrupting data, which I'd guess is a situation that you probably don't want to be in during the lifetime of the CPU.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Some motherboards can update the BIOS without a CPU installed. Look for a BIOS flash button on the motherboard.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

If viable for someone's particular situation, that sounds like an even better suggestion than what I offered.

[–] Sanctus 1 points 4 months ago

If I decide not to sell I'll do this. Booking marking this handy guide for whenever I scrounge up the rest of a new PC.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Best to throw that away. Good job keeping it from affecting the performance of your pc.

[–] Sanctus 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

At that rate I'll make a keychain out of it. It sucks cause its above my normal price range and was a gift.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

Sell it as unused, I bet someone would pick it up