So, three hours after receiving the new processor, the 165 updates installed and configured themselves. This is the first time since this saga began that it worked just like that, as if out of the box. I have not installed any other software or changed something in the BIOS. Now, I let the PC run a maxed out simulation...
Well done. Congratulations, that's a very strange case. I have always said the CPU is the last thing to suspect. You have proved me wrong. I hope your good luck continues. Please keep me posted. I would love to hear of your continuing success.
Ok, no BSOD after two hours maxed out simulation. Usually, in each new hardware configuration, the PC had crashed by now. I consider the problem solved: It was the processor, which I will now RMA. Thanks for all your help; it was a long and winding journey!
My conclusion from all of this is: PCs are still not modern devices, compared with many other products - why a faulty processor passes all of Intel's very own tests is beyond my comprehension. Processors should be able to self-diagnose their functionality, saving the user hours or, rather, days of futile work.
Well let me know in a week or so, if it is still doing well. I'm surprised, CPU, as I stated, is the last thing I would suspect. Not that I don't believe you, just surprised. I have seen cases where it was the CPU, but they are quite rare. I would be sure to tell Intel all that you have been through and all that it has cost you. Not that they will do anything about it, but I would just have to tell them, just me being me. I do know Intel puts them through rigorous tests to make sure there is nothing wrong, but I guess with this technology, things can still fall through the cracks.
What else could it have been? The only thing (apart from the CPU) I did not change once during my ordeal were case and cables...
With the new CPU, all I had to do was to: put it in, install Windows, install drivers - no issues (yet). But just the fact that I could 1. download the 165 updates and 2. install them in one go tells me something. Now, I have spare mainboards, graphics cards and memory so I can buy a new case and another CPU to build another compute box - or sell it all on Ebay.
Can you RMA the CPU? I would certainly try. If it is too late, I would show Intel the dates on the receipts from everything you bought trying to fix it, when it was the CPU all along. If we did not live so far apart, you would already have a potential customer, especially if you were able to RMA the CPU.
I intend to RMA the CPU to Intel, I have two weeks left in the three year warranty period.
Great job and absolutely perfect timing. Just think, you may then have a second 'beast' of a computer. Most people wish they had just 1. You can have 2 now. Besides, for all the grief and expense you have been through, you deserve something to show for it. I envy you. Not the grief or expense, just having 2 absolutely fantastic computers. Now you can do twice the work in half the time.
Well, the "repaired" box is still computin'...
Still, so much time wasted without actually learning anything. If there'd been a "self-test module" in the CPU, I would have saved in total 11 full workdays of fiddlin' around.
I agree with you, but I guess we could say that about every piece of hardware and especially Operating Systems. In fact, with what I do, I would be very happy if there were a module that could be trusted which would say, you have a hardware or software or driver problem. With what I do everyday, most times that is the first thing you need to find out and the thing you spend the most time on. But, I do agree the CPU should have one. It's very rare that it is the CPU, but it is also one of the hardest to diagnose. I'll even go you one better. Since almost everything in a computer runs through the CPU, why couldn't that module also say, I'm getting insufficient data from the hard drive, or the ram is very sporadic in the information it is giving me or the power supply is not giving me the power I require.
The truth is, the dump files most of the time always blames the CPU first. The reason is, whatever is wrong in the computer, be it another piece of hardware or even a driver, it is the CPU that recognizes something is wrong and issues the shutdown order. Because it issues the shut down order, it is blamed for the crash. So, why couldn't the CPU module that does that give 1 more piece of information? I'm issuing the shutdown order because there is a problem and tell why it issued it? You certainly had more than your share of problems and way more than most people. But, in my world, I see it a little different than you would or probably should. I am sure the CPU somewhere knows why it is issuing that order, why couldn't it tell us? Then I would probably have to find something else to do in my 'spare time'.
Quote