9 Replies Latest reply on Jun 1, 2018 11:03 AM by Al Hill

    processors authenticity/compatibility


      Hello , i recently purchased via Ebay this processor : Intel Confidential, QEY8 ES 2.30 GHZ,  3324B407 E4, 2L324399G0020.

      A) Can somebody from intel company confirm that this is original ?

      Which brand and model of motherboard and RAM is it compatible to ?

      I have tried MSI x99s SLI PLUS, MSI x99S Gamer 7 , ASUS x99A USB 3.1, and ASUS Z8PA- u8  with any of :

      Crucial Ballistix WHite 2400 MHZ, Crucial 2 x 8 GB DDR4 2400 Mhz - CT8G4DFS824A.C8FBR1 , Kingston KVR21R15S4/8 and Kingston KVR24R17S8/8MA MEMORY MODULES BUT WITH NO HOPE.


      All these motherboards with RAM modules are tested with Intel XEON e5-2609 V4 and Intel I7 6800K and work perfectly. I have spent around 500 USD so i need to find a solution.


        • 1. Re: processors authenticity/compatibility
          Al Hill

          You should not have purchased this processor.  It does not matter if it is original or not.  It is not for distribution or use.

          Contact the seller for a refund.


          You cannot use this processor.

          Information About Engineering Sample Processors


          Also, asking these questions AFTER you have purchased the processor is a bit silly.



          • 2. Re: processors authenticity/compatibility

            So the reason that this CPU is not workable is the Stepping ? Can it be anyhow fixed or is it just for experimental reason and it does not work by any means?

            I need to give a concrete reason for why i must ask a refund

            • 3. Re: processors authenticity/compatibility
              Al Hill

              Read the link I provided.  It has all the answers you need.


              The reason you give the seller is that he is not supposed to sell confidential or engineering samples.  They are not meant to used by the consumer.


              No, it cannot be fixed.  Do not try any circular logic on how you can make this work.


              Get rid of it.  If you get a refund, great.  If not, lesson learned.



              • 4. Re: processors authenticity/compatibility

                In most cases, the BIOS provided on production-level boards do not provide support for installing microcode updates onto PP/ES processor steppings -- which means processor errata will remain outstanding and vulnerabilities will remain exposed. That should be reason enough.



                • 5. Re: processors authenticity/compatibility

                  Dear Scott,

                  There is no microcode update for XEON e5-2699 V3. Neither for MSI X99 nor for ASUS x99 or C612 chipset. I could have spent around 3000 USD for a new one and have the same security "holes" . This reason does not suffice.

                  • 6. Re: processors authenticity/compatibility
                    Al Hill

                    This is the "circular logic" I was talking about.



                    • 7. Re: processors authenticity/compatibility

                      ...And this is a completely different situation that I am talking about. PP/ES processors are typically down-rev silicon - which means that there is silicon-level errata. These are errata so bad that they cannot be fixed in microcode; only a silicon-level change can fix them.


                      • 8. Re: processors authenticity/compatibility

                        The initial build of the processors regarding security issues sucked from the very beginning. Intel was forced to compromise them to 30% decrease in efficiency which is totally unacceptable!

                        It has been announced that no microcode update is required for e5-2699 v3 chips (the ES i purchased) so it is makes no sense regarding microcode update! Even if i had bought the retail edition, there would be still no microcode support and i suppose when one pays for 18 threads, he needs ALL the process power and (s)he CANNOT be compromised with 30% decrease (after the microcode update).

                        I paid a serious amount of Euros for something to work and not to be thrown to be recycled. And i do not understand what is the point behind producing something that it cannot be tested or even used.

                        • 9. Re: processors authenticity/compatibility
                          Al Hill

                          John, you purchased a processor from a disreputable seller on an auction site.  Plain and simple.


                          And, since you did not read the link I provided, I will paste a part of it here:

                          What is an engineering sample (ES) processor?

                          Engineering sample (ES) processors are also known as qualification sample processors. They are pre-production processors Intel loans to original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), original device manufacturers (ODMs), and independent software vendors (ISVs) to be used in the product design cycle before product launch.

                          These processors often include more features than production processors for customer pre-production evaluation and test purposes. ES processors:

                          • Produced by Intel are the sole property of Intel.
                          • Produced by Intel are Intel Confidential.
                          • Are provided by Intel under nondisclosure and/or special loan agreement terms with restrictions on the recipient's handling and use.
                          • Are not for sale or resale.
                          • May not have passed commercial regulatory requirements.
                          • Are not covered under Intel warranty and are generally not supported by Intel.


                          You are trying to justify something that cannot be justified.


                          Let us get back to square one - you are not allowed to have this processor, your seller was not allowed to sell it, and you will get no where bringing up a microcode issue as you should never have had the processor in the first place.  You lost your money.


                          This discussion is closed.