[tardy_one]

For server CPUs there's not a similar problem or they realize server purchasers may be less willing to tolerate it? I'm not all that thrilled with the prospect of buying Intels especially when wondering about waiting to 5 year out replacement compared to a few generations ago, but AMD server choices can be a bit limited and I'm not really sure how to evaluate if there may be increasing surprises more across the board.

[sirn]

Are you talking about Xeon Scalable? Although they share the same core design as the desktop counterpart (Xeon Scalable 4th Gen shares the same Golden Cove as 12th Gen, Xeon Scalable 5th Gen shares the same Raptor Cove as 13th/14th Gen), they're very different from the desktop counterpart (monolithic vs tile/EMIB-based, ring bus vs mesh, power gate vs FIVR), and often running in a more conservative configuration (lower max clock, more conservative V/F curves, etc.). There has been a rumor about Xeon Scalable 5th Gen having the same issue, but it's more of a gossip rather than a data point.

The issue does happen with desktop chips that are being used in a server context when pairing with workstation chipset such as W680. However, there haven't been any reports of Xeon E-2400/E-3400 (which is essentially a desktop chip repurposed as a server) with C266 having these issues, though it may be because there hasn't been a large deployment of these chips on the server just yet (or even if there are, it's still too early to tell).

Do note that even without this particular issue, Xeon Scalable 4th Gen (Sapphire Rapids) is not a good chip (speaking from experience, I'm running w-3495x). It has plenty of issues such as slow clock ramp, high latency, high idle power draw, and the list goes on. While Xeon Scalable 5th Gen (Emerald Rapids) seems to have fixed most of these issues, Zen 4 EPYC is still a much better choice.