Please assist.  Thank you in advance.

i am on Windows 10 x64 Pro.  Fresh install.  Zero other programs installed.  Only have Xplane 11 and 12.  NVIDIA game driver up to date.  Windows updates all completed. 

PC Specs

i9-14900K

128gb DDR5 RAM (Moved down to 32gb just for troubleshooting here)

GeForce RTX4090 Ti SUPER GPU

1,000W Power supply

Neither game will run.  They are updated.  I have attached the most recent log files for each showing the app crashed.  I have researched and followed hundreds of other tutorials and sites and have ended up here. 

Event viewer typically gives error code 0xc0000005 when this crash happens.  1 out of 25 crashes will go to BSOD but the rest just crash to desktop. 

Any advice or assistance would be appreciated.  Thank you

Links here if this is allowed for the log files

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0523/6778/6146/files/XP11.Log.txt?v=1726702846XP11XP11

XP12

Your xp12 is certainly not anywhere near up to date. Where up to 12.1.2

Edited September 19, 20241 yr by mjrhealth

XP11: You're trying to use a third party aircraft (AW109) and have X-Camera installed. Remove all third party plugins and use default aircraft only until you get the base simulator working.

XP12: 12.00 is horribly out of date. Update it, then try again.

 

Check Windows' event logs. They may have more information where something goes wrong.

Do they crash or just won't start. I had this problem and it took me 5 months to find out that I had accidently enabled osd setting in GPU tweak 3. After turning it off both started right up.

On 9/19/2024 at 9:41 AM, TDMfire said:

i9-14900K

This is your problem. Make sure your bios is up  to date, and do some research on you tube, Plenty of videos on it, Also affect the 13900k

15 hours ago, mjrhealth said:

This is your problem. Make sure your bios is up  to date, and do some research on you tube, Plenty of videos on it, Also affect the 13900k

I unfortunately agree with mjrhealth, Intel dropped the ball trying to get its CPUs to compete with AMD.

 

3 hours ago, mSparks said:

I unfortunately agree with mjrhealth, Intel dropped the ball trying to get its CPUs to compete with AMD.

 

Wasnt just intel, motherboard manufactures, wont mention ASUS had there hand in killing chips. Making setups to make chips perform better without considering the life of the chip.

2 hours ago, mjrhealth said:

Wasnt just intel, motherboard manufactures, wont mention ASUS had there hand in killing chips. Making setups to make chips perform better without considering the life of the chip.

Many Industry guys are playing damage control for Intel so as not to damage any future relationships. Im not, the only basis of the problem is Intel pushed the power consumption of their chips higher than the chips can actually take.

In order to get similar perf to AMD chips consuming half or better power,

So as not to appear the 50% slower that they actually are.

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/236773/intel-core-i9-processor-14900k-36m-cache-up-to-6-00-ghz.html

simply cant take 253W

This has been incoming since AMD switched to chiplets, the only way Intel could compete with that massive surprise completely new architecture was to keep pushing the power consumption higher and higher until their chips melted - which is what has been happening for the last 12 months or so. Share price down more than 50% YTD.

Hence the "unfortunately" - the bad news is the CPU will likely be completely dead in 6 months, there is no good news.

https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/intel-rejected-oxidation-returns/

 

.

 

Edited September 21, 20241 yr by mSparks

2 hours ago, mSparks said:

he only basis of the problem is Intel pushed the power consumption of their chips higher than the chips can actually take.

Nah you missed the other bit, MOBO manufacturers where bypassing the intel limitations to make there boards look better, thats how it was originally discovered. It was never just an Intel problem

1 hour ago, mjrhealth said:

Nah you missed the other bit, MOBO manufacturers where bypassing the intel limitations to make there boards look better, thats how it was originally discovered. It was never just an Intel problem

And you missed the bit where that turned out to be mostly not true and the actual problem is oxidation inside the chip (second link last post).

Motherboard vendors wont be taking any liability for distributing boards set to Intel specs- and there is no accusations that they did anything else.

Edited September 21, 20241 yr by mSparks

9 hours ago, mSparks said:

And you missed the bit where that turned out to be mostly not true and the actual problem is oxidation inside the chip (second link last post).

Motherboard vendors wont be taking any liability for distributing boards set to Intel specs- and there is no accusations that they did anything else.

There was. And yes I'm aware of the oxidation again that was only part of the problem. Being following this since it started. And I believe the oxidation was limited to some batches.

Edited September 21, 20241 yr by mjrhealth

1 hour ago, mjrhealth said:

And I believe the oxidation was limited to some batches.

 

15 hours ago, mSparks said:

the only basis of the problem is Intel pushed the power consumption of their chips higher than the chips can actually take.

They are all melting and oxidising, the motherboard and microcode "fixes" simply limit the performance to what you could have got for a tenth of the price - mostly so they have a greater chance of making it a month or two out of warranty before they fail completely.