Well there's a reason although the reporting is quite a bit lower than Id hoped. having looked at problems and lot numbers reported across multiple forums (some obviously duplicated) I cant say that there's any evidence that one lot number is any better or worse than any other lot number, at least not yet. Problems seem to be more random across lots. Personally I'm waiting for Intel to issue a PCN to Skylake or Confirmation that a future Firmware Update has finally achieved the stability Id expect. If there's an Intel PCN then Id need some method to determine if the CPU is the revised level, presumably HWinfo/CPUID or other utility.So after 6 pages, has anyone actually analysed the data to identify significant findings, or are we all just shouting numbers out for absolutely no reason?
Well there's a reason although the reporting is quite a bit lower than Id hoped. having looked at problems and lot numbers reported across multiple forums (some obviously duplicated) I cant say that there's any evidence that one lot number is any better or worse than any other lot number, at least not yet. Problems seem to be more random across lots. Personally I'm waiting for Intel to issue a PCN to Skylake or Confirmation that a future Firmware Update has finally achieved the stability Id expect. If there's an Intel PCN then Id need some method to determine if the CPU is the revised level, presumably HWinfo/CPUID or other utility.
Yep and also some with the original lot numbers who maintain they have never had any of these issues.That was my general opinion. I've just not seen anything substantial enough to suggest a correlation between an issue and a lot number. It is even harder to consider there being a correlation when a unit with problems can be fixed up with nothing but a reset, meaning 1 device, 1 lot number, 2 experiences.
Perhaps a photo of the label would help deciphering this. based on your purchase date a lot number of 1528 would be reasonable and I wonder if you damaged the label when pealing back the label pasted over the lot number.
Aside from a few aberrations which there are always some the lot numbers generally follow yyww format that makes sense, you just have to filer outliers since verification is nearly impossible.
No, there's no indication to support the revision theory. and there's plenty of 1429, 1430, 1431... 1444... 1522... so there's no freeze at 1428.Here is it. As you can see, I photographed it from the back, as the original label mostly peeled off with the added Amazon label. But it clearly states "LOT NO.1428". If it isn't clear to you via this photo, it is perfectly clear to me--there is no doubt about what it states. Then, of course, there is the pre-March 15,2015 cable problem.
View attachment 7988
Could it be that the 'Lot No' is actually a 'revision number'? That is, the lot number is set at a date where hardware is frozen and not changed until a hardware update is made?