Tuesday, July 23rd 2024

Intel Statement on 13th and 14th Gen Core Instability: Faulty Microcode Causes Excessive Voltages, Fix Out Soon

Long-term reliability issues continue to plague Intel's 13th Gen and 14th Gen Core desktop processors based on the "Raptor Lake" microarchitecture, with users complaining that their processors have become unstable with heavy processing workloads, such as games. This includes the chips that have minor levels of performance tuning or overclocking. Intel had earlier isolated many of these stability issues to faulty CPU core frequency boosting algorithms, which it addressed through updates to the processor microcode that it got motherboard- and prebuilt manufacturers to distribute as UEFI firmware updates. The company has now come out with new findings of what could be causing these issues.

In a statement Intel posted on its website on Monday (22/07), the company said that it has been investigating the processors returned to it by users under warranty claims (which it has been replacing under the terms of its warranty). It has found that faulty processor microcode has been causing the processors to operate under excessive core voltages, leading to their structural degradation over time. "We have determined that elevated operating voltage is causing instability issues in some 13th/14th Gen desktop processors. Our analysis of returned processors confirms that the elevated operating voltage is stemming from a microcode algorithm resulting in incorrect voltage requests to the processor."
Modern processor power management runs on an intricate clockwork of collaboration between software, firmware, and hardware, with the software constantly telling the hardware what levels of performance it wants, and the hardware managing its power- and thermal budgets by rapidly altering the power and clock speeds of the various components, such as CPU cores, caches, fabric, and other on-die components. A faulty collaboration between any of the three key components could break this clockwork, as has happened in this case.

Intel is releasing yet another microcode update to its 13th- and 14th Gen Core processors, which will address not just the faulty boosting algorithm issue the company unearthed in June, but also the faulty voltage management the company discovered now. This new microcode should be released some time around mid-August to partners (motherboard manufacturers and PC OEMs), who will then need to validate it on their machines, before passing it along to end-users as UEFI firmware updates.
Intel is delivering a microcode patch which addresses the root cause of exposure to elevated voltages. We are continuing validation to ensure that scenarios of instability reported to Intel regarding its Core 13th/14th Gen desktop processors are addressed. Intel is currently targeting mid-August for patch release to partners following full validation. Intel is committed to making this right with our customers, and we continue asking any customers currently experiencing instability issues on their Intel Core 13th/14th Gen desktop processors reach out to Intel Customer Support for further assistance, the company stated.
It's important to note here, that the microcode update won't fix the issues on processors already experiencing instability, but prevent it on chips that aren't. The instability is caused by irreversible physical degradation of the chip. These chips will, of course, be covered under warranty.

Meanwhile, an interesting issue has come to light, which that some of Intel's processors built on the Intel 7 node are experiencing chemical oxidation of the die as they age. Intel responded to this, stating that it had discovered the oxidation manufacturing issues in 2023, and addressed it. The company also stated that die oxidation is not related to the stability issues it is embattled with.
We can confirm that the via Oxidation manufacturing issue affected some early Intel Core 13th Gen desktop processors. However, the issue was root caused and addressed with manufacturing improvements and screens in 2023. We have also looked at it from the instability reports on Intel Core 13th Gen desktop processors and the analysis to-date has determined that only a small number of instability reports can be connected to the manufacturing issue, the company stated.
If you feel your chip might be affected, you can file for an RMA.
Sources: Intel Community, Intel (Reddit)
Add your own comment

387 Comments on Intel Statement on 13th and 14th Gen Core Instability: Faulty Microcode Causes Excessive Voltages, Fix Out Soon

#126
fevgatos
VinceroBut it happened... meanwhile where is that 1st gen LGA 1151 board running last gen 1151 CPU (unmodded)??
But they never promised support bud. Do you get the difference?
Posted on Reply
#127
Klemc
EvrsrThere are reports even Supermicro boards are pushing voltages to very unsafe levels. Well, reading Intel's report it would be the CPU that is requesting them.
It's AGESA, so yes any Mb Bios maker could fail to put correct(ed) numbers
fevgatosBut they never promised support bud. Do you get the difference?
Yes, they are armed
Posted on Reply
#128
Evrsr
b1k3rdudeIf its a hardware issue like GN have suggested to by a failure analysis lab, then how exactly is a microcode update going to fix it? seem like a non-sequitur to me.
The base clock is much lower than what is being pumped on the chips, so that will require lower voltages. But, less drastically, the Turbo Boost is 5.6GHz vs 6 on velocity, TB 3.0 and whatever else.

I guess Intel will change it so that we will see chips that perhaps stay below the 5.6GHz limit, possibly the 5.3 to 5.5GHz that some people have mentioned as a fix for these issues. Good silicon should be able to do 5.6GHz but not all.

They will probably avoid a mass recall this way but I think OEMs especially will not be happy. Users should be able to get a damaged CPU exchanged but will still end with lower performing parts than what was reviewed.
KlemcIt's AGESA, so yes any Mb Bios maker could fail to put correct(ed) numbers


Yes, they are armed
Bar any wierd OS or atypical setup, the microcode will be delivered and then pushed to the CPU at every boot. You don't need EUFI updates.

Given Intel's latest release, this has gone from "board vendors fault" to "we messed up and are fixing what the CPU does".

Said Supermicro board seems to implement every Intel hardware recommendation regarding voltage, to spec. Still is having issues.
Posted on Reply
#129
neatfeatguy
Intel is working on rolling out their next line of CPUs, would they even have inventory/stock to fulfill thousands (if not millions) of faulty CPUs if a recall was demanded?

They'd have to scramble to run more or be forced to issue refunds? Or....what would their next step actually be?

If this turns into a class action suit against them those impacted outside of being a big company that buys trays worth of these CPUs aren't going to see much in return. Maybe 3/4/5 years down the road once the suit is settled the everyday consumer might get $10 back in their pocket.
Posted on Reply
#130
Klemc
EvrsrThe base clock is much lower than what is being pumped on the chips, so that will require lower voltages. But, less drastically, the Turbo Boost is 5.6GHz vs 6 on velocity, TB 3.0 and whatever else.

I guess Intel will change it so that we will see chips that perhaps stay below the 5.6GHz limit, possibly the 5.3 to 5.5GHz that some people have mentioned as a fix for these issues. Good silicon should be able to do 5.6GHz but not all.

They will probably avoid a mass recall this way but I think OEMs especially will not be happy. Users should be able to get a damaged CPU exchanged but will still end with lower performing parts than what was reviewed.



Bar any wierd OS or atypical setup, the microcode will be delivered and then pushed to the CPU at every boot. You don't need EUFI updates.

Given Intel's latest release, this has gone from "board vendors fault" to "we messed up and are fixing what the CPU does".

Said Supermicro board seems to implement every Intel hardware recommendation regarding voltage, to spec. Still is having issues.
Forget about AGESA i said, i mixed topic with another...
Posted on Reply
#131
fevgatos
RGAFLFevgatos at this moment.

Just to be clear, never said either one of those things. You should be ashamed
Posted on Reply
#132
Klemc
Why are you so concerned, there is a fail and that's all.
Posted on Reply
#133
kapone32
Here is how I see this.

1. AMD and Intel are embroiled in a War for users.
2. Intel could not just create a new socket and expect that users would pay for that after AM4.
3. The 12th Gen chip was safe.
4. When the 13th and 14th gen were released they were highly tuned chips from the same generation.

We started hearing about Intel issues from some Tech tubers like Tech Yes City when his 11th Gen chip was faster than his 13th gen chip. Then we had a real issue and Nvidia was quick to blame Intel. There was an update released that lowered the voltage and performance to the point where Reviewers started giving you results with and without the power limits removed. Then Wendell did his video and the flood gates opened. People that try to use AMD as a shield are not looking at the reality of this.

Now Intel have promised a chip with no E cores and no HT. I wonder if that one will support AVX 512.

This battle has been summarily lost by Intel. Let's hope they learn, just be glad the traditional Media is not fully aware of this yet. One thing it has really done is expose the Techtubers that are fanboys with their AMD is failing too videos. It is like how some people use the X3D chips to complain about AMD's heat. As Wattage is the biggest thing that leads to heat. These Intel chips seem to have too much wattage for the package size. I have seen theories like the substrate in construction of the chip but they just turned them up too high. I wonder if that chip that is just cores will be TSMC?
Posted on Reply
#134
RGAFL
fevgatosJust to be clear, never said either one of those things. You should be ashamed
Sorry, I forgot, Intel just f*** up. AMD create biblical, world ending events.
Posted on Reply
#135
kapone32
fevgatosYes, obviously. Do you think they accidentally said that they are not going to support zen 3 on x370
You have been using this argument for like 5 years already. The sad thing is since X370 works with Zen3 this is a huge nothing burger.
Posted on Reply
#136
Event Horizon
fevgatosSo amd overvolted their 3d chips in order to compete turning them into handgrenades and then Intel overvolted theirs resulting in crashes.
VSoC was set too high by some motherboard vendors in expo resulting in socket and cpu damage. Kindly stop spamming misinformation.
Posted on Reply
#137
Klemc
At least there is a lot of written things about Intel past and AMD also infos now in this Intel fail threads, a true bible.
Event HorizonVSoC was set too high by some motherboard vendors in expo resulting in socket and cpu damage. Kindly stop spamming misinformation.
Don't try, it's perhaps a bot.
Posted on Reply
#138
mahirzukic2
How does any go about the process of RMA-ing the CPU in this case? An invoice is needed? Just send in the CPU? Something else?
Posted on Reply
#139
Klemc
mahirzukic2How does any go about the process of RMA-ing the CPU in this case? An invoice is needed? Just send in the CPU? Something else?
You tell Intel mail: i have problems i can't solve tied to the last infos known about CPU being buggy, the answer that's them, let us know.
Posted on Reply
#140
Onyx Turbine
Can anyone express their view on what they think a 13100 is affected? just ordered one and it will be used for gaming, not necessarily overclocking..
Posted on Reply
#141
RGAFL
Fevgatos is Pat Gelsinger and I claim my £5.
Posted on Reply
#142
fevgatos
mahirzukic2How does any go about the process of RMA-ing the CPU in this case? An invoice is needed? Just send in the CPU? Something else?
You send it in, you get a new one back within a few days.
Posted on Reply
#143
Count von Schwalbe
Onyx TurbineCan anyone express their view on what they think a 13100 is affected? just ordered one and it will be used for gaming, not necessarily overclocking..
Shouldn't be. Mostly i9's and a few i7's were affected.
Posted on Reply
#144
Onyx Turbine
Count von SchwalbeShouldn't be. Mostly i9's and a few i7's were affected.
Sigh.. that is good news..
Posted on Reply
#145
Klemc
Onyx TurbineCan anyone express their view on what they think a 13100 is affected? just ordered one and it will be used for gaming, not necessarily overclocking..
It's microcode i think all CPU have the same, but don't use same settings.
Posted on Reply
#146
Onyx Turbine
KlemcIt's microcode i think all CPU have the same, but don't use same settings.
i choose the 13100 because of needing not more than 100fps and low power draw etc. and expected longlivety, if it fails a big disappointment and newly acquired socket 1700 mb incl. ddr4 down the drain
Posted on Reply
#147
RGAFL
Count von SchwalbeShouldn't be. Mostly i9's and a few i7's were affected.
The degradation is seemingly being sped up due to the amount of voltage of the i9 and i7. The whole range has that issue so it's a wait and see at the moment.
Posted on Reply
#148
Onyx Turbine
RGAFLThe degradation is seemingly being sped up due to the amount of voltage of the i9 and i7. The whole range has that issue so it's a wait and see at the moment.
now when im saying it myself it wouldnt be a bad advice, to skip the 13 and 14 range? when want 1700 take 12 range e.g. 12600 in my case..
Posted on Reply
#149
the54thvoid
Super Intoxicated Moderator
There is far to much crap being posted to keep up with.

No more personal attacks.
No more derailing.
No more in-thread warnings.
If you step across the line, I'll delete your post, and if it's in bad faith, you're getting points.
Posted on Reply
#150
mxthunder
As someone who tuned the V/F curve of my 13900KF from day one, I dont really want any microcode updates pushed on me.
I wont be updating my BIOS that is for sure. My chip has been stable since day 1 and still is. Luckily, even being a n3wb to 13th gen at the time, I noticed crazy vcore happening as soon as I installed windows and began to benchmark and check the behavior of the system. I then went down a 2 week rabbit hole of undervolting and checking for stability.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 4th, 2024 19:43 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts