Intel Core 13/14th Gen Instability Update - Future Products Unaffected + Current Gen Product Updates

[Thomas_Hannaford]

Intel is sharing a few important updates on the Intel® Core™ 13th and 14th Gen desktop processor Vmin Shift Instability issue investigation, including ongoing guidance for BIOS updates and settings and the status of upcoming next gen product families. Intel will be publishing another update by the end of September.

Future Product Update

Intel confirms that its next generation of processors, codenamed Arrow Lake and Lunar Lake, are not affected by the Vmin Shift Instability issue due to the new architectures powering both product families. Intel will ensure future product families are protected against the Vmin Shift Instability issue as well.

Unaffected Products List

Following the recent warranty extension announcement for affected Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen desktop processors, Intel confirms these currently available processors are not affected by the Vmin Shift Instability issue:

• 12th Gen Intel Core desktop and mobile processors
• Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen i5 (non-K) & i3 desktop processors
• Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen mobile processors – including HX-series processors.
• Intel Xeon processors – including server and workstation processors.
• Intel Core Ultra (Series 1) processors

Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen Desktop Processor BIOS Updates

While most Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen desktop processors are not impacted by the Vmin Shift Instability issue, Intel recommends all users continue following guidance:

• Ensure the system is running with the latest BIOS, which users can look up through Intel’s Compatibility Tool and/or their motherboard manufacturer’s website. Users can also learn more about how to update their BIOS by visiting the following site: How to Update BIOS.
• Utilizing the Intel Default Settings recommendations for their Intel Core 13th and/or 14th Gen desktop processor – including both Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen consumer, commercial, and entry workstation desktop systems.

[Gessler]

I've updated my 14700K/STRIX Z790-E II build to the latest BIOS (1503) and HWiNFO confirms I'm running microcode version 129.

However I continue to get VID requests as high as 1.565V during 30-min Cinebench R23 runs and even in gaming loads the VIDs are crossing the supposed 1.55V limit.

These are just what could be caught by HWiNFO at its default polling rate of 2 seconds which means higher spikes might be happening that I'm unaware of.

My BIOS is on Intel Default Settings with everything set to UEFI default values (which we get by hitting F5).

Any guidance on what I should do?

[pressed_for_time]

The VIDs are the voltage requested by each core, the voltage that matters is Vcore that HWINFO shows under the motherboard section. It is Vcore that is being restricted to 1.55v, it is a single value that is applied to the whole CPU. HWINFO allows Vcore to be graphed (see image below), based on the polling interval this may be of less value than might be hoped.

[Janitorus]

Intel says: bug is fixed, requests now limited to 1.55V

User observes: 1.55VID being surpassed

So, bug is not fixed yet. It really is that simple. We know Vcore is actual voltage.

[Gessler]

Yes, I'm aware of the Vcore reading and I've observed a peak of 1.518V on it during the said Cinebench run. Again, at default polling rate of 2s.

But what the Microcode is supposed to limit at <1.55V is the requested voltage itself, which are the VIDs of each core. Vcore is not controlled by the CPU, so Intel's microcode cannot do anything to place a limit on that, as Vcore depends on many motherboard-related factors like VRM design, Vdroop etc. which are not controlled by Intel. The microcode can only tell the CPU to stop asking for voltages above 1.55V which under realistic circumstances should mean that it would never get anything above that either.

But as my testing (and that of at least 2 others I've seen on this forum) shows, there are cases where applying the 0x129 update & staying on Intel Defaults is still resulting in the 1.55V VID limit being crossed.

[iameatingjam]

I haven't experienced anything like that. But does your mobo have an option to manually limit vid? Cause you may be able to do it that way.

I have a gigabyte board, if you happen to as well, its under tweaker>advanced voltage settings>cpu/vrm settings>internal vr control>ia voltage limit. And it definitely works, I've seen buildzoid use it.

I believe asus has the option too, I don't think asrock does, msi.... I'm not sure.

[Gessler]

Yes, my Asus board has that feature as well. However, it would require me to deviate from the Intel Defaults and potentially give them a reason to deny my RMA should I end up needing it.

[iameatingjam]

I see. Well the bios update was enough to get it working for me but.... would it be deviating, if you are just reinforcing their own setting as it should be? You could send an email and ask.

[ysk_PLUZ]

私はRMAのプロセスで『マイクロコード129で劣化の問題が【完全に解決】したのなら「交換」してください、他に問題が残っていれば「返金」してください』と問いました。

intelは「交換」を選択しました。

[VARADHARAJAN]

@Thomas_Hannaford 

Thanks for the confirmation.

I have an i5 -13500  S series Processor, I want to confirm microcodes 0x125 and 0x129 apply to this i5 - 13500 processor, recently Gigabyte updated new bios firmware, I downloaded and flashed new bios, but intel default settings did not appear, and microcode 0x125 or 0x129 does not appear. Only the old microcode appeared  0x35. So I asked the Gigabyte support team, and they replied that your processor  i5 13500 was not affected so the microcode does not appear they said ask to Intel only.

So please reply to me and confirm.

Thanking you

Varadharajan K  M.Sc B.Ed Mathematics

[iameatingjam]

Thats right... 13500 is a C0 die, aka its basically rebranded alder lake. I'm not sure if there's cut down b0 variants, if there is, they're probably only a small amount. You could use cpu-z to check. It should be under 'revision.' If it says anything other than b0, then you shouldn't be affected.

[VARADHARAJAN]

@iameatingjam 

Thanks for your reply.

Revision is  C0 

Thanking you

Varadharajan K  M.Sc B.Ed Mathematics

[Geek_sam]

So, given how the excessive voltage have slipped past the endurance testing of the whole 2 years of RPL and RPL refresh... how do you make sure the new generations arn't affected?

[pressed_for_time]

This issue is specific to the Raptor Lake architecture which is a monolithic chip. There is a different architecture for the new generation of processors such as Lunar Lake and Arrow Lake, these are also tile based CPUs. The combination of both means that this issue will not affect them and no doubt Intel will have tested them thoroughly to ensure that this is the case.

[BtheZebra]

The RMA process should be simplified. If a knowingly problematic product was released, there should be more trust given to the verified purchaser the product. Intel does not want to do a recall because the cost would be too much at a time when Intel's stock is taking a dive. The business put short term profits over consumer trust, there really is nothing more to it than that. There needs to be a list of tests that Intel wants done for the RMA process to be listed on the site. Once all tests are performed a decision should be made. There should not be any open-ended questions asked. I don't know who is supposed to be satisfied with the response that future products won't have issues when they currently own a product with known issues. My trust is already lost, and Intel should do everything possible to make the process as easy as possible. 

[CapitanN]

Hello, i have purchased almost two monts ago a i9 14900K paired with a ASUS ROG MAXIMUS Z790 HERO motherboard and

i have had instability problems since then even im on 2503 bios update with the 0x129 microde fix since launch on 08/08/2024 and running on deafults profile.

I have lost hope on RMA as i been reading cases where intel puts a lots of rocks in your way to send a new proc, and of couse i lost

all confince on intel because of this. Where i supposed to go to iniciate the RMA and what data i have to provide to make my case?

many thanks to whoever reads this and responce.

[pressed_for_time]

I would suggest downloading the Intel Processor Diagnostic Tool from here . Be aware that it runs a stress test from the outset. This Tool will give a PASS/FAIL result. If you need to make a claim I would first contact the source you purchased the CPU from. I have not had to do a RMA but the local retailer I bought my 14th gen CPU processor from say that they will handle RMA claims.

[CapitanN]

@pressed_for_time many many thanks, i didnt know there was a tool to test processors!!

I got a PASS result so thats mean i dont have a failed proc???

[pressed_for_time]

I see you have an ASUS ROG motherboard. ASUS had a forum specifically for ROG owners. The part of the ROG forum that covers Intel 700 series boards can be found here . There may already been some potential answers to what you are experiencing in existing forum posts. Or you could set up an account and sign into the forum if you want to ask for advice about your particular issues.

[Dan0987]

In an interview with the Verge in July, Thomas Hannaford mentioned that “Intel is investigating options to easily identify affected processors on end user systems.” A CPU passing IPDT (latest version is from January 2024) is no guarantee that it is OK.

Contact Intel support if your system is still unstable with the latest BIOS and Intel's recommended settings.

[CapitanN]

@pressed_for_time thanks again for the advice, yes i been lurking that especific forum and by the way im using this guide from reddit 

https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/1axepvu/optimizing_stability_for_intel_13900k_and_14900k/?rdt=38445&onetap_auto=true&one_tap=true

and combined with XTU modififing just one parameter, the x ratio over P-cores wich is at x54, anything beyond that cause instability. Thats why i was asking if i can trust the Intel Processor Diagnostic Tool you advised me before. The only thing i care the most is that, i have a PASS green message from the diagnostic tool and thats mean i dont have a failed proc?.

Again many thanks to take the time to read and responce you very kind cheers!!