June 2024 Guidance regarding Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen K/KF/KS instability reports

[Thomas_Hannaford]

*9/25/24 - Please go to the following link for the latest updates: Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen Desktop Processor Vmin Instability Issue Root Cause*

Intel and its partners are continuing to investigate user reports regarding instability issues on Intel Core 13th and 14th generation (K/KF/KS) desktop processors. We appreciate the Intel community’s patience on the matter and will continue to share updates on the investigation as it works towards a conclusion. In the meantime, we’re sharing an update on confirmed factors leading to the reported instability issues and Intel’s current guidance to users regarding Intel Core 13th and 14th Generation (K/KF/KS) desktop processors.

Investigation Background and Intel Default Settings Recommendations

Intel analysis has determined a confirmed contributing factor to the instability reports on Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen (K/KF/KS) desktop processors is elevated voltage input to the processor due to previous BIOS settings which allow the processor to operate at turbo frequencies and voltages even while the processor is at a high temperature.

However, in investigating this instability issue Intel did discover a bug in the Enhanced Thermal Velocity Boost (eTVB) algorithm which can impact operating conditions for Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen (K/KF/KS) desktop processors. We have developed a patch for the eTVB bug and are working with our OEM/ODM motherboard partners to roll out the patch as part of BIOS updates ahead of July 19th, 2024. While this eTVB bug is potentially contributing to instability, it is not the root cause of the instability issue.

As Intel and its partners continue working towards a conclusion to the investigation, we want to make sure that all users are clear on the recommended Intel Default power delivery profile settings for Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen (K/KF/KS) desktop processors. Intel also recommends users check their motherboard vendor’s website for the latest relevant BIOS updates:

These recommended Intel Default Settings are developed – based on extensive testing and validation - to ensure optimal stability and reliability for Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen (K/KF/KS) desktop processors. System performance is dependent on configuration and several other factors.

And to be clear, users looking to overclock or utilize higher power delivery settings than recommended can still do so at their own risk as overclocking may void warranty or affect system health (you can learn more at www.intel.com/overclocking).

Next Steps

As we noted earlier, this investigation is not an easy one to conduct and we’re grateful for both the support of our partners in conducting the analysis as well as the patience of the Intel community.

In the interim, please reach out to Intel Customer Support if you have questions or concerns regarding your Intel Core 13th or 14th Gen (K/KF/KS) desktop processor.

More Information on Intel Core 13th and 14th Gen (K-Series) Desktop Processors:

Intel Core 14th Gen (K/KF/KS)

Core i9 - https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/237504/intel-core-i9-processor-14900ks-36m-cache-up-to-6-20-ghz.html (KS), https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/236773/intel-core-i9-processor-14900k-36m-cache-up-to-6-00-ghz.html (K), https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/236787/intel-core-i9-processor-14900kf-36m-cache-up-to-6-00-ghz.html (KF)

Core i7 - https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/236783/intel-core-i7-processor-14700k-33m-cache-up-to-5-60-ghz.html (K), https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/236789/intel-core-i7-processor-14700kf-33m-cache-up-to-5-60-ghz.html (KF)

Core i5 - https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/236799/intel-core-i5-processor-14600k-24m-cache-up-to-5-30-ghz.html (K), https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/236778/intel-core-i5-processor-14600kf-24m-cache-up-to-5-30-ghz.html (KF)

Intel Core 13th Gen (K/KF/KS)

Core i9 – https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/232167/intel-core-i9-13900ks-processor-36m-cache-up-to-6-00-ghz.html (KS), https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/230496/intel-core-i9-13900k-processor-36m-cache-up-to-5-80-ghz.html (K), https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/230497/intel-core-i9-13900kf-processor-36m-cache-up-to-5-80-ghz.html (KF)

Core i7 – https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/230500/intel-core-i7-13700k-processor-30m-cache-up-to-5-40-ghz.html (K), https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/230489/intel-core-i7-13700kf-processor-30m-cache-up-to-5-40-ghz.html (KF)

Core i5 – https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/230493/intel-core-i5-13600k-processor-24m-cache-up-to-5-10-ghz.html (K), https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/230494/intel-core-i5-13600kf-processor-24m-cache-up-to-5-10-ghz.html (KF)

[3qw4tW46T4v256v]

Hi,

Is there any guidance available on how to apply these settings?

[pressed_for_time]

Motherboard manufacturers have issued a BIOS update that includes an Intel Default Settings (IDS) option. This will automatically apply the Intel settings for your particular CPU if you select it. In many cases there is encouragement to apply the IDS settings by default.

[David_Martinez]

Hello, please could you clarify if ASUS are included in these manufacturers? There was a BIOS update yesterday but I assumed it was for the Intel firmware flaw that has exposed all the 'Lake' processors to Stack Overflow (something i'm repeatedly getting in my Safe boot even after the update). I hadn't seen this message but assumed it would be something like this.
Optimised defaults just loaded back to the usual AQSUS onesd and I had to go through and retune everything, but i don't remember seeing a setting for it.

Also i get the kernel loop if i use the settings provided. I haven't tested every level but it works if I use 200 short, 100 long, sync all cores to 57, and all e-cores to 43. Thanks for your help, i'm sure it must be a nightmare having to lean on some of these suppliers.

EDIT: they've just released asnother today, so yesterday was probably the microcoder, today the default settings, i'll check and report back.

Edit 2:  Well... the answer is a big fat no. They did make a slight change to the wording on the boosts though (see pic). In some ways it reminds me of a spoilt child, but I think they were just trying to one-up you on the confusing messages.

Guys, i'm sure you're doing your best to lean on them, and whilst poorly communicated, I'm pleased you put the K_BSOD loops in, because otherwise it would only have been a matter of time before one caught fire, killed someone,  and your execs would have been hauled into the dock. But there are plenty of cost free, extra steps you can do to communicate this, without having to publicly state that you just didn't test it enough.
JayZeTwocents is already blaming ASUS for it, ask him to do a more detailed video than what he's done before.
OR, you could post on this very forum, the exact BIOS settings for each board. Its not your board, but it would show some effort to help those who don't know their way around bios, before kids start switching their VM or Microcode prior to getting randomwared. Also I think one of your processors is missing from this: https://edc.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/performance/benchmarks/overview/ 

For those reading with an ASUS Z790 who haven't managed to get theirs working, I would recommed hiring a professional, but here are the steps I take to run mine. I'm supposed to have finished my NVIDEA LLM certification by now, but instead i've spent two weeks in BIOS, so whilst it can be tuned up a little more, I prefer to aire on the safe side.
Also there is a workaround to effectively get it back to 'near XTU levels', performance-wise, but I don't use it.

In BIOS, load defaults, make sure AI Optimization is turned off on the EZ screen:
Press F7
Choose XMP 1 , XMP 2, or don't OC it
ASUS Multicore Enhancement - DISABLE Enforce All Limits
SVID Behaviour - Intels Fail Safe
Performance core Ratio - Sync all cores 
ALL-Core Ratio Limit - 57

Efficient Core Ratio - Sync all cores
All Core Ratio Limit - 43

*Move to CPU Management or use search*
CPU Core/Cache Current Limit Max - 307

Long Duration Package Power Limit - Try intels first, if that doesnt work set to 100.

Short Duration Package Power Limit - Try intels first, if that doesnt work set to 225

NOTE: ASUS wording above describes PP limits like they are the 'current' limit, but we're in Watts now.

Finally if you want to completely knock the 'k' off your i9: FLL OC Mode - disabled 

I should stress that these are my own settings, and unlkess you're doing something that really needs CPU power (most games don't), go with Intels lower settings.

The only game this has issues with that i've tested it on is Cyberpunk, it crashes when the boost times out i think. For AI use its run some pretty heavy models with no problem, although most of the time thats going through the 4090. For me personally, its running about 5-10% slower on 3D mark than when I switch to my board with another manufacturer, which sounds a lot but its still more than enough to play games.

[RippedBy14900KS]

Excuse me? And who is paying for that "Expert?" That better be intel. 

[gman17]

Thanks for this post, I have a z790 board and this really helped stabilize my system. I haven't had one crash since implementing this.

I have a Corsair Vengeance i8200

i9-14900k

64 gb ram

rtx4090

nvme ssd

However, I tested out Fortnite with my sons, which at one time ran 4k@120 fps with all settings on epic and hardware ray tracing, with no problem.  Now, the foliage in the game is still drawing even at close distance, despite view distance set on epic.  I know view distance is normally CPU intensive so clearly it is related.  I'm worried that for more demanding games that I actually play for my own fun, like Cyberpunk 2077, this will really become a problem.

Do you know what might be the best way to modify the above suggestions to give it a slight boost without creating stability problems again? 

Here are precisely the changes I made:

PL1/PL2 - 253w (both)

disable xmp

disable hardware prefetch (l1, l2)

underclock protection

ASUS Multicore Enhancement - DISABLE Enforce All Limits

SVID Behaviour - Intels Fail Safe

Performance core Ratio - Sync all cores 

ALL-Core Ratio Limit - 55

Efficient Core Ratio - Sync all cores

All Core Ratio Limit - 43

CPU Core/Cache Current Limit Max - 307

iccmax - unlimited disabled

[ksxkshan]

Thank you. This was very helpful.

[David_Martinez]

Intel have updated everyone indirectly by chiming on about their new socket having less heat issues due to its design.
Roughly translated as 'the chip/ socket before has a design fault. I felt like my moaning on here was fruitless, but the tubers are finally picking up on it. This guy also did a slot on gamersnexus. The question is, will intel do the right thing now, or will they be dealing with complete customer distrust as we head into the market correctional.
https://youtu.be/QzHcrbT5D_Y?si=Y57-Uyr-u2-0cbCO

[RippedBy14900KS]

'Everyone' Except I have to scour the internet for an answer, and cant even have edge running for more than 10 seconds with this processor. 

I've been silent long enough. EVERYTHING IS CRASHIN. EVEN INTEL XTU CRASHES WITHIN 5 SECONDS

[ksxkshan]

Reduce you cpu multipliers by a few notches. Maybe try 55 or 52 max. I seem to be doing ok now that I reduced to 55.

[Prototype]

You can't apply any of these suggestions on Alienware/Dell bios! The Bios is very limited!

[Nate6]

I also do not see these options in Alienware/Dell bios (Aurora R16 Desktop).

[Prototype]

yeah, Alienware and Intel i9 chips are a disaster. After this experience, I will no longer buy Dell or Intel. Customer support is non-existent. Especially when you spend thousands of dollars for the best of the best and end up with the worst of the worst.

I have exhausted calling, emailing and finally messaging on this board and simply ended up with a very expensive PC that can perform better as a pizza oven. 

Really frustrated, upset and disappointed with these brands. This is an example of how brands lose lifelong customers.

[Nate6]

Yeah I feel you, $5,000 PC shouldn't have these issues.

[David_Martinez]

I must say I haven't looked at an Alienware PC in a long time as i've always built mine, but I'm actually surprised Alienware sell K series on their PC's, as they are typically conservative, but indeed they do. Best thing is to turn everything down low, do a search in the bios for intel and make sure everything that looks like it may have come from the latest update is checked (assuming you haven't tested F5 to load optimised defaults). If you dont see the exact names, look for settings in CPU management that have amps next to them, there should only be 1. Also turn off anything AI related. 

If your board takes it, or if you have a spare, the 7800X3D is going for somewhere between 200-300 quid these days an is still the gaming king.


This is my gripe with the way intel have handled it. They admit its an issue with their chip, yet don't go the extras mile to help people with the different motherboards. They simply release a bunch of numbers, which will not make your PC work on all motherboards.

Its bizarre to see how short sighted it is. They have new Core Ultra chips which they're hanging their hat on, and with these being Ai chips, they've blocked ASUS boards which have any Ai settings activated. All the while, they expect their primary consumer customers to:
a) Not see straight through that
b) Not be annoyed at it given they paid money for their board and the faulty chip
c) Not look at intels XTU functionality, going over and above that of all the third party suppliers they blocked (which also crashes the PC) and see extreme incompetence
D) Forget all of the above and buy the new chips.

Meanwhile, across the world, washing machines and kitchen appliances are being recalled for less dangerous.
The consumer market is a rounding error to chipmakers, but it will be all AMD and NVIDEA from here onwards anyway.

[Vendrium]

@Thomas_Hannaford is there any update on how the investigation is going?
I recently bought an i9-14900 before I was aware of these issues and I'd be interested to know how Intel will resolve this.

[Prototype]

Return it if you can. These chips came out quite some time ago and it looks like Intel is abandoning these products along with their paying customers and moving on to the next gen chips without any attention or resolution!  I am so frustrated that I have also sold all my Intel stocks...

These issues have been documented, including videos released just days ago from prominent Youtube channels such as Gamers Nexus that have drawn the conclusion that Intel has completely ignored the fact that they are selling faulty products at premium prices and have done absolutely nothing to provide realistic solutions and halt sales of these defective products. 

At this point I have lost any faith that they will resolve these issues an deeply regret spending close to 1000 dollars on a chip that has provided nothing but headaches at a premium cost.

The Federal Trade Comission needs to get involved as this is simply fraud!

[Der_Lokator]

I would trade in my 13700k to a 12700k from intel, if they would pay me out with sth like a 66,40€ price difference, from when I bought it.

Let's see, what the next weeks bring us in news, but this kind of fast degradation on basically all CPUs on a gaming server does make it highly likely, that all Raptor Lake CPUs were sold defect.

Since Alder Lake works fine on our platform, trading the CPU in with Alder Lake + compensation with (price difference from purchase date)*(currency inflation) would make sense imo.

Or intel could say, we are producing new chips with hardware fixes, so we can do then RMA.

There is no point at the moment, to RMA the chip, since all Raptor Lake CPUs can be considered faulty right now.

[berkkocaturk]

I do not want a faulty cpu when are you going to to release affected cpu serial number range and will we get a replacemant cpu ?

[RippedBy14900KS]

They dont answer this , I've asked support "So your sending me a new one, and your fixing it in august" so your going to send me a new one in august again? 

Then they send you the hilariously bad suggested profiles, bro if I put it on 300W profile the whole thing wont even start and thats with a top of the line MB too LOL 

I've been pushing random CPU's to insane overclocks and can't even mimmick this unstability that the out of box 14900KS has, reminder S stands for Special. 

Special Bad batch and special 0 quality control.

[RippedBy14900KS]

@Thomas_Hannaford How would you reply if I told you that I own a i9 14900KS and that NONE of your power delivery profiles works for it? 

What If I told you I had to lower it all the way to 5.0 freq locked over all P cores. with a maximum boost of 200W and EVEN THEN simple things like Edge, the calculator , XTU , anything you can think of CRASHES.

When are we going to address the loss of performance due to these new settings compared to the advertised speeds, reminder advertised = what the customer expects. 

I used to have a I9 9900KS before this. And I am going to rebuild my OLD pc today, as this 3000 Euro new build (All brand new parts which are likely degrading rapidly by the constant crashing of my system ) can be considered garbage as it is, with no resolution but "Maybe in august" and "Your chip will degrade in the meanwhile" . 



It's just unacceptable.   


What should be done here is contact MB vendors , arrange that all customers get the new gen chips + MB replacements so customers don't lose out on their time, arguably the most valuable commodity in all this drama. 

To specify : I wasted days , like full on 18 hour sessions of trying to make this thing stable and were talking all top of the line parts here, and all that time is wasted.

Enjoy a game? Mate I can't even run minesweeper consistently.
My work which is 100% on the PC : Has suffered to the point that I got warned about it, obviously the understood after explaining but thanks I guess.