How Deep Does The Rabbit Hole Go? Intel’s 14th & 13th Gen CPU Instability Issues Analysis: GamersNexus Analyzes Potential “Oxidation” Issues With Silicon, No Thermal Failure & More

Intel's 14th & 13th Gen CPU instability issues have existed for more than a year but while Intel has yet to give a solid reasoning for the problems, others have come up with potential causes of the silicon degradation and crashing issues associated with these chips.

The crashes, instability, and performance issues present in Intel's 14th Gen & 13th Gen CPUs are bothering several consumers out there to the point where it is unbearable, and the community is now determined to switch towards alternatives, such as offerings from AMD.

So far, here's the timeline of Intel's 14th & 13th Gen Instability issues:

We have seen game studios such as Alderon Games and Epic Games raising the issue on their respective platform, along with tech content creators such as Wendell from Level1Techs, providing their audience awareness about the issue.

Despite the problem spreading into mainstream media, Team Blue hasn't managed to address the root cause. The company has worked with AIBs & board partners to mitigate the issues while discovering several other such as the eTVB bug but outside of that, there's been no proper communication from the blue team which tells us two things, either the firm is worried about a heated backlash from its customer base (clients, partners, OEMS) or they want to drag the issue as much as possible until something new comes out and people simply forget about it.

Now, GamersNexus has compiled on-ground statistics on how the issue is affecting Intel's 14th & 13th Gen consumers, and according to one "unnamed" Intel customer, they have witnessed 600,000 to 2 million CPUs facing instability issues. This only includes the 13th Gen units and information surrounding the 14th Gen SKUs is currently unavailable. Interestingly, one Intel customer disclosed that the affected units have production dates from March 2023 to April 2024, spanning more than 12 months of retail SKUs revolving in the markets that are facing the problem.

From what we have heard, 1/3rd of all Intel Raptor Lake CPUs that have been shipped are Core i9-13900K or 14900K units so that's roughly around 40-60 million units (estimates from Mike Bruzzone). If that's the case, then Intel might be facing a huge recall, one that would end up being a major disaster for the company and that might be a potential reason why they are taking time with the appropriate response to the community.

Our editor, Hassan, reported in a post on X a while back that he started facing these issues in early 2023, just a few months after the release of the 14th Gen Desktop CPUs. While the BIOS mitigation has made things a little stable for him, one can easily say that applying the current "power limit" fix will reduce the performance of your chip versus what you originally had.

Onto the more intriguing bits, GamersNexus has compiled the possible reasons behind the instability issues based on Intel's internal documents and information from the customers. Newly surfaced information claims that Team Blue might have faced a "fabrication" issue with the affected 13th and 14th Gen chips, where the "anti-oxidation" on the SKUs wasn't applied sufficiently, causing disruptions in the electrical connections of the processors.

Well, this reasoning does make some sense, considering that limiting power levels didn't solve the issue at all despite Intel releasing relevant microcodes. While we won't go into how oxidation has affected the functionalities of the CPUs (check out GamersNexus video below for detailed info), to sum it up, it might have affected individual layers, which is why the solution doesn't lie in any sort of software-level mitigation.

It's important that the 'power limiter' issue doesn't lead this story. It's not a 'power limit on the board' issue. It's a chip issue and always has been. The power limit issue was fixed with microcode. We have no idea if it affects Meteor Lake or not yet. The current possible affected processors are [about] 8 million shipped that we know of.

If you disable Turbo Boost, you can get 'stability' until the corrosion/contamination make the CPU fault. We have reports of some CPUs that will not even boot without blue screening because the contamination/corrosion is so bad.

- Large Intel Customer to GN

Well, what's next, then? According to GamersNexus, vendors are finding intermediary solutions, with some moving towards limiting the clock speeds to 5.3 - 5.5 GHz at an OEM level while others are waiting for Intel to come up with a solution. Intel has started to work with vendors, hinting them towards providing refunds for affected CPUs, and there are rumors of a potential "large-scale" callback as well, but nothing is certain for now.

Furthermore, below are failure rates segregated based on individual Intel SKUs. interestingly, there are no thermal-based failures, which hints that the instability issue is likely something more complex.

Intel 7 Based Raptor Lake Product Failure Rates, JESD94.

All tested at 80-85C, 1.5V, other than the 14x01E lineup tested at 100C, 1.35V.

Other raptor lake lineups have perfect survivability as per JESD94 standards.

No thermal-based failures.

Click to expand image. pic.twitter.com/SGeRbp3fbi

— Jaykihn (@jaykihn0) July 20, 2024

Meanwhile, leaker @Jaykihn also states that the reports of oxidation being the issue behind the Intel 13th and 14th Gen CPU issues seem unlikely. He also states that the report doesn't add up since he has statistics of Intel 7 (process node) chips tested as of June 2024.

The oxidation claim makes no sense both logistically and technically.

Events in manufacturing and packaging do not correspond with the timeframes claimed. It would be impossible for such an issue to ship.

The explanation used for the cause of oxidation makes no sense, either. https://t.co/l2fCHLpVyj

— Jaykihn (@jaykihn0) July 20, 2024

There’s so much that doesn’t add up.And I have statistics on Intel 7 chips tested as of June 2024.Impossibility aside, even with all claims taken at face value, nothing statistically corroborates the claim to any significance. If anything, the opposite.

— Jaykihn (@jaykihn0) July 20, 2024

Ian Cutress for More Than Moore also weighs in on potential reasons behind the issues:

We're seeing more high-end CPUs because of the fact that those units typically need more mounting pressure, or might use boards without a mounting plate. The cooling requirements are higher, the current draw is higher, so any shear twist or torque will exacerbate over time.

— ????????. ???????????? ???????????????????????????? (@IanCutress) July 15, 2024

Tantalum Nitride liner issues. That's a new one. TaN has a scaled performance/reliability curve, fighting against scaling issues and battling Copper diffusion into the bulk dielectric.

I may put something together over the weekend on this. GJ to GN on offering it as a potential. https://t.co/rwugtRX8gl pic.twitter.com/eYbhXsrhID

— ????????. ???????????? ???????????????????????????? (@IanCutress) July 20, 2024

We have pushed out extensive guidelines on how to solve the issue based on Intel's guidance along with suggestions from third-party sources; hence, you can check them out if you haven't implemented the solutions mentioned. Furthermore, we have talked with various board partners about this and they have said that they are taking extra caution and spending more time testing & evaluating the clock and power behavior, not only for existing chips but also the upcoming CPUs such as Arrow Lake.

For now, we have to wait and see how Team Blue moves with the situation. Given that Arrow Lake-S desktop CPUs are right around the corner, the whole fiasco is starting to become interesting yet unfortunate at the same time.