Skip to main content

Intel finally responds to CPU instability but only makes it more confusing

A Core i9-12900KS processor sits on its box.
Jacob Roach / Digital Trends

Intel and motherboard makers aren’t on the same page about what exactly “default” means for high-end CPUs like the Core i9-13900K and Core i9-14900K. Intel has issued its first public statement regarding the wave of instability on its most powerful CPUs, but it doesn’t address the problem directly.

Here’s the statement that was shared with Digital Trends in full:

Recommended Videos

“Several motherboard manufacturers have released BIOS profiles labeled ‘Intel Baseline Profile.’ However, these BIOS profiles are not the same as the ‘Intel Default Settings’ recommendations that Intel has recently shared with its partners regarding the instability issues reported on 13th- and 14th-gen K SKU processors.

Get your weekly teardown of the tech behind PC gaming
Check your inbox!

These Intel Baseline Profile BIOS settings appear to be based on power delivery guidance previously provided by Intel to manufacturers that describes the various power delivery options for 13th- and 14th-generation K SKU processors based on motherboard capabilities.

Intel is not recommending motherboard manufacturers to use “baseline” power delivery settings on boards capable of higher values.

Intel’s recommended Intel Default Settings are a combination of thermal and power delivery features, along with a selection of possible power delivery profiles based on motherboard capabilities.

Intel recommends customers to implement the highest power delivery profile compatible with each individual motherboard design as noted in the table below.”

Here’s that table for reference:

Intel's recommended power settings for the Core i9-13900K and Core i9-14900K.
Intel

As if the situation with Intel’s recent instability issues wasn’t confusing enough, we’re now seeing two different naming conventions. There’s the “Intel Baseline Profile,” which we’ve seen motherboard vendors like Asus, Gigabyte, and ASRock implement, and there’s the “Intel Default Settings,” which is a list of recommended specifications now being provided by Intel.

Despite stating it wasn’t blaming motherboard vendors for instability, Intel is pushing the responsibility to solve the instability problems off on them. According to the statement, the various baseline profiles we’ve seen are based on earlier settings provided to motherboard vendors. That’s resulted in wildly different performance between vendors.

Gigabyte, for example, uses a maximum power of 188 watts with its baseline profile, while Asus uses 253W. That can account for upwards of a 20% difference in performance according to testing done by Hardware Unboxed.

Intel says that it expects the Core i9-13900K and Core i9-14900K to run in the Performance power delivery profile, meaning they can reach up to 253W, while the Core i9-13900KS and Core i9-14900KS run in the Extreme profile, reaching up to 320W. An earlier rumor suggested that Intel would enforce a 188W limit on all motherboards, but this recent statement contradicts that.

The Intel Core i9-12900KS box sitting in front of a gaming PC.
Jacob Roach / Digital Trends

Although the statement seems straightforward, motherboard vendors tell Digital Trends that’s not the case. The engineering team from one major motherboard vendor says that it’s not clear how Intel’s baseline settings should be applied, and that this situation “has resulted in new confusion on what should be the default setting.”

Part of that confusion results from the non-standard settings motherboard vendors have used for several generations of Intel releases. Vendors tell me that non-standard settings that are safe and reliable are commonly used, particularly on higher-end motherboards. Intel has, in the past, said that these optimizations are “in spec” and it relies on motherboard vendors to confirm stability for its products.

We’re still not out of the woods on the instability problems facing Intel CPUs. The new guidance will likely prompt motherboard vendors to release new BIOS updates, at which point we’ll get a chance to test if performance holds up under Intel’s recommendations. With the updates we’ve seen thus far, such as the one from Asus, lowering the power deliver profile can result in a performance drop.

Jacob Roach
Lead Reporter, PC Hardware
Jacob Roach is the lead reporter for PC hardware at Digital Trends. In addition to covering the latest PC components, from…
Intel announces sudden departure of CEO amid financial turmoil
Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger holding a chip.

Intel has announced that CEO Pat Gelsinger has retired. The executive, who first joined Intel in 1979 at 18 years old, is being replaced by David Zinsner and Michelle Johnston Holthaus. Holthaus and Zinsner will serve as interim co-CEOs while the board of directors works "diligently and expeditiously" to find a successor.

Gelsinger became CEO in early 2021. At the time, Intel was struggling to regain ground it had lost to AMD in the desktop market, as well as push a more ambitious manufacturing timeline to catch up with foreign chipmakers like TSMC. Under Gelsinger's leadership, the company made some big strides. Intel's 12th generation of processors marked a significant turning point in the company's desktop processors, and an aggressive foundry roadmap has pushed smaller nodes out of U.S.-based plants.

Read more
Nvidia CEO in 1997: ‘We need to kill Intel’
NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang at GTC

Those headline above includes strong words from the maker of the best graphics cards you can buy, and they have extra significance considering where Nvidia sits today in relation to Intel. But in 1997, things were a bit different. The quote comes from the upcoming book The Nvidia Way, written by columnist Tae Kim, and was shared as part of an excerpt ahead of the book's release next month.

The words from Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang came as part of an all-hands meeting at the company in 1997 following the launch of the RIVA 128. This was prior to the release of the GeForce 256, when Nvidia finally coined the term "GPU," and it was a precarious time for the new company. Shortly following the release of the RIVA 128, Intel launched its own i740, which came with an 8MB frame buffer. The RIVA 128 came with only a 4MB frame buffer.

Read more
Intel admits defeat on Arrow Lake — but it’s not down for the count
intel core ultra 5 245k review 4

Intel's Arrow Lake CPUs aren't off to a great start. As you can read in our Core Ultra 9 285K review and Core Ultra 5 245K review, Intel's latest CPUs miss the mark across productivity and gaming apps, and they're miles away from some of the best processors you can buy right now. According to Intel, there are several issues with the new platform that it plans to address within a matter of weeks.

In an interview with HotHardware, Intel's Robert Hallock was blunt about the release of Arrow Lake CPUs: "The launch didn't go as planned ... we have a number of things we got to go fix." Hallock, formerly of AMD, is near the top of Intel's technical marketing division. Although he didn't address exactly what's wrong with Arrow Lake, Hallock promised that Intel is working on updates that could significantly improve performance, and that they'll arrive in a matter of weeks.

Read more