Intel is confronting a class action lawsuit centered on its 13th and 14th generation Core desktop processors. The plaintiff, Mark Vanvalkenburgh from New York, asserts that Intel misled customers by omitting known stability issues in these chips. The case, filed in California’s federal court, claims that Intel was aware of the defects yet failed to disclose them while marketing the processors as premium, high-performance products.
User Complaints and Technical Issues
Problems with Intel’s 13th generation chips, known as Raptor Lake, surfaced publicly in late 2022, just months after their launch. Users reported crashes, sudden screen blackouts, and frequent restarts, raising concerns across tech forums and social media. Despite mounting evidence, Intel maintained its marketing focus on the processors’ speed and performance, omitting any mention of potential defects.
The plaintiff alleges that Intel’s own pre-release and post-release testing would have revealed these stability problems. The lawsuit argues that Intel continued to sell the processors without informing customers, leading buyers to invest in hardware that did not meet expectations for reliability. Vanvalkenburgh, who purchased an Intel Core i7-13700K in January 2023, describes repeated crashes and blackouts that persisted even after attempts to install Intel’s corrective patches.
The class action complaint against Intel also mentions that the 14th Gen Core i7-14700K was promoted with promises of “efficient use” and “high processing throughput and improved performance.” These claims also highlighted the processor’s optimization for gaming and productivity, emphasizing its ability to deliver “high performance” under these use cases.
However, despite these assertions, the complaint points out that Intel’s processors were plagued with design and manufacturing flaws, leading to stability issues, system crashes, and failures, which contradicted the advertised benefits and left consumers facing unexpected problems.
Intel’s Acknowledgment and Patch Rollout
It wasn’t until July 2024 that Intel formally addressed the issue. Intel communications manager Thomas Hannaford admitted in a forum post that a microcode algorithm flaw led to elevated voltage requests, resulting in system instability. Microcode, the set of instructions that manages hardware-software interaction, plays a critical role in CPU operations.
Flaws in this code can trigger unexpected behavior, as seen in the “Vmin Shift Instability” identified by Intel. This condition, involving variations in minimum operating voltage under certain conditions, was traced to a vulnerability in the clock tree circuit within the IA core.
Intel’s response included a series of microcode patches. The initial patch, released in June 2024, adjusted the Enhanced Thermal Velocity Boost (eTVB) algorithm. This was followed by two more updates in August and September (0x129 and 0x12B), aimed at stabilizing voltage control and incorporating prior fixes.
Although these updates helped manage the instability, they couldn’t fully resolve issues in already-affected processors, indicating that hardware replacements might be necessary for a complete fix.
Intel’s Struggles and Decline
The lawsuit comes at a turbulent time for Intel. On November 7, Nvidia officially took Intel’s place on the Dow Jones Industrial Average after Intel’s 25-year tenure. This change highlights Nvidia’s ascension in the AI hardware space, driven by the success of its GPUs used for advanced machine learning and data center operations.
In contrast, Intel’s attempts to break into the AI sector with its Gaudi chips fell short of initial expectations. CEO Pat Gelsinger had set a goal of $1 billion in revenue from Gaudi chip sales, which was later cut to $500 million before being scrapped entirely due to integration challenges.
Arrow Lake CPUs: Promise and Pitfalls
Intel’s October 2024 release of the Arrow Lake series was part of its strategy to recover market momentum. The new Core Ultra models integrated Neural Processing Units (NPUs) designed to handle AI tasks efficiently. While tests showed up to 58% lower power consumption in standard operations, the CPUs struggled in gaming performance, with frame rate drops as high as 20% in demanding games like Cyberpunk 2077. These challenges highlighted a design shift to a tile-based architecture, which Intel outsourced to TSMC’s external nodes instead of its own 20A process.
The Competition Tightens
Meanwhile, Nvidia’s dominance continues to grow. Recently, the company invested $500 million in a new chip assembly plant in Guadalajara, Mexico, reinforcing its foothold in the semiconductor industry. Nvidia also plans a 90-exaflop supercomputing system in Taiwan set for 2025, showcasing its commitment to expanding AI capabilities.
AMD is also vying for attention with its recent launch of the Zen 5-based Epyc processors and Instinct MI325X GPUs. These products, introduced at AMD´s “Advancing AI 2024” event, have drawn interest for their open-ecosystem approach, which appeals to major tech firms like Meta and Google. AMD’s strategy contrasts with Nvidia’s dominance and underscores the competitive landscape Intel must navigate.
Legal and Market Implications
The class action lawsuit accuses Intel of fraudulent omission, breach of implied warranty, and violations of consumer protection laws in New York. Vanvalkenburgh and other affected users argue that Intel’s failure to disclose the defects misled them into paying for processors that underperformed. This case could have serious financial repercussions for Intel, adding to the challenges it already faces amid rising competition and strategic missteps.
