It is an important point for many small wooden artifacts, as to which part of a long lived tree that it derived from, and therefore caution is required on dates obtained from these small samples.
Might we be better examining larger items, like the large logs inside the Bent pyramid; my understanding is that these have not been dated.
Khufu's boat likewise has large timbers, which might indicate better as to which part of the tree they came from, the boat has been dated to 2600BC. [www.pbs.org]
Though l have not found any detailed paper on what was dated from this boat, or how many samples etc.

Short lived items, seeds, papyrus etc might be a better bet, at the bottom of the following presentation by Tallet,
[myemail.constantcontact.com]
He states, " Organic material from the site will also be used for 14C dating, under the responsibility of Anita Quiles, from the French Institute of Archaeology, Cairo. Preliminary results already point out that the chronology of the IVth dynasty is probably much earlier than it what thought before."
Has anything further been released on the dating of this site?