Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads

Page 431 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
T

Tigerick

Senior member
Apr 1, 2022
694
600
106






As Hot Chips 34 starting this week, Intel will unveil technical information of upcoming Meteor Lake (MTL) and Arrow Lake (ARL), new generation platform after Raptor Lake. Both MTL and ARL represent new direction which Intel will move to multiple chiplets and combine as one SoC platform.

MTL also represents new compute tile that based on Intel 4 process which is based on EUV lithography, a first from Intel. Intel expects to ship MTL mobile SoC in 2023.

ARL will come after MTL so Intel should be shipping it in 2024, that is what Intel roadmap is telling us. ARL compute tile will be manufactured by Intel 20A process, a first from Intel to use GAA transistors called RibbonFET.



Comparison of upcoming Intel's U-series CPU: Core Ultra 100U, Lunar Lake and Panther Lake

ModelCode-NameDateTDPNodeTilesMain TileCPULP E-CoreLLCGPUXe-cores
Core Ultra 100UMeteor LakeQ4 202315 - 57 WIntel 4 + N5 + N64tCPU2P + 8E212 MBIntel Graphics4
?Lunar LakeQ4 202417 - 30 WN3B + N62CPU + GPU & IMC4P + 4E012 MBArc8
?Panther LakeQ1 2026 ??Intel 18A + N3E3CPU + MC4P + 8E4?Arc12



Comparison of die size of Each Tile of Meteor Lake, Arrow Lake, Lunar Lake and Panther Lake

Meteor LakeArrow Lake (20A)Arrow Lake (N3B)Lunar LakePanther Lake
PlatformMobile H/U OnlyDesktop OnlyDesktop & Mobile H&HXMobile U OnlyMobile H
Process NodeIntel 4Intel 20ATSMC N3BTSMC N3BIntel 18A
DateQ4 2023Q1 2025 ?Desktop-Q4-2024
H&HX-Q1-2025		Q4 2024Q1 2026 ?
Full Die6P + 8P6P + 8E ?8P + 16E4P + 4E4P + 8E
LLC24 MB24 MB ?36 MB ?12 MB?
tCPU66.48
tGPU44.45
SoC96.77
IOE44.45
Total252.15



Intel Core Ultra 100 - Meteor Lake



As mentioned by Tomshardware, TSMC will manufacture the I/O, SoC, and GPU tiles. That means Intel will manufacture only the CPU and Foveros tiles. (Notably, Intel calls the I/O tile an 'I/O Expander,' hence the IOE moniker.)



 

Attachments

  • PantherLake.png
    283.5 KB · Views: 24,000
  • LNL.png
    881.8 KB · Views: 25,481
Last edited:
Reactions: static shock, del42sa, Hans Gruber and 11 others
Sort by date Sort by votes

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
6,595
13,918
136
IEC said:
I'm holding out hope that Arrow Lake is competitive (and fixes Intel 13th/14th gen stability issues) so I have an excuse to build or upgrade another system in the next six months.

On the other hand, the realist in me expects marginal gains overall with some regressions. There are just too many known items working against ARL:
1) Clock speed regression (even vs most optimistic "leaks")
2) Tile architecture = there will be some performance regressions due to this (latency and power penalties vs monolithic)
3) Lack of SMT
4) New platform/motherboards - I expect some things to be broken at launch judging from recent Intel and non-Intel launches

Not too much longer til we know for sure.
Click to expand...
ARL can bring a decent upgrade to your 12600K system, assuming you go for the Ultra 5 or Ultra 7:
  1. 6-12% higher clocks + 10%+ higher IPC, so think 15-20%+ higher ST performance
  2. Regression from tiled arch. already included in the rough & pessimistic estimate above
  3. SMT removal will be non-issue if you don't do rendering or some other similar thread bound work, and in the case of Ultra 7 you'll get 12 E cores, the E cores alone will have comparable MT perf with your 12600K
  4. The new platform jinx is a given, this year has managed to plague everything (from hardware launches to Microsoft software), but we all know it when buying early.
gdansk said:
What is a better estimate?
Click to expand...
He's arguing the 14% uplift was given for RWC in MTL mobile, which saw a regression against RPL mobile. See my previous post here. Unfortunately applying this regression to ARL only gives us a lower bound for the possible uplift, as ARL is likely to compensate for some of it. (more L2, maybe faster tile interconnect etc.)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
9

9949asd

Member
Jul 12, 2024
50
29
51
desrever said:
13700H is almost 10% more IPC than 155H, (this isn't even RPL refresh, which has like a 1% improvement from RPL). Using the 14% intel figure would make ARL 4.5% more IPC than RPL.

1.045*5.7/6 = 0% ST improvement average?
Click to expand...
the 14% is base on intel ppt LNL vs MTL, the ARL p core ipc will higher than LNL’s p core for sure.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

SiliconFly

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2023
1,462
824
96
desrever said:
13700H is almost 10% more IPC than 155H, (this isn't even RPL refresh, which has like a 1% improvement from RPL). Using the 14% intel figure would make ARL 4.5% more IPC than RPL.

1.045*5.7/6 = 0% ST improvement average?
Click to expand...
Wrong. MTL has clock regression of around 4% to 5% over previous gen equivalent sku that you haven't taken into account. Once included, the *overall* performance regression of MTL is only around 4% to 5% over previous gen equivalent sku, which includes both tile penalty *and* IPC regression combined.

I don't have the exact numbers (maybe other can help shed some light), but the MTL tile penalty itself is estimated to be around 3% by people in this forum which I too believe is probably close. So, the overall IPC regression (if any) for the RWC core is pretty much negligible.

You're estimate is light-years off from the actual.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote

SiliconFly

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2023
1,462
824
96
9949asd said:
the 14% is base on intel ppt LNL vs MTL, the ARL p core ipc will higher than LNL’s p core for sure.
Click to expand...
True. Thats why I keep saying IPC will be at least 14%. Or maybe a little more. Definitely can't be less once we consider all available data.

Even if IPC is above 14%, once we factor in clock regression & tile penalty, the overall ST performance will still take some hit. I'm guessing the final will be around 9% to 10% ST perf uplift minimum. But some others say only 5%. Only time will tell.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
G

gdansk

Platinum Member
Feb 8, 2011
2,836
4,218
136
If you're talking about discerning between 5% or 10% differences then for many benchmarks that'll be within margin-of-cooling.

So I'm guessing people won't agree even after the chips are available.
 
Reactions: SiliconFly
Upvote 0 Downvote

desrever

Member
Nov 6, 2021
167
445
106
SiliconFly said:
Wrong. MTL has clock regression of around 4% to 5% over previous gen equivalent sku that you haven't taken into account. Once included, the *overall* performance regression of MTL is only around 4% to 5% over previous gen equivalent sku, which includes both tile penalty *and* IPC regression combined.

I don't have the exact numbers (maybe other can help shed some light), but the MTL tile penalty itself is estimated to be around 3% by people in this forum which I too believe is probably close. So, the overall IPC regression (if any) for the RWC core is pretty much negligible.

You're estimate is light-years off from the actual.
Click to expand...
It literally says performance/GHz in the chart which is IPC.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

dullard

Elite Member
May 21, 2001
25,476
3,976
126
SiliconFly said:
Even if IPC is above 14%, once we factor in clock regression & tile penalty, the overall ST performance will still take some hit. I'm guessing the final will be around 9% to 10% ST perf uplift minimum. But some others say only 5%. Only time will tell.
Click to expand...
I do have to get quite a laugh about all this. Compare Raptor Lake IPC to Meteor Lake IPC. Then compare Meteor Lake IPC to Lunar Lake IPC. Then assume Arrow Lake IPC is similar to Lunar Lake IPC (cache and node differences probably aren't major contributors). Then assume frequencies (which are reasonably known). Then waive hands about how long the turbo speed can be maintained. Do all the math. And finally come up with 5% to 9%/10%.

Or skip all that hand waiving and calculations and just go with the age-old Intel leak of 3% to 8% until we have chips in a couple months. http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=attachments/img_0842-jpeg.105351/

Both of which are pretty much in line with the Arrow Lake leak that we already have had: https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-c...s-cpu-spotted-in-geekbench-with-5-5-ghz-boost
 
Last edited:
Reactions: sgs_x86
Upvote 0 Downvote

SiliconFly

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2023
1,462
824
96
gdansk said:
If you're talking about discerning between 5% or 10% differences then for many benchmarks that'll be within margin-of-cooling.

So I'm guessing people won't agree even after the chips are available.
Click to expand...
dullard said:
I do have to get quite a laugh about all this. Compare Raptor Lake IPC to Meteor Lake IPC. Then compare Meteor Lake IPC to Lunar Lake IPC. Then assume Arrow Lake IPC is similar to Lunar Lake IPC (cache and node differences probably aren't major contributors). Then assume frequencies (which are reasonably known). Then waive hands about how long the turbo speed can be maintained. Do all the math. And finally come up with 5% to 9%/10%.

Or skip all that hand waiving and calculations and just go with the age-old Intel leak of 3% to 8% until we have chips in a couple months. http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=attachments/img_0842-jpeg.105351/

Both of which are pretty much in line with the Arrow Lake leak that we already have had: https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-c...s-cpu-spotted-in-geekbench-with-5-5-ghz-boost
Click to expand...
True & very true. But even if we consider a meager 5% increase for ARL-S top sku over 14900K in GB6 ST, it's still a few percentage points ahead of competition top sku 9950X. At a 10% overall increase, it's has a healthy upper single digit percentage lead over competition. That means something. Lagging competition for years and finally not only catching up, but also slightly surpassing them makes a huge difference I believe.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
11,516
4,302
136
SiliconFly said:
True & very true. But even if we consider a meager 5% increase for ARL-S top sku over 14900K in GB6 ST, it's still a few percentage points ahead of competition top sku 9950X.
Click to expand...

A few negative percentage points eventualy, because the 9950X is 6% ahead of the 14900K in GB 6.3 ST, and before you ask Computerbase s 14900K score 3236 pts, wich is above GB submissions average.

AMD Ryzen 9 9900X und 9950X im Test: Benchmarks in neuen Anwendungstests

Ryzen 9 9950X & 9900X im Test: Benchmarks in neuen Anwendungstests / Intel-Instabilität und AGESA-Updates sind die (neue) Tagesordnung
www.computerbase.de
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2024-08-17 at 00-30-55 AMD Ryzen 9 9900X und 9950X im Test Benchmarks in neuen Anwe...png
    84.7 KB · Views: 41
Upvote 0 Downvote
J

jdubs03

Senior member
Oct 1, 2013
678
304
136
ARL-S ST in GB6, in all likelihood will average about the same as the 9950X. Realistically anywhere from a few percentage points behind to a few ahead.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
O

OriAr

Member
Feb 1, 2019
93
84
91
TESKATLIPOKA said:
Considering both RPL and MTL have only 2P+4E It's not really surprising that nT will be better.
BTW, what do you consider as a huge upgrade? +30% or more in nT?

Here is a table where I compare mobile MTL vs ARL. Not accurate, just an example of how much better It could be.
MTL P-core: 100 points
MTL P-core HT: 25 points
MTL E-core: 65 points
ARL P-core: 110 points
ARL E-core: 90 points
Thread countUltra 3 105UL 2P+4EARL 4P+4EDifference in %
1100110+10%
2200220+10%
3265330+24.5%
4330440+33.3%
5395530+34.2%
6460620+34.7%
7485710+46.4%
8510800+56.9%
Click to expand...
I was comparing it to 4+0 i3 which means on paper it should be roughly 70% better in MT perf.
Of course the real world is different but I'd be stunned if it's not at least +50% increase.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
D

DavidC1

Senior member
Dec 29, 2023
778
1,236
96
dullard said:
I could go on and on with links. In the average software, AMD's SMT gained more than Intel's HT. As the years go on, SMT's improvement is getting less and less on average.
Click to expand...
The reduction in HT's gain over the years can be explained(at least partially for now) by the fact there's diminishing returns to extra threads, which were very useful in the quad core days, but less on 8 cores, and definitely not nowadays with 16 or even 24 cores on them.

I know back in the days when they were saying HT was useless for games, but that was on the quad core chips. On the dual core ones, it was responsible for 20-30% gain in frame rates!

As for Intel's lack of SMT gains compared to AMD it can be explained by their architectural choices. I speculate one of the reason is due to AMD using distributed schedulers versus shared ones on Intel. HT further exacerbates the negative effect of sharing.

The way HT resources are allocated affects it too. I don't remember off the top of my head but they aren't identical. You can also optimize HT resource allocation to optimize more for ST vs MT.
inf64 said:
Well as per David Huang:

View attachment 105519
Click to expand...
Geekerwan's test showed the Desktop variant is faster than the mobile, the gap enough to explain the differences between Meteorlake(mobile only) and Raptorlake. And I know that this difference always existed.

You want to use 50% chance of being correct as a concrete evidence, go ahead. Mobile testing has serious issues for this very reason. Even on the firmware level Intel talks about power vs performance optimization and this was back in the Conroe days!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
T

TESKATLIPOKA

Platinum Member
May 1, 2020
2,479
2,955
136
OriAr said:
I was comparing it to 4+0 i3 which means on paper it should be roughly 70% better in MT perf.
Of course the real world is different but I'd be stunned if it's not at least +50% increase.
Click to expand...
So you meant a desktop comparison.
I don't think RPL 4P is weaker in nT than RPL 2P+4E, maybe a bit and It depends on actual clocks. Couldn't really find a meaningful comparison.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote

SteinFG

Senior member
Dec 29, 2021
617
728
106
Just noticed TPU making up process node names 😄 It's gonna be funny to see, as cpu generations pass, are they gonna continue making up node names that don't exist? The correct node for 6000E is Intel 3.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
T

TESKATLIPOKA

Platinum Member
May 1, 2020
2,479
2,955
136
511 said:
Tbh RPL 4P is more likely going to be 2P+8E equivalent
Click to expand...
Certainly not in nT.
13100F(4P+0E, 58W TDP -> 75W in Prime95) managed only 8844 points in CB R23.
i7-1365U(2P+8E, 28W sustained) 9576 points in CB R23.
So higher score at 1/2 TDP or less.
These E-cores despite their disadvantages are not just for show.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
W

Wolverine2349

Senior member
Oct 9, 2022
371
112
76
Why are the Skymont e-cores in clusters of 4 rather than individual like the P cores on the ring?

I mean if the Skymont really have IPC of Raptor Cove, why not make them individual or sell such a CPU and it could be the all P core Raptor Lake substitute for a homogenous arch but maybe lower clocks but still 12700K P core HT disabled capable as 12700K runs 4.7GHz all core.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
H

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,024
10,352
136
Wolverine2349 said:
Why are the Skymont e-cores in clusters of 4 rather than individual like the P cores on the ring?

I mean if the Skymont really have IPC of Raptor Cove, why not make them individual or sell such a CPU and it could be the all P core Raptor Lake substitute for a homogenous arch but maybe lower clocks but still 12700K P core HT disabled capable as 12700K runs 4.7GHz all core.
Click to expand...

They’d have to go to a mesh interconnect which has significant power and latency consequences.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |