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

Page 476 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Tigerick

Senior member
Apr 1, 2022
702
632
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 (N3B)Lunar LakePanther Lake
PlatformMobile H/U OnlyDesktop & Mobile H&HXMobile U OnlyMobile H
Process NodeIntel 4TSMC N3BTSMC N3BIntel 18A
DateQ4 2023Desktop-Q4-2024
H&HX-Q1-2025
Q4 2024Q1 2026 ?
Full Die6P + 8P8P + 16E4P + 4E4P + 8E
LLC24 MB36 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: 24,014
  • LNL.png
    881.8 KB · Views: 25,501
Last edited:
Jul 27, 2020
20,921
14,496
146
PNL/CWF/DNR are all on track and are very promising! If they deliver as promised, competition is in very serious trouble considering their already minuscule market share both in clients AND servers!
Yeah. At least one whole year for Intel to fend off vultures and hostile takeover groups and investor lawsuits!
 

cebri1

Senior member
Jun 13, 2019
373
405
136
AMD wasn't full of absolute morons working against each other.

Intel's teams and management are used to having too much resources at their disposal. AMD has ALWAYS been lean. They don't know what excess is.

Going from having anything available to limited resources doesn't immediately lead to better execution. It will actually cause a lot of teething pains as they discover how to do things with limited budgets and those unable to thrive in such an environment will quit and leave gaping holes in skills and expertise.

Their stupid Meteor Lake hot lots fiasco is a direct result of them thinking they can do anything with their resources, in other words, waste investor money!

AMD, even under Lisa, fired thousands of employees between late 2000s and mid 2010s. You are clearly ignorant about the matter.

“ AMD has ALWAYS been lean. They don't know what excess is.”

 
Jul 27, 2020
20,921
14,496
146
AMD, even under Lisa, fired thousands of employees between late 2000s and mid 2010s. You are clearly ignorant about the matter.

“ AMD has ALWAYS been lean. They don't know what excess is.”

They have always been a fraction of Intel's workforce. That's why they have been number two for so long. Never made enough to get as big as Intel.
 
Reactions: Tlh97

511

Golden Member
Jul 12, 2024
1,038
897
106
Intel need to cut fat but the right fat that is something only time will tell they need to become lean and flexible and be ready for next bing thing something trinity got right closest comparison would be huang
 
Last edited:

Josh128

Senior member
Oct 14, 2022
511
865
106
Back on topic here, have y'all seen the Cinebench R24 single core scores of the 288V? 13% faster than Strix @ same clock speed.

If that carries to Arrow Lake, 285K is going to be over 150, and likely ~2500 in R23 if the same uplift applies there. Thats what Im talking about.

Depending on pricing, AMD will have have to lower Zen 5 significantly, their 4nm Zen 5 is going to get trounced by 3nm Lion Cove quite handily. Seems AMD miscalculated in using 4nm for client in Zen 5, but maybe they had no choice / no capacity after Intel bought it all up.

*EDIT - corrected confusion about source of the score, thought it was from a 258V CPU in Yoga laptop, it is not.

 
Last edited:

511

Golden Member
Jul 12, 2024
1,038
897
106
Back on topic here, have y'all seen the Cinebench R24 single core scores of the Yoga Slim Lunar Lake laptop?? 130 @4.8GHz max boost clock. If true, this destroys Zen5 Strix which averages 115 @5.1GHz max boost.

That is very impressive. Its about 13% faster than HX 370 ST average, and with only a 4.8 max boost??. If that carries to Arrow Lake, 285K is going to be over 160, and likely >2500 in R23 if the same uplift applies there. Thats what Im talking about.

Depending on pricing, AMD will have have to lower Zen 5 significantly, their 4nm Zen 5 is going to get trounced by 3nm Lion Cove quite handily. Seems AMD miscalculated in using 4nm for client in Zen 5, but maybe they had no choice / no capacity after Intel bought it all up.

View attachment 107018
I would take this with a grain of salt and also i would make it out as the best case i would expect it to be around 126-127 cause the fact 5.1 requires TB 3.0.It is rare to live up in laptops due to cooling constraints
 
Reactions: cebri1

cebri1

Senior member
Jun 13, 2019
373
405
136
I would take this with a grain of salt and also i would make it out as the best case i would expect it to be around 126-127 cause the fact 5.1 requires TB 3.0.It is rare to live up in laptops due to cooling constraints

This. I’d wait until independent reviews come out.
 

jdubs03

Golden Member
Oct 1, 2013
1,079
746
136
Back on topic here, have y'all seen the Cinebench R24 single core scores of the Yoga Slim Lunar Lake laptop?? 130 @4.8GHz max boost clock. If true, this destroys Zen5 Strix which averages 115 @5.1GHz max boost.

That is very impressive. Its about 13% faster than HX 370 ST average, and with only a 4.8 max boost??. If that carries to Arrow Lake, 285K is going to be over 160, and likely >2500 in R23 if the same uplift applies there. Thats what Im talking about.

Depending on pricing, AMD will have have to lower Zen 5 significantly, their 4nm Zen 5 is going to get trounced by 3nm Lion Cove quite handily. Seems AMD miscalculated in using 4nm for client in Zen 5, but maybe they had no choice / no capacity after Intel bought it all up.

View attachment 107018

(Higher quality image, in case @Tigerick wants to use that in the OP)


Based on the Intel slide^ (slide 20) showing the single thread performance compared to AMD and Qualcomm in CB24/GB6.3/spec2017int, I was thinking it’d be around 133-135 if going by the HX370 percentage difference (scores 115-116); and the statement and claim slide (says X1E84 and not the X1E80 on the slide itself).
Which is odd because the 130 score does lineup more with the X80 difference. But I doubt 130 is unreasonable though.
I think ARL will be around 150 based on the IPC increase of 14% and clock frequency reduction (using the 14900K single thread score of 139).
 
Last edited:

Josh128

Senior member
Oct 14, 2022
511
865
106
288V Max Boost is 5.1 though, but yeah ST would be faster on Lion Cove, on desktop and Mobile.
Ah, you are correct-- the Yoga laptop has max 4.8 boost with a 258V, but the R24 slide number is not from the that unit, its from 288V in an unknown unit/power profile. Still, if we assume ISO frequency, it looks like 13% higher R24 IPC vs Strix, still very impressive.
 

OriAr

Member
Feb 1, 2019
96
90
91
Qcomm wouldn't have been making plans to buy parts of Intel if they weren't in trouble.
I can also make plans to date Amanda Seyfried, doesn't mean I have any chance with her whatsoever.
QComm "making plans" doesn't mean they have any chance to actually carry out said plans, Intel is not gonna sell any of their core design businesses anytime soon.
 

maddie

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2010
4,940
5,079
136
Yeah. Thats Apple. But are you trying to compare Apple with AMD?


After many many years, competition is all set to be hot this year. In clients, Lion Cove + Skymont has already surpassed Zen 5 (by a small margin). In servers, Granite Rapids is all set to catch up with competition. Interesting times ahead.
To refresh the mind , as it seems it sometimes slips. You were the one claiming that because Intel still has the dominant share in servers, everything is fine for them. What did you write? Intel is in trouble, maybe they will recover.


"Oopsie. For a while I was under the impression that AMD server market share would've be around or over 50% when compared to Intel. Seeing these numbers is quite shocking.

AMD is not even at 25%, but just 23% in servers. I think the upcoming Intel server products should be able to stop the market share loss."



You are failing to note that when it comes to the profit share, Intel is trailing far behind AMD, and profits are the values that matter. Delusion and deceit is now a big part of our existence and it seems some relish doing little parts in the overall game. Maybe it's a generational thing.
 

SiliconFly

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2023
1,658
999
96
Just to clarify: not polluting the thread, sticking to the topic, not concern trolling, does not equate with saying Intel is fine. Some people do not seem to get the difference. If you are emotionally attached to AMD products I suggest you stick to other threads.
Imho, I think it's okay for people to say bad stuff about Intel even if they're emotionally attached to AMD or something. It kinda keeps the thread engaged and more importantly, it maintains balance instead of creating wrong illusions that one company is far superior to another. Just my humble opinion.

View attachment 107019
(Higher quality image, in case @Tigerick wants to use that in the OP)

View attachment 107021
Based on the Intel slide^ (slide 20) showing the single thread performance compared to AMD and Qualcomm in CB24/GB6.3/spec2017int, I was thinking it’d be around 133-135 if going by the HX370 percentage difference (scores 115-116); and the statement and claim slide (says X1E84 and not the X1E80 on the slide itself).
Which is odd because the 130 score does lineup more with the X80 difference. But I doubt 130 is unreasonable though.
I think ARL will be around 150 based on the IPC increase of 14% and clock frequency reduction (using the 14900K single thread score of 139).
Thats what I too have been saying all along. ARL-S LNC is going to wipe the floor with Zen 5. But too many people here believe that the overall ST performance uplift compared to 14900K is gonna be in the 5% ballpark! Not happening people.

I can also make plans to date Amanda Seyfried, doesn't mean I have any chance with her whatsoever.
QComm "making plans" doesn't mean they have any chance to actually carry out said plans, Intel is not gonna sell any of their core design businesses anytime soon.
True.

To refresh the mind , as it seems it sometimes slips. You were the one claiming that because Intel still has the dominant share in servers, everything is fine for them. What did you write? Intel is in trouble, maybe they will recover.


"Oopsie. For a while I was under the impression that AMD server market share would've be around or over 50% when compared to Intel. Seeing these numbers is quite shocking.

AMD is not even at 25%, but just 23% in servers. I think the upcoming Intel server products should be able to stop the market share loss."



You are failing to note that when it comes to the profit share, Intel is trailing far behind AMD, and profits are the values that matter. Delusion and deceit is now a big part of our existence and it seems some relish doing little parts in the overall game. Maybe it's a generational thing.
Short term profits & losses aren't that important as market share. Intel has slipped a bit. But GNR should arrest the server market share erosion. And more importantly, Diamond Rapids should improve the market share.
 
Last edited:

majord

Senior member
Jul 26, 2015
505
698
136
Ah, you are correct-- the Yoga laptop has max 4.8 boost with a 258V, but the R24 slide number is not from the that unit, its from 288V in an unknown unit/power profile. Still, if we assume ISO frequency, it looks like 13% higher R24 IPC vs Strix, still very impressive.
I don't think its too wise to make such nuanced IPC comparisons with R24.. the scores are obviously influenced by other factors. A 9950X for e.g does ~140cb @ 5.7Ghz

Not downplaying the performance advantage here , it's a strong win SoC vs SoC and should of course count towards its performance along with every other workload , but it's just not something i'd use as an indication of comparative IPC on average.
 
Reactions: lightmanek

SiliconFly

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2023
1,658
999
96
I don't think its too wise to make such nuanced IPC comparisons with R24.. the scores are obviously influenced by other factors. A 9950X for e.g does ~140cb @ 5.7Ghz

Not downplaying the performance advantage here , it's a strong win SoC vs SoC and should of course count towards its performance along with every other workload , but it's just not something i'd use as an indication of comparative IPC on average.
There are too many leaks (both trusted and unverified) out there that signal that ARL's LNC is stronger than expected. A lot stronger.
 

Josh128

Senior member
Oct 14, 2022
511
865
106
I don't think its too wise to make such nuanced IPC comparisons with R24.. the scores are obviously influenced by other factors. A 9950X for e.g does ~140cb @ 5.7Ghz

Not downplaying the performance advantage here , it's a strong win SoC vs SoC and should of course count towards its performance along with every other workload , but it's just not something i'd use as an indication of comparative IPC on average.
R24 is much easier to gauge than something like Geekbench-- 9950X does around 132-138 in R24 ST depending on the review you look at. Anandtech put 9950X and 9900X at 132 and 131 respectively in their review. That is right in line with the 11.8% clock increase over HX 370 ST average of 115.

Im not using it for average IPC, but specifically R24. If the number cited is real, Lion Cove is looking like ~10-13% faster per clock than Zen 5 Nirvana core in R24.
 

MS_AT

Senior member
Jul 15, 2024
365
798
96
R24 is much easier to gauge than something like Geekbench-- 9950X does around 132-138 in R24 ST depending on the review you look at. Anandtech put 9950X and 9900X at 132 and 131 respectively in their review. That is right in line with the 11.8% clock increase over HX 370 ST average of 115.

Im not using it for average IPC, but specifically R24. If the number cited is real, Lion Cove is looking like ~10-13% faster per clock than Zen 5 Nirvana core in R24.
R24 is memory subsystem dependant what makes it different to R23. I suggest checking out Chips&Cheese review of the benchmark. AT is using stock memory, while other outlets are using 6000MHz+ RAM. In case of Lunar Lake vs Strix, Lunar is enjoying both bandwidth and latency advantage. Since there exists memory subsystem dependency L3 size might also be of importance.
 
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/    |