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

Tigerick · Aug 22, 2022

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

Model	Code-Name	Date	TDP	Node	Tiles	Main Tile	CPU	LP E-Core	LLC	GPU	Xe-cores
Core Ultra 100U	Meteor Lake	Q4 2023	15 - 57 W	Intel 4 + N5 + N6	4	tCPU	2P + 8E	2	12 MB	Intel Graphics	4
?	Lunar Lake	Q4 2024	17 - 30 W	N3B + N6	2	CPU + GPU & IMC	4P + 4E	0	12 MB	Arc	8
?	Panther Lake	Q1 2026 ?	?	Intel 18A + N3E	3	CPU + MC	4P + 8E	4	?	Arc	12

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

	Meteor Lake	Arrow Lake (20A)	Arrow Lake (N3B)	Lunar Lake	Panther Lake
Platform	Mobile H/U Only	Desktop Only	Desktop & Mobile H&HX	Mobile U Only	Mobile H
Process Node	Intel 4	Intel 20A	TSMC N3B	TSMC N3B	Intel 18A
Date	Q4 2023	Q1 2025 ?	Desktop-Q4-2024 H&HX-Q1-2025	Q4 2024	Q1 2026 ?
Full Die	6P + 8P	6P + 8E ?	8P + 16E	4P + 4E	4P + 8E
LLC	24 MB	24 MB ?	36 MB ?	12 MB	?
tCPU	66.48
tGPU	44.45
SoC	96.77
IOE	44.45
Total	252.15

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.)

ondma · Saturday at 3:00 AM

Wolverine2349 said:
Yeah may not. But Zen 5 is a flop in uplift with almost no gain in gaming and other consumer workloads that do not use AVX512. Will Arrow Lake actually have a meaningful gain over RPL in gaming and other general consumer workloads even if only 10-15%. I really want to see that plus much lower power for cooler running CPUs and oh stability stability stability which Raptor Lake lacks.

Raptor Lake may even lack stability and still degrade too easily even with corrected microcode and default Intel power profile updates. It was a rushed design and flawed afterall.

"Only" 10-15%? I would jump for joy of ARL shows that much gain in either 1T or nT. (I mean in final performance, not just IPC)

511 · Saturday at 3:02 AM

DavidC1 said:
Maybe in 128-bit support, but that's a stretch. Supporting it itself increases transistor count and power because of the extra registers.

Nope Avx10 128 bit was canned so it is 256 bit or 512 bit

DavidC1 said:
AVX512 is a remnant of the misguided and fat Intel that aimed at continually increasing vector performance of CPUs to limit GPU inroads. There were AVX1024 in plans at one point according to some. It should have went from AVX2 to AVX3, but with 256-bit vector.

It is really nice but I agree AMX was invented for AI instead of AVX-1024 a nice step

DavidC1 said:
The E cores have been closely following ARM cores in development. After all, Atom was shifted to compete with ARM in Smartphones early on and that never stopped.

And it is paying them off nicely look how E cores have been constantly getting better i think Skymont is on same level as X2 which is nice in terms of IPC

ondma · Saturday at 3:04 AM

jdubs03 said:
Spotted this. Just one benchmark, but it shows the U7 258V is fallible..

AMD Z1 Extreme beats Intel Core Ultra 7 258V in DX12 gaming benchmark — Zen 4 chip offers over 90% higher performance

The amount of RAM makes a big difference.

www.tomshardware.com

Ashes is a notoriously non-representative "gaming" benchmark. Also, reading the details, there wasnt even a direct comparison in comparable systems.

SiliconFly · Saturday at 4:19 AM

CouncilorIrissa said:
No.

Yes.

Link: C&C

Nothingness · Saturday at 5:30 AM

SiliconFly said:
Yes.

Link: C&C

From your link:

AVX-512 is used in Cinebench 2024, but in such low amounts that it’s irrelevant.

So no

MS_AT · Saturday at 5:39 AM

SiliconFly said:
Yes.

Link: C&C

In addition to what Nothingness said I will also quote from the article:

The most common FP/vector math instructions are VMULSS (scalar FP32 multiply) and VADDSS (scalar FP32 add). About 6.8% of instructions do math on 128-bit vectors. 256-bit vectors are nearly absent, but AVX isn’t just about vector length. It provides non-destructive three operand instruction formats, and Cinebench leverages that.

naukkis · Saturday at 6:09 AM

Wolverine2349 said:
I would buy a 10-12 P core 5GHz Golden Cove/Alder Lake CPU on a single ring bus in a heartbeat if it existed.

Arl come very close of that. Up to 12 threads every thread have 2MB L2 and at least 4.6Ghz clock on same L3 ring. Replacing Skymont clusters with Lion Coves wouldn't change much at sane power levels.

SiliconFly · Saturday at 8:01 AM

Nothingness said:
From your link:

So no

Oh pls. First you said it’s not there at all.

But now you say it’s there but useless.

Make up your mind!

SiliconFly · Saturday at 8:03 AM

MS_AT said:
View attachment 107527
In addition to what Nothingness said I will also quote from the article:

So, like you and this article says, Cinebench leverages AVX512?

TESKATLIPOKA · Saturday at 8:46 AM

naukkis said:
No it's just what to be expected from max 17w soc. Those 700-800 results would have only possible without powerlimits consuming about 100w.

As you said, 700-800 points is impossible at low TDP.

LNL is still just a 4P+4E CPU without SMT at 15W+2W for memory, 479 points is not that bad even If some think so or simply had too high expectations.

In comparison:
Ultra 5 125H 4P+8E+2LPE(18t) manages 564 points at 30W(Link).
Ultra 7 164U 2P+8E+2LPE(16t) manages 420 points at 16W(Link).
Core i3-N305 8E(8t) manages 324 points at 15W(Link).

I think retail product will score a bit higher ~500 points.

It could be an interesting CPU for a handheld, but I don't think price will be low and then GPU drivers are still worse than AMDs, and Intel doesn't have any frame generator yet.

Nothingness · Saturday at 8:54 AM

SiliconFly said:
Oh pls. First you said it’s not there at all.

But now you say it’s there but useless.

Make up your mind!

I didn't say anything 😉

Anyway the point you were trying to make that to see AVX-512 benefit one should run Cinebench was utterly wrong. Being wrong is not an issue, insisting on being wrong on the other hand...

Nothingness · Saturday at 8:56 AM

SiliconFly said:
So, like you and this article says, Cinebench leverages AVX512?

Using instructions doesn't mean it's of any use. The graph proves it: no significant amount of AVX-512 is run by CB, so using it to asses the benefit of AVX-512 is meaningless.

511 · Saturday at 9:02 AM

TESKATLIPOKA said:
As you said, 700-800 points is impossible at low TDP.

LNL is still just a 4P+4E CPU without SMT at 15W+2W for memory, 479 points is not that bad even If some think so or simply had too high expectations.

I agree i was always thinking of 500-550 range

TESKATLIPOKA said:
It could be an interesting CPU for a handheld, but I don't think price will be low and then GPU drivers are still worse than AMDs, and Intel doesn't have any frame generator yet.

Funnily amd FG works with Xess so it won't matter much the drivers are the biggest pain though

Abwx · Saturday at 9:54 AM

SiliconFly said:
Oh pls. First you said it’s not there at all.

But now you say it’s there but useless.

Make up your mind!

There s only up to SSE 4.2 in CB R15, a tiny amount of AVX128 in CB R20/23, AVX256 is found only in CB 2024 since this is required to run this bench, and of course there s no AVX512 in whatever version.

Josh128 · Saturday at 9:55 AM

SiliconFly said:
So, like you and this article says, Cinebench leverages AVX512?

No, it doesnt. Look at the chart.

SiliconFly · Saturday at 10:48 AM

Nothingness said:
I didn't say anything 😉

Anyway the point you were trying to make that to see AVX-512 benefit one should run Cinebench was utterly wrong. Being wrong is not an issue, insisting on being wrong on the other hand...

Looks like AVX512 is not useful for general consumers after all!

Thunder 57 · Saturday at 10:48 AM

SiliconFly said:
Yes.

Link: C&C

What are you talking about? There is no blue (Cinebench) for AVX512.

Thunder 57 · Saturday at 10:52 AM

SiliconFly said:
Looks like AVX512 is not useful for general consumers after all!

Transcoding and emulation come to mind.

SiliconFly · Saturday at 10:53 AM

Thunder 57 said:
Transcoding and emulation come to mind.

Only some A/V encoders.

Thunder 57 · Saturday at 10:59 AM

SiliconFly said:
Only some A/V encoders.

So it is sometimes useful and not never useful?

Tup3x · Saturday at 12:04 PM

Thunder 57 said:
Transcoding and emulation come to mind.

Normal user doesn't really do neither though. If normal user does transcoding or video encoding, it's probably done using hardware acceleration.

Nothingness · Saturday at 12:07 PM

SiliconFly said:
Looks like AVX512 is not useful for general consumers after all!

No, it just means the CB guys didn't optimize their software for AVX-512 or found it didn't fit well in their current implementation. I will let you read about the benefits of AVX-512 for some other renderers: https://www.phoronix.com/review/amd-zen5-avx-512-9950x/3

Of course rendering is not of use to all people. Just like high-end gaming isn't.

Markfw · Saturday at 12:29 PM

Thunder 57 said:
Transcoding and emulation come to mind.

scientific calculations, primegrid is an example.

gdansk · Saturday at 12:41 PM

It should also work pretty well for a renderer in general.

For example, Intel added it to Embree. But last I tried I couldn't get AVX 512 to work, it required Intel's compiler on Windows. But maybe it works these days.

Not using AVX-512 extensively in a renderer used as a benchmark is almost a deliberate decision. Edit: And it's a fine decision in my opinion.

SiliconFly · Saturday at 12:55 PM

Thunder 57 said:
So it is sometimes useful and not never useful?

Tup3x said:
Normal user doesn't really do neither though. If normal user does transcoding or video encoding, it's probably done using hardware acceleration.

gdansk said:
It should also work pretty well for a renderer in general.

For example, Intel added it to Embree. But last I tried I couldn't get AVX 512 to work, it required Intel's compiler on Windows. But maybe it works these days.

Not using AVX-512 extensively in a renderer used as a benchmark is almost a deliberate decision. Edit: And it's a fine decision in my opinion.

So, AVX512 is more of a niche.

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

Senior member

Attachments

Platinum Member

Senior member

Platinum Member

Golden Member

Diamond Member

Senior member

Senior member

Golden Member

Golden Member

Platinum Member

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Senior member

Lifer

Senior member

Golden Member

Platinum Member

Platinum Member

Golden Member

Platinum Member

Golden Member

Diamond Member

Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member

Platinum Member

Golden Member