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

Page 664 - 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:

cannedlake240

Senior member
Jul 4, 2024
207
111
76
Ehh for one architecture sure but they are Jumping two architecture and one optimization.LNC has 14% ipc over RWC and cougar is 5% more and Panther is another 10-15% it is inline with modern architecture 🙂
Thats still not going to be anywhere near 40-50%, and 5% for cougar is probably too optimistic
 

Kocicak

Golden Member
Jan 17, 2019
1,148
1,211
136
They are offering a replacement CPU. I'm jumping ship. 14900K is too hard to cool and too prone to degradation for my tastes. I could just run at 4.5GHz and call it a day... but I'm an enthusiast! I can't go out like that.
I was telling you that 5.5 is too much. You will get a lot of perfomance from the new CPU, when you cap it from the beginning at 5 GHz.

If you want, jump ship the next year, when the truly updated AM5 platform is available.
 

naukkis

Senior member
Jun 5, 2002
962
829
136
10-15% at best should be the expectation for modern architectures. Memory and cache latency on GNR isn't great in HEX mode so if they can sort that out IPC uplift will be greater than Client. If latency can't be lowered at least get the capacity up through 3d stacking...

Intel Panther Cove will bring APX, which basically should give x86 similar performance possibilities than todays ARM. x86 is currently lacking about 50% IPC. If Intel doesn't target that with Panther Cove they are just losing their mind. And when they target that kind of high IPC they pretty much have no other option than drop SMT.

If they change their mind and re-introduce SMT they basically confirm that they have failed all their design targets and have gone to damage limitation mode.
 

cannedlake240

Senior member
Jul 4, 2024
207
111
76
Intel Panther Cove will bring APX, which basically should give x86 similar performance possibilities than todays ARM. x86 is currently lacking about 50% IPC. If Intel doesn't target that with Panther Cove they are just losing their mind. And when they target that kind of high IPC they pretty much have no other option than drop SMT.
Nah anything more than 20% is extremely unlikely. ARM is 4.5Ghz max, way below the 5.7ghz of current x86 chips. They achieve basically the same perf, but the low clock speed approach is more efficient. Intel's experimental Royal core program that was recently canned allegedly targeted much higher IPC
 

naukkis

Senior member
Jun 5, 2002
962
829
136
Nah anything more than 20% is extremely unlikely. ARM is 4.5Ghz max, way below the 5.7ghz of current x86 chips. They achieve basically the same perf, but the low clock speed approach is more efficient. Intel's experimental Royal core program that was recently canned allegedly targeted much higher IPC

So Intel bringing new instruction set architecture targeting performance and you except that they could not extract any performance out of it? Intel should gain that 20% for legacy x64 and have much more from native APX compared to legacy x64.
 

cannedlake240

Senior member
Jul 4, 2024
207
111
76
So Intel bringing new instruction set architecture targeting performance and you except that they could not extract any performance out of it? Intel should gain that 20% for legacy x64 and have much more from native APX compared to legacy x64.
David Huang and Chester from CnC believe that perf improvement from APX will be negligible. Plus it apparently increases instruction length which will make the x86 decoding an even bigger headache
 

naukkis

Senior member
Jun 5, 2002
962
829
136
David Huang and Chester from CnC believe that perf improvement from APX will be negligible. Plus it apparently increases instruction length which will make the x86 decoding an even bigger headache

It does not cure everything on x86 - but doubling registers will outright reduce loads 10% and stores 20%. X86 with it stupid TSO ordering will greatly benefit from fewer stores. APX also makes possible to reduce branches from code. With those APX code should be equal to ARM at least with cpu designs that have mop cache to remove instruction decoding problems.
 

dttprofessor

Member
Jun 16, 2022
105
30
71
Quite a few cloud use cases do not require high single-core performance. SRF is sufficient for these applications. No matter how strong the performance of CLW is, it will not cost the cloud more. SRF is sufficient.
 

Meteor Late

Member
Dec 15, 2023
116
98
61
Nah anything more than 20% is extremely unlikely. ARM is 4.5Ghz max, way below the 5.7ghz of current x86 chips. They achieve basically the same perf, but the low clock speed approach is more efficient. Intel's experimental Royal core program that was recently canned allegedly targeted much higher IPC

Eh 5.7GHz is on Desktop, on Laptop there is no 5.7GHz chip because it would consume a massive amount of power for single core. ARM limit is not 4.5GHz, I'm sure M4 can clock a bit higher, 200-300MHz more for sure, at what power cost though I don't know, probably very costly.
 

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
4,701
2,863
136
I was telling you that 5.5 is too much. You will get a lot of perfomance from the new CPU, when you cap it from the beginning at 5 GHz.

If you want, jump ship the next year, when the truly updated AM5 platform is available.
You were correct.

What will the updated AM5 add?
 

Kocicak

Golden Member
Jan 17, 2019
1,148
1,211
136
What will the updated AM5 add?
I have no idea, but I believe it is impossible that AMD ran exactly the same platform for three consecutive years without updating it.

Now is a bad time for jumping ships, the next year you will be able to choose between a fixed CPU for LGA 1851 or even better CPUs for AM5 than are available today.
 

dttprofessor

Member
Jun 16, 2022
105
30
71
Eh 5.7GHz is on Desktop, on Laptop there is no 5.7GHz chip because it would consume a massive amount of power for single core. ARM limit is not 4.5GHz, I'm sure M4 can clock a bit higher, 200-300MHz more for sure, at what power cost though I don't know, probably very costly.
maybe core 285hx(not ultra)5.7g
 

AcrosTinus

Member
Jun 23, 2024
162
163
76
Well I'll be getting a warranty replacement on my 3rd Raptor CPU shortly. Running on auto "Intel safe" BIOS options with updated Intel microcode BIOS and max clock capped at 5.5GHz. Getting lock ups in Topaz Photo AI. Contacted them and they said check CPU stability Photo AI hits the CPU hard. I said, "Impossible, I'm 100% stable."

Just for kicks I backed max clock down to 4.5GHz and the issues with Photo AI are resolved.

Checked with Intel and based on S/N and batch number they said my CPU is "defective" and will send a new one.

Now the question do I use it or just bail and move to AMD? I want to bail as I'm tired of this. I just hate starting over with Windows from the ground up. But it's gotta happen sooner or later right? I think the writing is on the wall and I have to move on from Intel.
The only AMD mainstream that might be worth it is the 9950X with 3D-VCache to compensate the IO Die and RAM latency. Anything else is too weak, 9800x3D is nice but I am not buying 8 cores in 2024, not going to happen.

And Intel maybe in one of my dreams might implement a 3D cache equivalent, now that the tiles introduce latency and the L3 is quite weak, it might help or just introduce more latency.

I think Intel's strategy might be increasing L3 frequency like they did from Alder to Raptor, reintegrate the IMC into the compute die and introduce a LV4 cache to hide the D2D latency. I don't know how effective that approach might be but it is fair to say that Intel won't be taking any gaming crowns for nearly a decade maybe and frankly I don't care. I am on 4K with a 4070 Ti Super, these bottlenecks don't see me. I buy Intel for the stability *ahemmm* and their chipset, here AMD has to catch up as their chipset is only connected via a 4x lane. Z890 currently has more bandwidth but no real CPUs....
 

Markfw

Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
May 16, 2002
26,389
15,513
136
The only AMD mainstream that might be worth it is the 9950X with 3D-VCache to compensate the IO Die and RAM latency. Anything else is too weak, 9800x3D is nice but I am not buying 8 cores in 2024, not going to happen.

And Intel maybe in one of my dreams might implement a 3D cache equivalent, now that the tiles introduce latency and the L3 is quite weak, it might help or just introduce more latency.

I think Intel's strategy might be increasing L3 frequency like they did from Alder to Raptor, reintegrate the IMC into the compute die and introduce a LV4 cache to hide the D2D latency. I don't know how effective that approach might be but it is fair to say that Intel won't be taking any gaming crowns for nearly a decade maybe and frankly I don't care. I am on 4K with a 4070 Ti Super, these bottlenecks don't see me. I buy Intel for the stability *ahemmm* and their chipset, here AMD has to catch up as their chipset is only connected via a 4x lane. Z890 currently has more bandwidth but no real CPUs....
Intel ? Stability ? you are in the wrong universe, see the Raptor lake instability threads
 

Markfw

Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
May 16, 2002
26,389
15,513
136
It was a joke, "stability *ahemm*", thought it was on the nose
SORRY !!!! I was commenting based on the rest. The 9800x3d if you are a gamer or 9950x for the test productive would have been my recommendation.

But sorry, this is an Intel thread. No more posts on this from me.
 
Reactions: AcrosTinus

511

Golden Member
Jul 12, 2024
1,034
894
106
SORRY !!!! I was commenting based on the rest. The 9800x3d if you are a gamer or 9950x for the test productive would have been my recommendation.
Test productivity 😅
No matter how bad 14900K was it was not a regression like ARL was ARL would have been salvageable without the -ve gains it had
 
Last edited:
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/    |