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 (N3B)	Lunar Lake	Panther Lake
Platform	Mobile H/U Only	Desktop & Mobile H&HX	Mobile U Only	Mobile H
Process Node	Intel 4	TSMC N3B	TSMC N3B	Intel 18A
Date	Q4 2023	Desktop-Q4-2024 H&HX-Q1-2025	Q4 2024	Q1 2026 ?
Full Die	6P + 8P	8P + 16E	4P + 4E	4P + 8E
LLC	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.)

AcrosTinus · Nov 10, 2024

Hulk said:
My new first follow up.

"You say the results were unexpected. What was Intel expecting exactly?"

Then sit back and watch the dance.

It could be that the product was rushed and the TTM was priority here instead of delaying. After that use the user and reviewers as Beta testers, digest the information, craft the optimization and new microcode/firmware. Voilà, you have optimized your CPU while cutting down on some internal processes AT THE COST OF YOUR REPUTATION.

Intel man, you better get a x3D equivalent or brute force IPC gain to be competitive or it might soon be over in the DIY space...

Kocicak · Nov 10, 2024

Hulk said:
BTW, good advice some people here regarding my 3rd degraded part. I'm going to ask for a refund. I don't want another defective part as I believe they are all the same (defective).

They are not defective physically, they are sold with defective frequencies. You can fix that, if you want. It is up to you.

Now I run my new mediocre 14900K with 5/4 GHz frequency limits, HT off and it performs really nicely, for example, consumes just 55W while gaming and it is cool as well.

511 · Nov 10, 2024

Kocicak said:
They are not defective physically, they are sold with defective frequencies. You can fix that, if you want. It is up to you.

Now I run my new mediocre 14900K with 5/4 GHz frequency limits, HT off and it performs really nicely, for example, consumes just 55W while gaming and it is cool as well.

View attachment 111391

In the end you are not getting what you paid for ARL seems to have solved the issue of degradation and stuff but it will take time to tell whether the Microcode fixed it or not i know some people who have been running their processors fine some are not

static shock · Nov 10, 2024

ARL and Zen5 should be faster. Lion Cove underperforms versus core ultra 100 p-core in IPC metric.

511 · Nov 10, 2024

Lion cove is the biggest waste of sand in ARL silicon

OneEng2 · Nov 10, 2024

Perhaps....still can you imagine how pissed people here would be if ARL had only Skymont cores in it?

Hulk · Nov 10, 2024

AcrosTinus said:
It could be that the product was rushed and the TTM was priority here instead of delaying. After that use the user and reviewers as Beta testers, digest the information, craft the optimization and new microcode/firmware. Voilà, you have optimized your CPU while cutting down on some internal processes AT THE COST OF YOUR REPUTATION.

Intel man, you better get a x3D equivalent or brute force IPC gain to be competitive or it might soon be over in the DIY space...

Okay, let's role play.

Are the benches produced by reviewers in line with Intel's press numbers? If so, then what was unexpected? If not, what exactly was different and what caused this?

Hulk · Nov 10, 2024

Kocicak said:
They are not defective physically, they are sold with defective frequencies. You can fix that, if you want. It is up to you.

Now I run my new mediocre 14900K with 5/4 GHz frequency limits, HT off and it performs really nicely, for example, consumes just 55W while gaming and it is cool as well.

View attachment 111391

Okay let's go down that rabbit hole.

The CPU is advertised to run 5.6GHz all-core, 6GHz single core but burns out if you do that. Either the part is defective because it can't hold the rating, or the rating is defective because it over rates the part. Either way the package/part is defective. It doesn't do what the manufacturer claims it can do.

It's word play. I understand your position. There is nothing inherently wrong with the physical construction of the CPU, Intel rates it too high and therefore it fails. In a court of law I think the jury would side with the plaintiff, meaning us.

Hulk · Nov 10, 2024

OneEng2 said:
Perhaps....still can you imagine how pissed people here would be if ARL had only Skymont cores in it?

But then again, if ARL was 4+24 the ST performance would be basically the same, lightly threaded apps would have performed basically the same because of the narrow gap performance-wise between Lion Cove and Skymont, but Intel would have had a massive feather in their cap because MT performance in apps that could have utilized all threads would have been through the roof. Over 2800 CB R24 MT.

Go for a win (MT) and a loss (ST) rather than a tie (MT) and loss (ST). They could have also said they focuses on Skymont and MT performance because that is where software is heading. They will work on ST in the next iteration. It would at least have made some sense.

511 · Nov 10, 2024

Hulk said:
But then again, if ARL was 4+24 the ST performance would be basically the same, lightly threaded apps would have performed basically the same because of the narrow gap performance-wise between Lion Cove and Skymont, but Intel would have had a massive feather in their cap because MT performance in apps that could have utilized all threads would have been through the roof. Over 2800 CB R24 MT.

Go for a win (MT) and a loss (ST) rather than a tie (MT) and loss (ST). They could have also said they focuses on Skymont and MT performance because that is where software is heading. They will work on ST in the next iteration. It would at least have made some sense.

If they are going to loose ST better to go 32 SKT wipe everything in MT

static shock · Nov 10, 2024

Skymont is a marvel.

511 · Nov 10, 2024

Hulk said:
Okay let's go down that rabbit hole.

The CPU is advertised to run 5.6GHz all-core, 6GHz single core but burns out if you do that. Either the part is defective because it can't hold the rating, or the rating is defective because it over rates the part. Either way the package/part is defective. It doesn't do what the manufacturer claims it can do.

I think it was 5.4-5.5 ghz not 5.6 ghz
You are correct though you are cheating with the customer if your product doesn't behave as advertised

511 · Nov 10, 2024

I don't know a single person on the internet who would say no to a 24C or 32C skymont chip

Hulk · Nov 10, 2024

511 said:
I think it was 5.4-5.5 ghz not 5.6 ghz
You are correct though you are cheating with the customer if your product doesn't behave as advertised

It's a detail but kind of important because it show how loose Intel played it with frequency.

Ark shows 5.6GHz for max P core boost, plus another 100MHz for TVB, which was so relaxed that it would always engage if power was there and temps were below throttling, which would mean 5.7GHz nT.
5.7 is instanity for Raptor Lake and long term viability

Supported by this review.

Intel Core i9-14900K Review - Reaching for the Performance Crown

Core i9-14900K is Intel's new flagship with clock speeds of up to 6 GHz. It's actually clocked even higher than the 13900KS, thanks to an extra 100 MHz when more than two cores are active. Our review confirms that Raptor Lake Refresh is amazing for both applications and gaming, if you can live...

www.techpowerup.com

Hulk · Nov 10, 2024

511 said:
I don't know a single person on the internet who would say no to a 24C or 32C skymont chip

Perhaps 28+2 would be the sweet spot?

First thing we'd (or at least I would like) need to see is head-to-head Skymont vs Lion Cove, which is hard to do since we're not able to shut down all Lion Coves in the compute complex.

gdansk · Nov 10, 2024

511 said:
I don't know a single person on the internet who would say no to a 24C or 32C skymont chip

Nice to meet you.

Hulk · Nov 10, 2024

gdansk said:
Nice to meet you.

Very good! Short, sweet, funny, and makes the point. This is why I still spend time here. We can disagree and still have fun.

511 · Nov 10, 2024

gdansk said:
Nice to meet you.

Nice to meet you too what is your dream ARL config ?

gdansk · Nov 10, 2024

511 said:
Nice to meet you too what is your dream ARL config ?

I would like good 1T and gaming performance. So at least 6P cores.
Unless it's a very cheap part. Then it's forgivable - like a hypothetical Arrow Lake N.

511 · Nov 10, 2024

gdansk said:
I would like good 1T and gaming performance. So at least 6P cores.
Unless it's a very cheap part. Then it's forgivable - like a hypothetical Arrow Lake N.

I can give you 24P cores with 4.9-5.0ghz all core
Good gaming okay ST good multi

511 · Nov 10, 2024

I can't believe this

I really want to know what MLID Smokes

SiliconFly · Nov 10, 2024

511 said:
If they are going to loose ST better to go 32 SKT wipe everything in MT

I'm hoping that with nova lake, they come out with at least one sku that has 32 Arctic Wolf cores (and no P cores). That would be cool.

static shock said:
Skymont is a marvel.

Skymont is real terrific. I'm expecting Arctic Wolf to be the marvel with IPC a lot higher than LNC (but lower clocks). This would put it on par with LNC but at just 1/3rd the size and very power efficient too.

MoistOintment · Nov 10, 2024

Hulk said:
My new first follow up.

"You say the results were unexpected. What was Intel expecting exactly?"

Then sit back and watch the dance.

If we take what he's saying at face value, then the performance of the CPU is below the expectations of the engineers that designed it, despite matching the results seen by the team that ran internal benchmarks shortly before it was released.

He certainly could be doing PR damage control. But if we give the benefit of the doubt for a minute and assume he's telling the truth, there's certainly no contradiction here because the team that would do a 30 game internal benchmark shortly before the product unveiling would be a totally different team than the ones who designed the CPU.

Saylick · Nov 10, 2024

SiliconFly said:
“Exclusive:-#Panther Lake is 35% more Efficient than #Lunar Lake.”

Looks like it’s totally made up. He posts way too much unverifiable/cooked-up stuff & lots of garbage. Wouldn’t trust him unless the news comes from a reliable source.

Prakhar the Intel fanboy is going to fanboy. More news at 11.

Here’s a tweet in the same thread where he says he doesn’t actually know if Xe3 is actually 40% faster than Xe2, contradicting himself:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1788644719519547543

Beyond_FPS sarcastically says that there’s a worldwide conspiracy to get people to buy Zen 5 and the obvious joke flies over Prakhar’s head…

He also has an alt Xitter account whose entire purpose is to promote Intel, x86, and Windows.

x.com

mikk · Nov 10, 2024

SiliconFly said:
His anger is justified. Another 3 to 4 weeks wait is kinda painful.

+35% efficiency isn't easy. In fact it close to impossible unless they pull out some major new gimmicks.

From N3B to 18A, the ppw gain (power, not density) isn't that significant I think. It's like 10% or maybe even upto 20% due to BSPDN. 35%? Thats just way off. In fact, I'm getting the feeling that it's gonna be hard for PTL-H to even match LNL efficiency (let alone +35%).

Edit: If PTL-H can comfortably surpass LNL in efficiency, it places Intel in a whole new level. A direct competitor to Apple leaving AMD in the dust. So, this +35% efficiency gain rumor should be taken with a tiny truck load of salt.

It is very very easy for PTL with 8 more E-cores, in fact +35% isn't enough to even match Strix Point at 25W, not even close.

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

Senior member

Attachments

Member

Golden Member

Golden Member

Member

Golden Member

Senior member

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Golden Member

Member

Golden Member

Golden Member

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Golden Member

Diamond Member

Golden Member

Golden Member

Golden Member

Member

Diamond Member

Diamond Member

Attachments