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.)

Thunder 57 · Feb 7, 2025

511 said:
Platform Tops

https://twitter.com/x/status/1887856347498320330

Does anyone care about TOPS though? I thought the concensus was that it was a waste of die space though could be used for something more valuable. As far as the NPU goes that is.

GTracing · Feb 7, 2025

511 said:
Platform Tops

https://twitter.com/x/status/1887856347498320330

How meaningful is platform TOPS as a metric? Genuinely asking. I don't know much about this stuff.

Can models easily be run on the CPU, NPU, and GPU at the same time? Will a 10 TOPS CPU run AI software as fast as a 10 TOPS NPU or 10 TOPS GPU? Or does it depend on the software? Would running a model on the CPU use all the CPU horsepower and make the system slow and unusable until the software finishes?

511 · Feb 7, 2025

511 said:
Platform Tops

https://twitter.com/x/status/1887856347498320330

From this info the clock speed for iGPU is around 2.5 GHz and there is a core count increase of 50% for the halo and the TOPs per Xe Cores are same so
2.5*4096(Int 8)*12 = 122 TOPS

jpiniero · Feb 7, 2025

Thunder 57 said:
Does anyone care about TOPS though?

Wall Street does

511 · Feb 7, 2025

GTracing said:
How meaningful is platform TOPS as a metric? Genuinely asking. I don't know much about this stuff.

TOPS is even worse than FP32 Flops for metric cause at least it's FP32 and is fixed Size while companies don't even list the TOPS they use it can be Int8/BF16/FP16/Int4/FP4 size.

Nvidia uses TOPS with an edge case called Sparsity they will just take the TOPS multiply by 2 due to the edge case and report it as TOPS for example the 980 TOPs on Nvidia RTX 5070 is FP4 with Sparsity so if we convert it into what Intel has reported it in terms of Int8 we would be dividing it by 4. 2 from going from FP4(4 bit) Sparsity to non Sparsity and 2 by going from FP4 to Int8 (8 bit) that would translate to approx 245 TOPS of Int8 or roughly double the throughput of the Panther Lake iGPU.

TOPS = ops/clk*clk frequency* Cores
This is the mathematical part of conversion

GTracing said:
Can models easily be run on the CPU, NPU, and GPU at the same time? Will a 10 TOPS CPU run AI software as fast as a 10 TOPS NPU or 10 TOPS GPU? Or does it depend on the software? Would running a model on the CPU use all the CPU horsepower and make the system slow and unusable until the software finishes?

It all comes down to software also if they are not Memory Bandwidth and Size bound it would be performing the same but that's an ideal scenario an iGPU may be faster than an RTX 4090 if the model size is too big that it spills out of VRAM and becomes Slow.
For AI You need few things
> Memory large enough to fit the model.
> Memory Bandwidth to not slow the model
> Compute ofc measured in TOPS in this case BF16 is used for training smaller size like FP4 is limited to inference.
> Software Support( Hence the CUDA Moat cause AMDs MI300X is more powerful but lacking in SW)

Hope that helps

511 · Feb 7, 2025

Thunder 57 said:
Does anyone care about TOPS though? I thought the concensus was that it was a waste of die space though could be used for something more valuable. As far as the NPU goes that is.

Btw Intel has cut the NPU Size in Half from the rumors

dullard · Feb 7, 2025

OneEng2 said:
Yes, E cores are quite competent at SPECINT2017 at low clock speeds compared to P cores, but just to point out the obvious....

Real applications are not SPECINT

That test was SPECint. But, there have been other tests of P core vs. E core on other applications. The results so far have always the same: the performance curves cross each other at some point. Meaning one core is better at low power and the other core is better at high power.

Here are some admittedly dated ones, but they were easy to find and are real applications and not just SPECint:

Alder Lake’s Power Efficiency – A Complicated Picture

Reviews across the internet show Alder Lake getting very competitive performance with very high power consumption.

chipsandcheese.com

511 said:
but my point is for power constrained devices P cores are not that useful outside of maybe like 4P Cores the additional 2P cores will steal too much from power budget.

If your revised statement is that 6 P cores is too much, then lucky for you the 235H exists with fewer P cores and costs 31% less.

dullard · Feb 7, 2025

511 said:
Btw Intel has cut the NPU Size in Half from the rumors

Going from TSMC N6 to Intel 18A, they better be able to cut it in half.

coercitiv · Feb 7, 2025

511 said:
Btw Intel has cut the NPU Size in Half from the rumors

Perfectly balanced, as all things should be.

511 · Feb 7, 2025

dullard said:
Going from TSMC N6 to Intel 18A, they better be able to cut it in half.

Not from N6 to 18A I meant N3B to 18A

dullard · Feb 7, 2025

511 said:
Not from N6 to 18A I meant N3B to 18A

I was thinking of the NPU on Meteor Lake and Arrow Lake which uses TSMC N6. I assume you were talking about Lunar Lake?

511 · Feb 7, 2025

dullard said:
I was thinking of the NPU on Meteor Lake and Arrow Lake which uses TSMC N6. I assume you were talking about Lunar Lake?

Yes they have made a significant changes compared to LNL to minimize the area for NPU while still meeting Co-Pilot requirements

OneEng2 · Feb 7, 2025

dullard said:
That test was SPECint. But, there have been other tests of P core vs. E core on other applications. The results so far have always the same: the performance curves cross each other at some point. Meaning one core is better at low power and the other core is better at high power.

Here are some admittedly dated ones, but they were easy to find and are real applications and not just SPECint:
View attachment 116511
View attachment 116512

Alder Lake’s Power Efficiency – A Complicated Picture

Reviews across the internet show Alder Lake getting very competitive performance with very high power consumption.

chipsandcheese.com

If your revised statement is that 6 P cores is too much, then lucky for you the 235H exists with fewer P cores and costs 31% less.

Thanks. This is for older P and E cores and not LLK/ARL, but I suspect the story would still be the same.

511 · Feb 7, 2025

OneEng2 said:
Thanks. This is for older P and E cores and not LLK/ARL, but I suspect the story would still be the same.

The architecture has massive gaps between GLC and GMT vs SKT and LNC so there is a massive uArch difference the curve has shifted in favour of SKT more vs LNL

cannedlake240 · Feb 7, 2025

OneEng2 said:
Thanks. This is for older P and E cores and not LLK/ARL, but I suspect the story would still be the same.

Nope, since then e cores got >20% ppc in integer, even more in fp and higher clocks while P cores only got 10% ppc

LightningZ71 · Feb 7, 2025

There is certainly room in the mobile stack for a 4xlion plus 16xskt.

fastandfurious6 · Feb 8, 2025

Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX fails to outperform Core i9-14900HX in Cinebench R23 single-core test

A Cinebench R23 score of Intel's Arrow Lake-based Core Ultra 9 275HX has emerged online. While it fails to best its Raptor Lake counterpart in single-core performance, it offers a double-digit increment in the multicore test.

www.notebookcheck.net

🫣🫣🫣

fastandfurious6 · Feb 8, 2025

isn't it strange both camps still keep review embargos etc despite all products details announced already month+ ago?

when embargos lifted?

AcrosTinus · Feb 8, 2025

fastandfurious6 said:
Intel Core Ultra 9 275HX fails to outperform Core i9-14900HX in Cinebench R23 single-core test

A Cinebench R23 score of Intel's Arrow Lake-based Core Ultra 9 275HX has emerged online. While it fails to best its Raptor Lake counterpart in single-core performance, it offers a double-digit increment in the multicore test.

www.notebookcheck.net

🫣🫣🫣

Raptor is and was fast, so fast in fact it burned out like a star.
Only 18A or 14A based chips with a lot more logic can really surpass it, Zen5 is not much faster than RaptorCove as well.

511 · Feb 8, 2025

AcrosTinus said:
Raptor is and was fast, so fast in fact it burned out like a star.
Only 18A or 14A based chips with a lot more logic can really surpass it, Zen5 is not much faster than RaptorCove as well.

It's embarrassing that a Intel 7 product is making ST Performance of Zen5/ARL not meh

511 · Feb 9, 2025

I am waiting for Igor to leak NVL Performance Projection like they did with arrow lake.

Since the core count is 16P+32E I bet the 32E alone would have greater Multi than ARL-S and 2X over ARL is possible 100K R23?

I hope they don't use DLVR on Desktop there is no need for it on Desktop.

Any guesstimate for ST Performance?

Thunder 57 · Feb 9, 2025

511 said:
I am waiting for Igor to leak NVL Performance Projection like they did with arrow lake.

Since the core count is 16P+32E I bet the 32E alone would have greater Multi than ARL-S and 2X over ARL is possible 100K R23?

I hope they don't use DLVR on Desktop there is no need for it on Desktop

At what kind of TDP do you think they could pull that off? And enough memory bandwitdth to feed the cores? Maybe they have a halo SKU for that but I suspect Intel will stick to 8P cores for the most part. Not necssarily a bad thing, look at Nvidia ATM.

511 · Feb 9, 2025

Thunder 57 said:
At what kind of TDP do you think they could pull that off? And enough memory bandwitdth to feed the cores? Maybe they have a halo SKU for that but I suspect Intel will stick to 8P cores for the most part. Not necssarily a bad thing, look at Nvidia ATM.

Around 300-350W which kind of is needed to feed the P cores if it were 48 E cores 250W would have been enough considering 144E SRF Cores are fine around 250W as for bandwidth I would guess Triple channel memory ought to be needed

igor_kavinski · Feb 9, 2025

511 said:
Around 300-350W

I think they might choose default TDP of 270 to 280W but unlimited with 420mm AIO may go up to 400W.

511 · Feb 9, 2025

igor_kavinski said:
I think they might choose default TDP of 270 to 280W but unlimited with 420mm AIO may go up to 400W.

yeah but i worry about the P cores

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

Senior member

Attachments

Diamond Member

Senior member

Golden Member

Lifer

Golden Member

Golden Member

Elite Member

Elite Member

Diamond Member

Golden Member

Elite Member

Golden Member

Senior member

Golden Member

Senior member

Platinum Member

Senior member

Senior member

Member

Golden Member

Golden Member

Diamond Member

Golden Member

Lifer

Golden Member