Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread

Page 668 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
8,528
3,574
136
But the short and skinny is that compute die has the P cores and the E core clusters, and the LP E cores are on the SOC die, which is on the older node (Intel 7). The idea that's been floating around is either the VPU runs off of those cores (not sure if legit), or that the LP cores are there to run the system if the workload does not require turning on the compute die, thus saving power.
The big problem with Intel platform is that the idle power has not been realistic to reach often enough to matter and also it takes a substantial effort to even make it possible.

By using a very low power x86 core dedicated for power management and idle they can reel in such scenarios which keeps the CPU package from sleeping and at the same time allow driver/firmware development to be smooth in comparison to having a real special purpose core in there.

I'm excited for the confirmation of the cores for Meteorlake. Finally it has a chance of being a good mobile chip and a trend reversal of battery life regressions since Cometlake.
 

aigomorla

Cases and Cooling Mod PC Gaming Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 28, 2005
19,848
2,248
126
I seem to remember a thread in the CPU forums about people using Threadripper to do professional rendering for a movie project, for example. That's lost revenue for AMD and integrators when people can "cheap out" with high-end prosumer gear.
No all they need to do is put lots and lots of RGB, watercooling pump headers, and slap the Gamer tag in front of HEDT, and they can charge more then enterprise prices for it.

On topic of this, will i be able to run 2 GPUs and 2 nvme drives on that X670 board with 7950x? Cause that is my intention /need. I mean, without compromised performance anywhere.
each gpu will be downgraded to 8x, and not run at the full 16x each.
So asking for what your asking, 16x + 8x = 24x total pci-e lanes required.
That means yes, but thats your wall there, meaning you probably can't do anymore, like add a thunderbolt 4 card, or a 10gbe nic.
And you definitely can not throw in a bifurcation card ever which is required when you want to run 4 nvme's in R0 for some insanity.
 
Last edited:

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
20,311
9,358
136
Wait, what?

Making the SOC on the leading edge TSMC node? Isn't that die mostly IO and other stuff that doesn't scale well? Why would they use a leading edge process?
Is Intel taking any significant number of N6 wafers?

No all they need to do is put lots and lots of RGB, watercooling pump headers, and slap the Gamer tag in front of HEDT, and they can charge more then enterprise prices for it.
More than 1P EPYC? Somehow I doubt that. Threadripper Pro is already charging more per socket/PCIe lane than Threadripper.
 

Exist50

Golden Member
Aug 18, 2016
1,448
1,515
136
Are these LP E Cores just down clocked E Cores?
In addition to what's been stated about them being on the SoC die, they are full fat Crestmont (maybe Gracemont), at least on Meteor Lake and Arrow Lake. Future, who knows.

Ehh? So Intel is only making the compute die and the base die for Foveros? That's interesting. It's not like they have a shortage of Intel 7 throughput. I wonder why they want to outsource that to TSMC...
Well N6 is just flat out better for the purpose (low-mid voltage, low leakage, low cost). But beyond that, you can actually buy IP on N6.
 

Exist50

Golden Member
Aug 18, 2016
1,448
1,515
136
The big problem with Intel platform is that the idle power has not been realistic to reach often enough to matter and also it takes a substantial effort to even make it possible.

By using a very low power x86 core dedicated for power management and idle they can reel in such scenarios which keeps the CPU package from sleeping and at the same time allow driver/firmware development to be smooth in comparison to having a real special purpose core in there.

I'm excited for the confirmation of the cores for Meteorlake. Finally it has a chance of being a good mobile chip and a trend reversal of battery life regressions since Cometlake.
I certainly don't expect Meteor Lake to be worse than Alder Lake. But I do think you should temper your expectations somewhat. These SoC Atom cores are a good idea, but the implementation is tempered by the process choice, lack of DLVR, etc. And more importantly, some of the much bigger overheads MTL introduces that it'll need to overcome. I think there will be much more opportunity in the Lunar Lake, or perhaps Nova Lake, timeframe.
 

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
4,057
6,106
136
They included a Quark "line" but not a Phi line. :D

The big problem with Intel platform is that the idle power has not been realistic to reach often enough to matter and also it takes a substantial effort to even make it possible.

By using a very low power x86 core dedicated for power management and idle they can reel in such scenarios which keeps the CPU package from sleeping and at the same time allow driver/firmware development to be smooth in comparison to having a real special purpose core in there.

I'm excited for the confirmation of the cores for Meteorlake. Finally it has a chance of being a good mobile chip and a trend reversal of battery life regressions since Cometlake.
I honestly had expected the E cores to be used exactly for that. I find it a bit unfathomable that Intel really needs LP E cores on top of that to be able to achieve this.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
20,311
9,358
136
So Intel laid out likely over $10 billion for N3, and now they have to pay more to delay taking the wafers for two quarters? Ouch. That's gonna hurt the old pocketbook. Unless they produce all of Meteor Lake on N3 . . .
 

JasonLD

Senior member
Aug 22, 2017
479
440
136

Surprise, Surprise. Intel 4 is a trainwreck and they are forced to abandon the Meteor Lake paper launch. They might also be forced to fab the TSMC chiplets with no product to put it in because they were dumb enough to not dual source the CPU chiplet.
And 2 days ago they said Intel 4 is on its production later this year. I think #4 on that rumor alone is ridiculous enough to dismiss that entire rumor as unlikely.
 

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
4,057
6,106
136
As I noted in the Raptor Lake thread:
Intel going mixed node chiplets then delaying is certainly bound to become a juicy mess. Though knowing Intel I'd expect Intel to stockpile "early" dies and pretend everything worked as planned once all chiplets are up to speed and can be launched as complete chips.
I believe point #4 to be more likely because Intel is desperate and has to do whatever it can to meet targets and control losses.
#4 is not really possible on such a short notice, unless Intel actually ported and prepared a design already which I find hard to imagine with Intel being Intel.
 

Exist50

Golden Member
Aug 18, 2016
1,448
1,515
136

Surprise, Surprise. Intel 4 is a trainwreck and they are forced to abandon the Meteor Lake paper launch. They might also be forced to fab the TSMC chiplets with no product to put it in because they were dumb enough to not dual source the CPU chiplet.
I think you're reading this all wrong. The claim is that Meteor Lake got delayed from end of '22 to somewhere in mid-2023. That's easily believable. I've been skeptical of mass production any time before Q2 to begin with. But that's irrespective of Intel 4.

The supposed problem is that Intel had orders for N3 in that timeline, and those now have to be pushed backed back and face penalties. The solution being proposed is basically for Intel to placate TSMC by ordering additional N3 volume to compensate. I think this is very unlikely with the timeline and products detailed in the article.
 

igor_kavinski

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2020
6,234
3,813
106
Or Intel could flood the market with cheap chips, breaking even or making a tiny profit. Better than making loss.
 

nicalandia

Platinum Member
Jan 10, 2019
2,711
4,141
106
It says "LP E-cores" and references "Low-power island CPU offload". I.e. these are the SOC die Atom cores (Gracemont or Crestmont) I've mentioned previously. @dullard, I recall you were skeptical of their existence. Hopefully this puts those doubts to rest.
the thing is..

The max it's 14 cores. 6P + 8E Cores, so are those Off Die LP E Cores going to count towards the Total CPU on the marketing slides? Or are they more like Co-Processors? I mean that HUGE SOC tile does have space for additional 4 LP E cores but that would mean that the Meteor Lake would be 6P + 8E + 4 LP E?
 

igor_kavinski

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2020
6,234
3,813
106
Are the LP e-cores worth discussing from a performance standpoint? Are they even going to add something of value to multicore benchmark scores? I would prefer that they be reserved exclusively by the critical OS threads so they don't take time slices away from the user threads.
 

igor_kavinski

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2020
6,234
3,813
106
The inter-thread communication between three separate core clusters has got to be a challenge, I imagine, due to the latency involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hotrod2go

nicalandia

Platinum Member
Jan 10, 2019
2,711
4,141
106
The inter-thread communication between three separate core clusters has got to be a challenge, I imagine, due to the latency involved.
The 6P+8E are treated as a single monolithic die connected thru L3 Ring Bus, but the Off die LP E cores could be treated as a separate NUMA node. But it will depend on Intel glue them together, Intel could use the word "logically monolithic"
 

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
12,598
3,991
136
The claim is that Meteor Lake got delayed from end of '22 to somewhere in mid-2023.
It says they are talking about delaying mass production until the end of 23. The actual launch would have to be 3-4 months after that at least. The earlier expectation was that they would start mass production at the end of the year for a middle of 23 paper launch of the M.

That they would also move the CPU chiplet to TSMC is indeed sketchy if they haven't already started.

Edit: That would also include their TSMC orders, ie: the N5 and N3 chiplets were scheduled for the end of this year and presumably TSMC can still fulfill that. But with no CPU chiplet there's nothing to sell.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY