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

Page 379 - 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
696
602
106
PPT1.jpg
PPT2.jpg
PPT3.jpg



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 + 4E08 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 (20A)Arrow Lake (N3B)Lunar LakePanther Lake
PlatformMobile H/U OnlyDesktop OnlyDesktop & Mobile H&HXMobile U OnlyMobile H
Process NodeIntel 4Intel 20ATSMC N3BTSMC N3BIntel 18A
DateQ4 2023Q1 2025 ?Desktop-Q4-2024
H&HX-Q1-2025
Q4 2024Q1 2026 ?
Full Die6P + 8P6P + 8E ?8P + 16E4P + 4E4P + 8E
LLC24 MB24 MB ?36 MB ?12 MB?
tCPU66.48
tGPU44.45
SoC96.77
IOE44.45
Total252.15

LNL-MX.png

Intel Core Ultra 100 - Meteor Lake

INTEL-CORE-100-ULTRA-METEOR-LAKE-OFFCIAL-SLIDE-2.jpg

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.)



Clockspeed.png
 

Attachments

  • PantherLake.png
    PantherLake.png
    283.5 KB · Views: 24,006
  • LNL.png
    LNL.png
    881.8 KB · Views: 25,490
Last edited:

SiliconFly

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2023
1,541
897
96
That would be great. Some have said in this thread I was setting up for disappointment for hoping for anything more than 14% IPC uplift. 20% would be really nice.

And want platinum stability back as well. 13th and 14th Gen were a mess in terms of stability degradation even though they were extremely performant.

If 20% IPC uplift is true Intel will take crown easily handily over Ryzen 9000 with Arrow Lake. Maybe even take gaming crown and certainly in the thread heavy games over Ryzen 9000X3D. Certainly at least trade blows with 9800X33D or maybe even a little ahead for games that max 5-8 cores and beat 9950X3D due to cross CCX/CCD latency hit which Intel does not have the problem with.

Maybe Conroe lite moment for Intel with Arrow Lake would be so cool.
Beating a X3D part is gonna be a bit difficult I think. But if ARL top part even comes close to a X3D, I'd consider it a big achievement. At best, we shouldn't expect more than a marginal win. For all practical purposes, they're gonna be more or less equal this year I think.
 

SiliconFly

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2023
1,541
897
96
Most here keep saying that Intel has been power hungry in laptops.

But when I took notebookcheck battery life tests for wifi browsing and video playback, and not even "normalized" for screen (lots of newer devices come with 3K 120HZ OLED, compared to FHD 60HZ IPS), Meteor Laku U is only second to Macbook Air, on par with Snapdragon X (only 1 device in dataset), with only a couple Ryzen devices in this list near top (Thinkpad T16, Zenbook 14 OLED).

So, what gives?
Meteor Lake laptops have terrific efficiency compared to previous gen (after all the bios patches & pcode updates). No doubts there. Unfortunately, it had a slight performance regression. And thats not a hallmark of a good product, hence got panned widely. Forget Meteor Lake, it's over. Lunar Lake is a better bet.
 

Nothingness

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2013
3,089
2,083
136
And what most people care about here, games is exactly the same most care about latency.

I remember it even being pronounced back in DDR3 era where bandwidth was tiny compared to today. There's a thread from like 10 years ago where I tested high NPC areas of games with only changing memory focused on latency , best access time in ns regardless of memory speed won.
I was only answering your claim about SPEC. You didn't mention games in your previous post 😉
 

SiliconFly

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2023
1,541
897
96
...Most desktop users won't benefit at all from SMT but would from reverse SMT - rentable units of whatever - which would use unused cores/parts of them to boost single-thread performance.
SMT exists and works. Rentable units, however . . .
Yep. Rentable Units is pretty much an imaginary tech at this point. Either what Ian said is true, or Intel is very good at keeping secrets. And the former makes more sense as of now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AcrosTinus

AcrosTinus

Member
Jun 23, 2024
115
101
76
Yep. Rentable Units is pretty much an imaginary tech at this point. Either what Ian said is true, or Intel is very good at keeping secrets. And the former makes more sense as of now.
Fake News being propagated as if it is true these "Rentable Units" don't exist and don't be disappointed if rumors don't materialize, the same for "Royal Core", it is all hype. At the end we have actual announced products and reviews using standard tools to validate them.
 

Klingenberg

Member
Oct 29, 2012
46
6
71
Neither. After years of lagging competition, Intel has finally caught up (in almost all areas). That in itself is a massive feat! They're both almost at par now. A few percent points difference shouldn't be considered a big win.

Things may actually change a lot depending on how both the companies execute in the future. But not anytime now imho.

Based on LNC/Zen5 leaks, it looks like 2024 is gonna be the year of the equals.
The year of the equals, that's the most quotable thing you've said haha.

I dunno what to say exept for the fact that I almost always remember it being a prefference choice, and a slight period of AMD for gaming and Intel for office builds
 
  • Love
Reactions: SiliconFly

SiliconFly

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2023
1,541
897
96
Fake News being propagated as if it is true these "Rentable Units" don't exist and don't be disappointed if rumors don't materialize, the same for "Royal Core", it is all hype. At the end we have actual announced products and reviews using standard tools to validate them.
Actually Rentable Units were based on very credible news. Long back, Dr. Ian Cutress wrote a detailed article in AnandTech regarding the original soft machine tech (link). Intel later acquired soft machines. Later, Intel filed a patent regarding the same in 2020 (link). Dr. Ian later mentioned that it appears that the project got shelved (in 2022). All these are credible news. Definitely not fake.

There has been no news or updates or credible leaks or rumors of RU since then. So, I'd say with a very high probability that it got canned. But there's a slim chance that it's still active and may debut with nova lake. Hard to say.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AcrosTinus

poke01

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2022
2,205
2,803
106
Lunar Lake GB6 results. Never mind MT scores, but ST scores are ... nothing to be exciting about. I expected a lot more: I expected way over 3000.

https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/6678431 (ST: 2739)

https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/6678564 (ST: 2713)

That's slower than Ryzen 9 7945HX in ST mode. Darn. Could be engineering samples but clock speeds (add .gb6 to the URL) are perfectly fine.
I very much disagree. The 7945HX needs to boost to 5.3GHz to achieve 2700.

Lunar achieves 2700 using 4.8GHz, this is not poor relative to AMD.
I would also bet that Lunar’s lion cove is also not as power hungry in 1t.

What we see here M2 like performance and efficiency but for the x86 platform with eGPU support a much better software compatibility. This is good. The GPU should be good as well.
 
Last edited:

poke01

Platinum Member
Mar 8, 2022
2,205
2,803
106
@poke01

I've completely rewritten my message. Yeah, it's not that bad but it's not terribly exciting either. Alder Lake is more than 2 years old at this point, I expected more from a new uArch.
At this point I’m glad Intel is focusing on efficiency but you are right in saying they need major leaps in IPC in future generations.
 

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,186
10,693
136
Lunar Lake GB6 results running at roughly 4.9GHz:

https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/6678431 (ST: 2739)

https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/6678564 (ST: 2713)

An IPC increase is there but I expected more.

At 6GHz that would be 3,353 which is just 8% faster than 14900K Raptor Lake. Not really exciting but then it's a mobile platform, so Arrow Lake should fare better.

The clocks don't appear to be very stable so it's hard to say for sure, but it appears to be ~10% higher performance per clock than MTL in GB6.
 

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,186
10,693
136
I very much disagree. The 7945HX needs to boost to 5.3GHz to achieve 2700.

Lunar achieves 2700 using 4.8GHz, this is not poor relative to AMD.
I would also bet that Lunar’s lion cove is also not as power hungry in 1t.

What we see here M2 like performance and efficiency but for the x86 platform with eGPU support a much better software compatibility. This is good. The GPU should be good as well.

LNL won't be competing against Zen 4, it's Zen 5 that it will be compared with.

I don't think they'll be competing with M2 in efficiency either, at least not single and low threaded situations. LNL will still take way more power to get clocks up to ~5 GHz.
 

DavidC1

Senior member
Dec 29, 2023
939
1,472
96
At 6GHz that would be 3,353 which is just 8% faster than 14900K Raptor Lake. Not really exciting but then it's a mobile platform, so Arrow Lake should fare better.
You can't compare an ultra power efficiency optimized platform with similar RAM, and Drive configurations with a essentially unlimited power on desktop. Generally the desktop chips are 5-7% faster than laptop chips of the same uarch.
I don't think they'll be competing with M2 in efficiency either, at least not single and low threaded situations. LNL will still take way more power to get clocks up to ~5 GHz.
Battery life, which is defined as bursty workloads is the bigger deal. Getting that will be a big thing, as currently they are very far behind.
 

Ghostsonplanets

Senior member
Mar 1, 2024
691
1,113
96

Good scores for Lunar Lake. And that's the 17W SKU rather than the Core Ultra 9 30W.
 

AcrosTinus

Member
Jun 23, 2024
115
101
76
Sigh, I really wish Geekbench 6 would have kept the Crypto, FP and Int total scores. The perf per clock is so similar to Zen 5 mobile at similar GHz (which also isn't quite the desktop Zen 5 as it has halved it's FP structures and L3 cache), that separating these score would give a much more thorough overview.

I know this separation can be done manually but i'm too lazy. And the clocks (and reporting) are still all over the place as well. A bit too much to draw any conclusions.

Still I hope Arrow Lake has some surprises in store IPC-wise. Lunar Lake looks to be an excellent SKU overall but the IPC uplift from Raptor Cove (to me) looks a tad dissapointing

~4.8 Ghz 1360P vs ~4.8Ghz Lunar Lake
Well actually 1360P clocked slightly slower:

Lunar Lake:
Mean: 4825.04 MHz
Median: 4874.0 MHz

Core i7-1360P:
Mean: 4723.42 MHz
Median: 4824.0 MHz

The ST difference is 12,2% but taking the mean clock speed into account it's only 9.8%

Then again, comparing to a similarily clocked Meteor Lake U, taking the "chiplet tax" into equation it's actually quite good:
I don't trust geekbench one single bit. I have two systems A: 13700K and B:14900K, both score almost the same -> A: 3000ST and 20000MT and B:3100 and 21700MT. This cannot be this close...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Henry swagger

DavidC1

Senior member
Dec 29, 2023
939
1,472
96
Then again, comparing to a similarily clocked Meteor Lake U, taking the "chiplet tax" into equation it's actually quite good:
The faster 165U results are much closer than that. There's something wrong with that result.

With Geekbench you need to take top scores for that very reason.
Geekbench did two fatal mistakes, one not separating the Int/FP results and the other taking out the ability to sort by lowest/highest scores.

User-submitted results like GB is the worst way to isolate pure uarch differences when we care about 1%.
 

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,186
10,693
136
Battery life, which is defined as bursty workloads is the bigger deal. Getting that will be a big thing, as currently they are very far behind.

Battery life is also very dependent on SOC/fabric power. I don't expect Intel to catch up with M2's efficiency in either of these aspects. I do think they'll do much better than their current offerings, but M2 is just so far ahead on these that I don't see LNL closing the gap completely.
 

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,186
10,693
136
20% plus over meteor lake at 17 watts.. arrow lake hx should be even better 🥇

That's just WFFCtech doing WFFCtech things. Their 185H score is not accurate. That LNL result is only 3% higher than the 185H when it's holding its boost clock. The LNL is clocking lower, so we are again back to LNL being ~10% faster per clock than MTL (actually 7.5% in this case).

 

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
11,557
4,349
136
Just like Intel demonstrated, they have 115% single-thread performance at same power with their single-thread optimzed core as SMT-core running one thread.

That s not 15% better ST perf but 15% better perf/watt/area, good luck dealing with obscured metrics.

 

Gideon

Golden Member
Nov 27, 2007
1,774
4,145
136
That's just WFFCtech doing WFFCtech things. Their 185H score is not accurate. That LNL result is only 3% higher than the 185H when it's holding its boost clock. The LNL is clocking lower, so we are again back to LNL being ~10% faster per clock than MTL (actually 7.5% in this case).

That's a linux score (which runs better than windows and seems too high)

But I do agree the WFFC sample is too slow. This one is more representative:

 

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,186
10,693
136
That's a linux score (which runs better than windows and seems too high)

But I do agree the WFFC sample is too slow. This one is more representative:


That's a 165U, not a 185H. Intel CPUs typically don't benefit from Linux like AMD chips do. Maybe a slight bump. There are plenty of Windows examples scoring very nearly the same. I chose the one I did because it actually maintained its boost clock which made it easier to compare in terms of ppc. We can pick a Windows example though and calculate the average clocks and compare.


This would put LNL at 9% faster clock for clock when taking the average reported clocks. Conclusion is still the same (caveats of the LNL still being pre-release, GB clock reporting errors, and variability in testing still apply).