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

Page 388 - 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:

Henry swagger

Senior member
Feb 9, 2022
504
306
106
OMG!!! Is this even REAL??? or FAKE?

Thats a massive 27% single-core uplift. That too against RPL. Against MTL, it'll be well above 30%.

Assuming it's real, it's time for me say "I told you so" to around a dozen people here.

Hold on! @SiliconFly is typing...
I.ve already said desktop lion cove will be 25% or 30% plus over raptor cove.. in the forum they said its using 20A node 🤔
 

whoshere

Member
Feb 28, 2020
29
68
91
  • CPU-Z has never been considered a valid/good/decent benchmark.
  • Arrow Lake is at least Q4/2024, it's too early for such leaks. Intel last weak announced they had starting to tap out Lunar Lake CPUs.
  • Such a screenshot is too easy to photoshop. Don't get your hopes high. We've already seen fabricated Zen 5 screenshots from China.
GB6/GB5 ST results will show a much better picture. MT not so much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TESKATLIPOKA

AcrosTinus

Member
Jun 23, 2024
113
101
76
  • CPU-Z has never been considered a valid/good/decent benchmark.
  • Arrow Lake is at least Q4/2024, it's too early for such leaks. Intel last weak announced they had starting to tap out Lunar Lake CPUs.
  • Such a screenshot is too easy to photoshop. Don't get your hopes high. We've already seen fabricated Zen 5 screenshots from China.
GB6/GB5 ST results will show a much better picture. MT not so much.
It is a alright benchmark that at least scales compared to GB6. CPU-Z is a good indicator if compared against other Intel CPUs.
Chips and Cheese analyzed the bench and came to the conclusion that the instruction mix does not accurately resemble consumer workloads.
I call half BS on that, which bench really resembles consumer workloads SPEC - FP or INT, Cinebench, all the other crazy SIMD benches ?
I think the bench got overcriticized because AMD is slow in it, showing that the Zen4 core is less wide AND SLOWER, which it is.

I cannot make this sh... up, wait for GB6 benches and don't trust CPU-Z.....

The leaks seem possible, E-Cores are buffed beyond 50% and the P core are min +15% faster with additional news of the new layout.
Current System (13700K@1,34V 2P@5,8 6P@5,7 8P@5,5 8E@4,4 = CPU-Z : ST=938, MT= 13100), so quite realistic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Henry swagger

Abwx

Lifer
Apr 2, 2011
11,557
4,349
136
All conspiracy with no evidence. SKL is faster than Zen1 in all cases.

Lol, it s documented by CPU Z themselves, they explained the "reasons" for such a downgrade after they revised the 1.73 version wich was released in december 2016 and "updated" in may 2017 after they noticed the surprisingly good score of the 1800X.
 

AcrosTinus

Member
Jun 23, 2024
113
101
76
Lol, it s documented by CPU Z themselves, they explained the "reasons" for such a downgrade after they revised the 1.73 version wich was released in december 2016 and "updated" in may 2017 after they noticed the surprisingly good score of the 1800X.
They updated their bench due to the score misrepresenting the actual performance. Zen1 is slower than SKL a bench showing otherwise would not be the intentions of the authors, so they corrected it.
 

SiliconFly

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2023
1,541
897
96
CPU-z is worthless as a benchmark...
Possibly. But I just ran the same version with a 13900HX w.r.t 12900K & 13900K and the results were inline with expectations. Might translate well for ARL too. So, I don't think we should label it as totally worthless already.

The most important question we should be asking now is, whether it's altered using photoshop. Is there anyone who can analyze it?

Because of that reason I do not fully dismiss CPU-Z, it is alright for giving a hint.
I think so too. But first we need to find out whether it's real or digitally altered.
 

AcrosTinus

Member
Jun 23, 2024
113
101
76
Possibly. But I just ran the same version with a 13900HX w.r.t 12900K & 13900K and the results were inline with expectations. Might translate well for ARL too. So, I don't think we should label it as totally worthless already.

The most important question we should be asking now is, whether it's altered using photoshop. Is there anyone who can analyze it?


I think so too. But first we need to find out whether it's real or digitally altered.
True :)
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
22,065
11,693
136
Yes, that is why I say that for comparisons of Intel CPUs it is alright
That is debatable. CPU-z benchmark clearly has something wrong with it. We went through this with Dr. Cutress' 3DPM benchmark when it was found that repeated cache flushing caused the benchmark to heavily favor Intel CPUs with HT on over anything else. It wasn't even a really good tool for comparing Intel CPUs vs other Intel CPUs since the results were so skewed. Arrow Lake-S would probably suffer badly under 3DPM v1.

In any case that screenie might be a fake, and it's an already-sketchy benchmark, so let's not make too much of it.
 

CouncilorIrissa

Senior member
Jul 28, 2023
540
2,120
96
I'm sure the benchmark that fits entirely into the L1 of any modern CPU and practically does not stress the branch predictor is totally representative of all possible workloads.

After all, it's not like pretty much any new CPU microarchitecture presentation contains slides containing words such as "Improved branch prediction". Totally not Apple's most recent presentation. Nor ARM's. Nor AMD's even. Nor Intel's. Companies are just investing transistors into this for lolz.
 

AcrosTinus

Member
Jun 23, 2024
113
101
76
That is debatable. CPU-z benchmark clearly has something wrong with it. We went through this with Dr. Cutress' 3DPM benchmark when it was found that repeated cache flushing caused the benchmark to heavily favor Intel CPUs with HT on over anything else. It wasn't even a really good tool for comparing Intel CPUs vs other Intel CPUs since the results were so skewed. Arrow Lake-S would probably suffer badly under 3DPM v1.

In any case that screenie might be a fake, and it's an already-sketchy benchmark, so let's not make too much of it.
Fair
 

AcrosTinus

Member
Jun 23, 2024
113
101
76
I'm sure the benchmark that fits entirely into the L1 of any modern CPU and practically does not stress the branch predictor is totally representative of all possible workloads.

After all, it's not like pretty much any new CPU microarchitecture presentation contains slides containing words such as "Improved branch prediction". Totally not Apple's most recent presentation. Nor ARM's. Nor AMD's even. Nor Intel's. Companies are just investing transistors into this for lolz.

All I'm advocating for is that the term "real world workload" is nothing more than an approximation itself that no benchmark can justify. An aggregate of different benches come closer to representing reality, hence CPU-Z has it's place.

I know CPU-Z is not heavy on the branch predictor but many apps are.
 

AcrosTinus

Member
Jun 23, 2024
113
101
76
Ignoring everything else I said. How would you like to be on a 4C or 6C CPU today with HT as a ~$100 add on?
I do not indulge in hypotheticals that did not happen. Fact is that 8 core Zen1 was defeated by Coffee Lake as a response (6C/12T). If I remember correctly people were excusing AMD due to better NT performance in that period the same way people excuse Intel for better NT against 7800x3D.
 

Hail The Brain Slug

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2005
3,513
2,464
136
I am right, the bench showed nearly zero IPC gain (CPU-Z), the performance increase in CPU-Z was due to clocks. I think other benches on average showed 10% or 13% increase from Zen3 to Zen4 or is that wrong ?
Until CPU-z corrects the design of its benchmark to respect the CPPC scheduling of Ryzen, the results will be a wildcard because it always forces to core 0, which could be any random quality core boosting to any unknown frequency below or up to max singlethread boost.

Comparing any two samples of Ryzen will give you unpredictable results due to this.

Comparing Ryzen ST results to intel is also disingenuous because it will schedule properly on Intel to the fastest core.
 

DavidC1

Senior member
Dec 29, 2023
939
1,469
96
That is debatable. CPU-z benchmark clearly has something wrong with it.
Let's call spade a spade. CPU-Z is for information, and the benchmark is for laughs. It's the AFV of benchmarking. They decided to get onto a different bandwagon and couldn't be some boring "information provider" anymore.
Nice passive aggressive response.
CPU-Z showed no increase in IPC, In aggregate other benches showed 13% increase in IPC from Zen3 to Zen4. If anything I am saying is false, just respond and correct me.
"Passive aggressive" What is this, Psychology 101 class?

We are ALL telling you CPU-Z sucks. It's a laughingstock. The burden is on YOU to prove that it's a good benchmark.