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

Page 63 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
T

Tigerick

Senior member
Apr 1, 2022
741
699
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 + 4E012 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 (N3B)Lunar LakePanther Lake
PlatformMobile H/U OnlyDesktop & Mobile H&HXMobile U OnlyMobile H
Process NodeIntel 4TSMC N3BTSMC N3BIntel 18A
DateQ4 2023Desktop-Q4-2024
H&HX-Q1-2025		Q4 2024Q1 2026 ?
Full Die6P + 8P8P + 16E4P + 4E4P + 8E
LLC24 MB36 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: 24,023
  • LNL.png
    LNL.png
    881.8 KB · Views: 25,511
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: LaudaSur, jorden6655, john404 and 15 others
Sort by date Sort by votes
E

Exist50

Platinum Member
Aug 18, 2016
2,452
3,105
136
Geddagod said:
But for ARL, what could have potentially happened:

LNC started development late 2019 for Intel 7nm and TSMC 3nm. This should be ready ~ late 2020, early 2021.
Hence we see the mid-late 2023 ARL-P leaks on TSMC 3nm.
Intel realigns roadmaps and foundries internally around late 2020/ early 2021. Announced to the public in mid 2021.
LNC gets 'redefined', starts development of 20A for a 2024 launch around early 2021. TSMC delays also ensured that their original 2023 launch date is unrealistic.
The core is ready by early 2022. This follows Xeno's leak of LNC being design frozen early 2022 (maybe for the 20A variant?)
ARL with LNC on 20A comes late, late 2024 or 2025, with the TSMC 3nm variants coming out around half a year to a year earlier.

This could explain how GNR is able to change core design to LNC so relatively quickly after only ~1 year delay from original release date. LNC's Intel 7nm development could already have had a lot of work done.

However two counter points to this could be:
1) LNC was always planned on Intel 20A, since Intel also thought Intel 20A would be ready by 2023 all the way back in 2019
2) LNC wasn't planned for any internal Intel nodes until early 2021, and was only planned for TSMC since late 2019.

Something to note about GNR though is that half way through 2021 Intel were still claiming GNR would be on Intel 4. Assuming that Intel switched tack to Intel 3 as soon as possible 2H 2021, they would need the development of the CPU to start essentially as soon as they switched, with little to no time to develop a core design.
However if Intel were designing LNC for Intel 7nm/Intel 3 from the start, they already would have LNC ready for the server team...

Schedule would be a tight fit but I think it's possible. Only problem is believing Intel would have so many separate design teams working all at the same time.
Very excited to see if we get any more info in a week during Intel's q1 earnings call
Click to expand...
So, here's the picture that's forming in my head. I'm going to assume the RWC-based GNR rumors are true for now. If that proves to be false, will need to throw a lot of this out.

So, Intel almost certainly envisioned GNR as Intel 4 + RWC, arriving somewhere around 2022-2023. But at that point, they were probably also expecting SPR to fall comfortably within 2021. So SPR delays dragged on, with a knock-on effect on GNR, plus GNR probably had some of its own problems, and someone saw the writing on the wall that GNR would more realistically be a 2024 product, late 2023 at best.

Now, one very key thing to keep in mind about Intel's (at least historical) project (mis)management is that they're incredibly prone to scope creep. SPR started life as 2 tiles, Willow Cove, and PCIe 4.0. We see how that ended up. So someone probably said, "Hey, the SoC as a whole might be behind schedule, but these other bits (say, a new core, new process, etc) should be ready, so why don't we just™ swap those out?" This probably coincides with Gelsinger's comment. It's even possible they planned for an Intel 3 + Lion Cove compute tile as a follow-on generation, and were thinking they could basically skip the original GNR.

But naturally, this line of thinking always proves to be much easier on paper than reality. At this point someone probably bothered to ask the engineering teams how bad it would be, and got a sobering answer. So this one-off Intel 3 RWC+ idea ended up being the compromise solution. Probably for the best, because at this point I'm highly suspicious of Lion Cove.
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: Kepler_L2, moinmoin and coercitiv
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

A///

Diamond Member
Feb 24, 2017
4,351
3,160
136
a product shipped is a product shipped is something I have always said. I've been at big and small companies where we've shipped a giant steaming turd of a sku even with severe regressions because it's a product that shipped and didn't sit languishing in the labs like a sangria drunk broad at the english speaking section of a villa in mallorca.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
G

Geddagod

Golden Member
Dec 28, 2021
1,340
1,433
106
the account is private, all i see is replies
Click to expand...
unfortunate. It's basically what Mikk said tho, MTL-S ES sampling, and EMR ES2 sampling
The existence of commercial ADM SKUs for Meteor Lake.
Click to expand...
IIRC the first leaks for ADM were from Jim at adored TV about ARL? MTL does seem a bit ambitious, esp with all the new technologies already being packed into it.
I also believe Intel already claimed that the base tile would be passive, idk if having cache on it would still make it passive... not familiar with the terminology tbh.
Adamantium
Click to expand...
Intel's codenames get geekier by the day :laughing:
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
moinmoin

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
5,207
8,367
136
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: igor_kavinski, A///, mikk and 4 others
Upvote 0 Downvote
E

Exist50

Platinum Member
Aug 18, 2016
2,452
3,105
136
Geddagod said:
IIRC the first leaks for ADM were from Jim at adored TV about ARL? MTL does seem a bit ambitious, esp with all the new technologies already being packed into it.
I also believe Intel already claimed that the base tile would be passive, idk if having cache on it would still make it passive... not familiar with the terminology tbh.
Click to expand...
Afaik, MTL w/ ADM was cancelled long ago. They might be using it as kind of a test platform, but I don't think we'll see real products using it. ARL might be a different story, but not sure what the situation there is.

Either way, however, it would require a separate base die.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikk and Geddagod
Upvote 0 Downvote
BorisTheBlade82

BorisTheBlade82

Senior member
May 1, 2020
688
1,085
136
msj10 said:
this diagram from the patent above seems to be MTL-M with 2 RWC + 8 CMT.
it shows the SOC die will have 2 Crestmont cores, and the base die can be passive or with ADM cache.
Click to expand...
Good spot.
It is quite surprising, that these schematics seem to represent a real product. Is this just laziness in Intel's patent department? Usually everyone plays the Hide & Seek game.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
G

Geddagod

Golden Member
Dec 28, 2021
1,340
1,433
106
Henry swagger said:
Wonder what the 2 crestmont cores in the soc will be doing ?🤔
Click to expand...
I'm guessing the idea is to simply be able to not use the core tile unless the user has to actually do something intensive. Should help battery life I'm guessing. It seems like a good way to counteract the inherent battery life loss of going chiplets for low power chips.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Lodix, Elfear, Mopetar and 6 others
Upvote 0 Downvote
BorisTheBlade82

BorisTheBlade82

Senior member
May 1, 2020
688
1,085
136
Geddagod said:
I'm guessing the idea is to simply be able to not use the core tile unless the user has to actually do something intensive. Should help battery life I'm guessing. It seems like a good way to counteract the inherent battery life loss of going chiplets for low power chips.
Click to expand...
Yep, exactly. This has been rumoured for a long time already. Up until now it wasn't that clear what kind of core this would be and how many of them. 2 Atom cores do sound like a good idea for heavy idle (AV, Cloud Sync, Background updates etc.)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
coercitiv

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
7,139
16,562
136
One of the power issues Intel had since many generations ago was keeping the entire CPU package at sleep when the Windows OS was idling. It's obviously not Intel specific, but back in the Haswell era for example they were the only option anyway.

For context, an idle well built and well configured Haswell-U laptop could hit 3-4W idle. The entire laptop. The setup was fragile though, with all kinds of things a user could do that would unknowingly prevent the CPU from entering Package C-States. I spend an entire afternoon trying to figure out why my notebook refused to idle properly, only to discover the culprit was a HDMI external connection (I was running the unit with an external monitor).

I've been moderately optimistic about hybrids in consumer laptops and a skeptic about their use in consumer desktop, but when it comes to including a few E cores in the SOC I would say I'm all in: it's a very good idea with lots of potential for power usage optimization.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BorisTheBlade82
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom