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

[Tigerick]

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.





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.)

 

[Doug S]

Let's see. M4 does not run Linux or Windows.

M4 can run Windows - but so far only inside a VM since Microsoft's exclusivity agreement with Qualcomm prevents them from booting it even if they wanted to. Though after that unless someone writes a Windows GPU driver it'll never boot natively, but servers run headless so the lack of a GPU driver wouldn't matter for a hypothetical Apple Server.

As for Linux, I guess you aren't aware that Apple Silicon Macs ARE supported by Asahi Linux. That support isn't perfect, but the shortcomings are things that don't matter for servers like full native GPU performance, microphone issues and so forth.

If Apple was going to enter the server world they could deliver the necessary drivers for Linux and Windows Server without much trouble. You're pretending this would be some sort of herculean effort. Its trivial compared to what they accomplished when they migrated the entire Mac world from x86 to ARM.

 

[Io Magnesso]

M4 can run Windows - but so far only inside a VM since Microsoft's exclusivity agreement with Qualcomm prevents them from booting it even if they wanted to. Though after that unless someone writes a Windows GPU driver it'll never boot natively, but servers run headless so the lack of a GPU driver wouldn't matter for a hypothetical Apple Server.

As for Linux, I guess you aren't aware that Apple Silicon Macs ARE supported by Asahi Linux. That support isn't perfect, but the shortcomings are things that don't matter for servers like full native GPU performance, microphone issues and so forth.

If Apple was going to enter the server world they could deliver the necessary drivers for Linux and Windows Server without much trouble. You're pretending this would be some sort of herculean effort. Its trivial compared to what they accomplished when they migrated the entire Mac world from x86 to ARM.

Honestly, Asahi Linux I think it's better to know the hardships of the creators about...
Only the M1 series released 5 years ago is completely moving now.
The M2 series is currently working on it, but it will still take some time.
M3/M4 takes more time...

 

[Io Magnesso]

Honestly, Asahi Linux I think it's better to know the hardships of the creators about...
Only the M1 series released 5 years ago is completely moving now.
The M2 series is currently working on it, but it will still take some time.
M3/M4 takes more time...

Since there is no information, it is being developed by reverse engineering from 1.
It's really hard...
I don't think Apple, which freerides to other ecosystems or platforms, I don't think I can lend a hand
Well, the story of Linux and Windows is for example...

 

[poke01]

Honestly, Asahi Linux I think it's better to know the hardships of the creators about...
Only the M1 series released 5 years ago is completely moving now.
The M2 series is currently working on it, but it will still take some time.
M3/M4 takes more time...

That’s what you get if the platform holder doesn’t care about bare metal Linux on its computers. Apple makes zero money in configuring its Sillicon to run Linux.

Although, the Asahi team did do they an excellent job with what they had. Also look at Qualcomm’s X Elite, it’s still to this day not fully supported on Linux despite Qualcomm promising support.

x86 is easier to work with when it comes to Linux cause AMD and Intel maintain support.

 

[poke01]

Beyond the Roar: Dissecting Intel’s Panther Lake

Intel is gearing up to launch its Core Ultra 300/400 processors, namely Panther Lake, later this year. In this article, I’ll uncover…

medium.com

This is a nice article to read, like he mentions it will be interesting to see Panther lake cover <15 watts and >25 watts

 

[Io Magnesso]

That’s what you get if the platform holder doesn’t care about bare metal Linux on its computers. Apple makes zero money in configuring its Sillicon to run Linux.

Although, the Asahi team did do they an excellent job with what they had. Also look at Qualcomm’s X Elite, it’s still to this day not fully supported on Linux despite Qualcomm promising support.

x86 is easier to work with when it comes to Linux cause AMD and Intel maintain support.

In a way, Intel/AMD, which contributes well to open source, is amazing...
I understand that you can still run a consumer product that can be used for embedded and edges to be able to run on Linux.
Even complete consumer products like Lunar Lake that aren't very suitable for incorporation or edges I'm glad that it works fine on Linux.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Ampere Altra Max Continues To Deliver Competitive Power Efficiency To AMD EPYC & Intel Xeon - Phoronix

www.phoronix.com

It kinda looks like (which is why I specifically used that wording) ARM does not do well in the current state of servers.

Ampere's products from 2023 have nothing to do with M4. Which in turn has little to do with this thread . . .

 

[511]

Well when Apple gives backwards compatibility over 20 years with the additional features of RAS Confidential computing and other stuff without breaking stuff they can enter DC.

 

[poke01]

Well when Apple gives backwards compatibility over 20 years with the additional features of RAS Confidential computing and other stuff without breaking stuff they can enter DC.

Nvidia is not doing that and they entered DC. Anyway, I don't even know how DC became a topic in a client focused thread.

 

[511]

Nvidia is not doing that and they entered DC. Anyway, I don't even know how DC became a topic in a client focused thread.

They are supporting older hardware and don't jump ISAa like Apple they provide a good platform for developers.
For 2nd part it always happens in Intel/AMD thread things going off topic. 🤣🤣

 

[OneEng2]

I guess I didn't realize that all of the subject matter in the thread is client.

I still think that the ability of Intel to make client chips will be dependent on their ability to be successful in the DC market.

 

[511]

They need a good core architecture first for both client and server most of their problem stems from that.

 

[dullard]

I guess I didn't realize that all of the subject matter in the thread is client.

I still think that the ability of Intel to make client chips will be dependent on their ability to be successful in the DC market.

We do have a thread specifically for Intel Rapids products, right on the front page of the CPU forum. https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/intel-current-and-future-lakes-rapids-thread.2509080/ This thread started off as Meteor Lake which is client only. It slowly expanded to include other client CPUs.

It will soon be time for this thread to die though. After Panther Lake launches we should let this one go and move on to the Nova Lake thread.

 

[igor_kavinski]

You're pretending this would be some sort of herculean effort. Its trivial compared to what they accomplished when they migrated the entire Mac world from x86 to ARM.

Never pretended that. Of course Apple can do it if they really want to. They won't. Gotta make money from BOTH hardware and software is their mantra. They can't make software for every use case? Oh no. How did they solve this problem? Create a walled garden where they eat 30% of the sales revenue for essentially "free". It's free because their operational cost for the Apple Store is most likely in the single digit percentage points compared to the profits they rake in from that literally eternal fountain of revenue. It's not clever. It's just a monopoly.

 

[CouncilorIrissa]

Never pretended that. Of course Apple can do it if they really want to. They won't. Gotta make money from BOTH hardware and software is their mantra. They can't make software for every use case? Oh no. How did they solve this problem? Create a walled garden where they eat 30% of the sales revenue for essentially "free". It's free because their operational cost for the Apple Store is most likely in the single digit percentage points compared to the profits they rake in from that literally eternal fountain of revenue. It's not clever. It's just a monopoly.

You *can* install apps from outside App Store on MacOS. How is that different from Windows?

 

[igor_kavinski]

You *can* install apps from outside App Store on MacOS. How is that different from Windows?

Question should be, "How is that different from a PC?"

PC has open standards so multiple operating systems exist for it including BSD, Linux, Windows and of course, some people run hacked MacOS on their PCs too.

Contrast that with the closed and shrouded in secrecy Mac architecture where a small group of volunteers have been trying to reverse engineer it and still nowhere close to getting Linux fully supported on it. So the only way to run your application is to either develop it from scratch on MacOS, look for an existing available application outside the Apple Store (mostly fat chance) or use one on the Apple Store (better chance as developers prefer the wider userbase they can reach through that). So while MacOS applications are available outside the Apple Store, there just isn't a wide variety of them available due to the comparatively smaller userbase. Fixing this situation requires them to post the required patches to the Linux kernel for their hardware or document their hardware enough so people can do it themselves. As for Windows, need to wait and see what happens when Nvidia N1X hardware is available with Windows on ARM because that will signal the end of the exclusivity period with Qualcomm.

 

[CouncilorIrissa]

Question should be, "How is that different from a PC?"

PC has open standards so multiple operating systems exist for it including BSD, Linux, Windows and of course, some people run hacked MacOS on their PCs too.

So you're moving the goalposts, got it. Predictable really.

Contrast that with the closed and shrouded in secrecy Mac architecture where a small group of volunteers have been trying to reverse engineer it and still nowhere close to getting Linux fully supported on it. So the only way to run your application is to either develop it from scratch on MacOS, look for an existing available application outside the Apple Store (mostly fat chance) or use one on the Apple Store (better chance as developers prefer the wider userbase they can reach through that).

You don't need to develop it from scratch; Electron (aka the only reason why half of GUI apps for Linux exist) and React Native (mac bindings of which are developed and maintained by Microsoft of all companies) exist. The only thing you'd need a Mac for is to build (and even then you can get away with a build server iirc) and sign the app. But the rest of the codebase will largely be shared.

So while MacOS applications are available outside the Apple Store, there just isn't a wide variety of them available due to the comparatively smaller userbase.

No? Certain popular apps exist exclusively outside the App Store.

 

[igor_kavinski]

You don't need to develop it from scratch; Electron (aka the only reason why half of GUI apps for Linux exist) and React Native (mac bindings of which are developed and maintained by Microsoft of all companies) exist. The only thing you'd need a Mac for is to build (and even then you can get away with a build server iirc) and sign the app. But the rest of the codebase will largely be shared.

Good to know. Not native though. Electron is widely hated by users for introducing a certain clunkiness to applications (maybe it behaves differently on MacOS?) and React Native is almost the same thing using browser technologies. It's never going to be as fast as natively compiled applications and these technologies end up creating bloated, memory hungry fat applications.

 

[coercitiv]

Good to know. Not native though. Electron is widely hated by users for introducing a certain clunkiness to applications (maybe it behaves differently on MacOS?) and React Native is almost the same thing using browser technologies. It's never going to be as fast as natively compiled applications and these technologies end up creating bloated, memory hungry fat applications.

One of your favorite Windows apps would like to have a word with you.

Spoiler

 

[poke01]

Good to know. Not native though. Electron is widely hated by users for introducing a certain clunkiness to applications (maybe it behaves differently on MacOS?) and React Native is almost the same thing using browser technologies. It's never going to be as fast as natively compiled applications and these technologies end up creating bloated, memory hungry fat applications.

MS is moving away from native apps for many of its applications too. The Outlook app is native on macOS while it’s a web app on Windows. Go figure. Same for the ChatGPT app.

So the only way to run your application is to either develop it from scratch on MacOS, look for an existing available application outside the Apple Store (mostly fat chance) or use one on the Apple Store (better chance as developers prefer the wider userbase they can reach through that). So while MacOS applications are available outside the Apple Store, there just isn't a wide variety of them available due to the comparatively smaller userbase

Just say you have no idea how macOS app distribution works. There are MORE apps available outside and is more popular way of distributing apps than the near dead App Store on Mac. Almost no major or small dev using the App Store as they prefer the using the Web.


Also
Why does every discussion about Apple CPU architecture move to their software? Are people that insecure that Apple made a good CPU that people move from facts about hardware to opinions based on Apple’s software policies.

Mac Silicon is compared because like it or not they are near direct competitors to Lunar and Panther Lake and MacBook Airs are constantly in the Top 5 best selling laptop category in developed countries. So it doesn’t matter if they can’t run bare metal Linux as that’s out of topic. When we talk about ARM like Qualcomm or M4 it’s just to compare the architecture and efficiency differences, so why do we bring up useless topics like DC or app distribution or app development. These are all irrelevant to client Intel CPUs.

 

[511]

Intel automotive is winding down another one cut business looks like LBT is doing what he promised.

Intel will shut down its automotive business, lay off most of the department’s employees

It's the latest step in the chipmaker's dramatic downsizing.

www.oregonlive.com

 

[igor_kavinski]

One of your favorite Windows apps would like to have a word with you.

Spoiler

View attachment 126214

Not really a favorite and more a case of "don't have much choice". Others aren't very intuitive to use.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Also
Why does every discussion about Apple CPU architecture move to their software? Are people that insecure that Apple made a good CPU that people move from facts about hardware to opinions based on Apple’s software policies.

It's a good CPU limited by Apple's greed. We wouldn't even be having a discussion about Linux on Apple if the CPU weren't good. Remember, people in general didn't care much about Apple back when it was on PowerPC and Intel.

 

[igor_kavinski]

Intel automotive is winding down another one cut business looks like LBT is doing what he promised.

Intel will shut down its automotive business, lay off most of the department’s employees

It's the latest step in the chipmaker's dramatic downsizing.

www.oregonlive.com

Good. E-cores could cause automative crashes jk.

 

[Io Magnesso]

Intel automotive is winding down another one cut business looks like LBT is doing what he promised.

Intel will shut down its automotive business, lay off most of the department’s employees

It's the latest step in the chipmaker's dramatic downsizing.

www.oregonlive.com

Intel's remarks in the article said that it was not a closure, but a reduction in personnel.
The headline of the article says it's closed, but which one is it really?
Reduction doesn't mean it's closed