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

[Tigerick]

Wildcat Lake (WCL) Preliminary Specs

Intel Wildcat Lake (WCL) is upcoming mobile SoC replacing ADL-N. WCL consists of 2 tiles: compute tile and PCD tile. It is true single die consists of CPU, GPU and NPU that is fabbed by 18-A process. Last time I checked, PCD tile is fabbed by TSMC N6 process. They are connected through UCIe, not D2D; a first from Intel. Expecting launching in Q2/Computex 2026. In case people don't remember AlderLake-N, I have created a table below to compare the detail specs of ADL-N and WCL. Just for fun, I am throwing LNL and upcoming Mediatek D9500 SoC.

		Intel Alder Lake - N	Intel Wildcat Lake	Intel Lunar Lake		Mediatek D9500
Launch Date		Q1-2023	Q2-2026 ?	Q3-2024		Q3-2025
Model		Intel N300	?	Core Ultra 7 268V		Dimensity 9500 5G
Dies		2	2	2		1
Node		Intel 7 + ?	Intel 18-A + TSMC N6	TSMC N3B + N6		TSMC N3P
CPU		8 E-cores	2 P-core + 4 LP E-cores	4 P-core + 4 LP E-cores		C1 1+3+4
Threads		8	6	8		8
Max Clock		3.8 GHz	?	5 GHz
L3 Cache		6 MB	?	12 MB
TDP		7 W	Fanless ?	17 W		Fanless
Memory		64-bit LPDDR5-4800	64-bit LPDDR5-6800 ?	128-bit LPDDR5X-8533		64-bit LPDDR5X-10667
Size		16 GB	?	32 GB		24 GB ?
Bandwidth			~ 55 GB/s	136 GB/s		85.6 GB/s
GPU		UHD Graphics		Arc 140V		G1 Ultra
EU / Xe		32 EU	2 Xe	8 Xe		12
Max Clock		1.25 GHz		2 GHz
NPU		NA	18 TOPS	48 TOPS		100 TOPS ?

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.

 

[DrMrLordX]

GR has been sampling to key customers for a while now.Or do you mean general availability to anyone and all DC?

General availability. Heck "sampling" still means they haven't even started under-the-table ODM sales in any kind of volume. They only just got Sapphire Rapids to market in any capacity, and Emerald Rapids hasn't even appeared. Granite Rapids is just not going to pop out that quickly.

 

[A///]

General availability. Heck "sampling" still means they haven't even started under-the-table ODM sales in any kind of volume. They only just got Sapphire Rapids to market in any capacity, and Emerald Rapids hasn't even appeared. Granite Rapids is just not going to pop out that quickly.

There it is. Classic Mr. Lord complaining. I'm teasing you but they're pushing forward faster than they normally would have if their timeline had been on time. Sampling is a good sign because of how hard the processors are pushed to see the cracks in performance and stability. This is in line with what I said yesterday or the day before. We're going to see some rapid deployments across the intel lineup as they make up for being so slow in fighting against AMD and the longer the clocks tick the further market share they lose to AMD. Even now with a cheaper raptor lake series they're losing out to AMD in user uptake through sales. They may make more money than AMD but what counts is what's deployed imo. this is why I said ... maybe the other day that no one should be surprised if you see 3 generations of desktop release in 2 years if Pat "Guns A'blazin Pew Pew Gunslinger" Gelsinger isn't bs'ing anyone outside of intel. There's a lot riding on Intel not dropping the ball again. Gelsinger may look like a discount store version of Paul Anka but he's got more soul in him to bring back Intel roaring to life and beyond.

 

[mikk]

ES samples from Intel are very early usually, for us what matters is the store availability, when can we buy it. First Intel 3 server CPUs should be available around the middle of 2024....if there are no unforeseen delays which always could happen. They say Sierra Forest shipping first half 2024, in most cases it's towards the end. Shipping to availability are another 2+ months on desktop CPUs, for mobile much longer obviously. I don't think we can expect 20A CPU tiles before early 2025 in stores. I hope we can get something in H2 2025 on 18A, with Panther Lake hopefully they can use 18A on all variants, at the moment it's a bit messy. And 18A ist the most important because it's the foundry customer node.

 

[DrMrLordX]

We're going to see some rapid deployments across the intel lineup as they make up for being so slow in fighting against AMD and the longer the clocks tick the further market share they lose to AMD.

"I'll believe it when I see it". They may WANT to speed up their processes, but based on the immediate past it's hard to believe that they'll reach those targets. Intel has been blowing this smoke for awhile, but what are the results? Best-case scenario, we see market readiness for Intel 4 in late 2023, Intel 3 in late 2024, and Intel 20a in late 2025. Best case.

Realstically-speaking, Intel probably couldn't get 20a ready before 2027. At least based on 14nm and 10nm-family nodes and their rates of progression, along with Intel 4 which is going to be three years late (was supposed to debut in Ponte Vecchio some time ago).

Complaining or not complaining, Intel doesn't have room the screw up like this anymore. They have a gun to their heads, and it's about to go off. AMD doesn't have to worry about annoying one forum keyboard warrior because Zen4 was 4-5 months off-cadence (or whatever). Intel has billions of dollars on the line attached to major customers that will eventually abandon Intel's struggle to retain relevance.

 

[A///]

"I'll believe it when I see it". They may WANT to speed up their processes, but based on the immediate past it's hard to believe that they'll reach those targets. Intel has been blowing this smoke for awhile, but what are the results? Best-case scenario, we see market readiness for Intel 4 in late 2023, Intel 3 in late 2024, and Intel 20a in late 2025. Best case.

Realstically-speaking, Intel probably couldn't get 20a ready before 2027. At least based on 14nm and 10nm-family nodes and their rates of progression, along with Intel 4 which is going to be three years late (was supposed to debut in Ponte Vecchio some time ago).

Complaining or not complaining, Intel doesn't have room the screw up like this anymore. They have a gun to their heads, and it's about to go off. AMD doesn't have to worry about annoying one forum keyboard warrior because Zen4 was 4-5 months off-cadence (or whatever). Intel has billions of dollars on the line attached to major customers that will eventually abandon their struggle to retain relevance.

I agree but your forgetting that all of what you said could and was said about amd not long ago. I would still argue they have a gun to their head now that intel is nipping at their heels like piranhas. the rest of your aaron sorkin like post is correct but give it time.

 

[DrMrLordX]

I agree but your forgetting that all of what you said could and was said about amd not long ago. I would still argue they have a gun to their head now that intel is nipping at their heels like piranhas. the rest of your aaron sorkin like post is correct but give it time.

Intel is no meaningful threat to AMD now that AMD has attached themselves to a better foundry partner. Intel is becoming dependent on the same foundry partner. If anyone is a threat to AMD right now it's possibly TSMC (or their dependence on them). But that is a discussion for another thread.

Intel does not really have time. I can give them all the rope they need; that's irrelevant. They're making launch projections that would be impossible to reach under even ideal circumstances.

 

[A///]

Intel is no meaningful threat to AMD now that AMD has attached themselves to a better foundry partner. Intel is becoming dependent on the same foundry partner. If anyone is a threat to AMD right now it's possibly TSMC (or their dependence on them). But that is a discussion for another thread.

Intel does not really have time. I can give them all the rope they need; that's irrelevant. They're making launch projections that would be impossible to reach under even ideal circumstances.

If tsmc is a threat to amd they're a threat to apple if you mean failing to produce a future working node for a long time or one that performs poorly like 28nm was it? I don't think tsmc would bump off amd. Amd is too good for them and not thuggish like jh tried to be. Amd is a glory story for tsmc to waft in front of Intel like a big old stinker they've been holding in for hours. The rest of your post reads like I'm reading morris chang's thoughts.

 

[DrMrLordX]

I don't think tsmc would bump off amd.

I don't either, but anyone who becomes too dependent on one foundry partner to rule them all and in the darkness bind them is mmm well let's just say that monopolies in Taiwan are unstable and leave it at that.

Yes it's a potential problem for Intel too.

Samsung saved AMD once (GF14nm), but I don't think they can do it again. Would be interesting to see what would happen if Samsung made an alliance with Intel, but honestly if that was gonna work, Gelsinger would have had to do it as soon as he took office for it to matter.

 

[NostaSeronx]

Samsung saved AMD once (GF14nm), but I don't think they can do it again.

Samsung didn't save AMD. AMD was already working on Zen on TSMC's 16nm, since 2014. 14nm was suppose to save GlobalFoundries, but ran a huge debt across the board. It then caused AMD to delay from a 1H2016 Zen(16nm node) general availability to a 1H2017 Zen(14nm node) general availability. Doing irreversible harm to revenue till AMD finally returned to Zen's original home foundry TSMC for 7nm.

Getting forced in 14nm by GF via WSA. Lead them to also going into a sub-par node which cut LV and HV performance. Leading to lower than ideal frequency in both low-voltage and restrictive scaling for high-voltage. TSMC's 16nm was much better for scaling high-speed across low voltage/low-TDP and high voltage/high-TDP.

The issue Intel is hitting right now is loosely similar to Samsung's 14nm and the Zen-port on to it. The process is tuned for low-power-orientated designs but Intel is pushing high-speed-orientated designs on them.

Where as TSMC has knobs for tuning the process from a low-power-orientated one into a high-speed-orientated process. Intel is simply not doing the work for these knobs to actually be exploited on their node at architecture release. GlobalFoundries excuse was they didn't have any additional money or know-how to fix their stuff.

 

[Hulk]

TMSC has all of the x86 information from AMD and now Intel required to manufacture CPU's. When are they going to realize they can just design (reverse engineer) their own CPU's and rule the semiconductor world?

 

[mikk]

"I'll believe it when I see it". They may WANT to speed up their processes, but based on the immediate past it's hard to believe that they'll reach those targets. Intel has been blowing this smoke for awhile, but what are the results? Best-case scenario, we see market readiness for Intel 4 in late 2023, Intel 3 in late 2024, and Intel 20a in late 2025. Best case.

Realstically-speaking, Intel probably couldn't get 20a ready before 2027. At least based on 14nm and 10nm-family nodes and their rates of progression, along with Intel 4 which is going to be three years late (was supposed to debut in Ponte Vecchio some time ago).

This is not the best case lol. You are way off. Best case would be H1 2024 Intel 3, H2 2024 Intel 20A and H2 2025 Intel 18A. A more realistic timeline would have been 2H 2024 Intel 3, H1 2025 Intel 20A and H2 2025 - H1 2026 Intel 18A. ARL-P could come with Intel 20A but realistically not before H1 2025. ARL-S is only doable in 2024 if they switch to TSCM which some rumors suggest.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Best case would be H1 2024 Intel 3

That doesn't even seem remotely possible.

 

[bwhitty]

That doesn't even seem remotely possible.

Yet that is exactly what Intel just said to a group of investors -- to whom they have SEC fiduciary duties -- saying that Intel 3 will be shipping with Sierra Forest as the lead product in 1H 2024.

AnandTech Forums: Technology, Hardware, Software, and Deals

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

www.anandtech.com

Sierra Forest: The First E-Core Xeon and Intel 3 Lead Product, Shipping H1’24​

 

[DrMrLordX]

Yet that is exactly what Intel just said to a group of investors -- to whom they have SEC fiduciary duties -- saying that Intel 3 will be shipping with Sierra Forest as the lead product in 1H 2024.

They also said Cannonlake would ship on 10nm in 2017.

 

[trivik12]

They also said Cannonlake would ship on 10nm in 2017.

Wait you are saying intel 3 is in the same shape as 10nm back in 2016.

 

[A///]

straight from wiki. either you got your dates wrong or you're talking about something else.

Cannon Lake (microprocessor) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Cannon Lake was initially expected to be released in 2015[6]/2016, but the release was pushed back to 2018.[7] Intel demonstrated a laptop with an unknown Cannon Lake CPU at CES 2017[8][9] and announced that Cannon Lake based products would be available in 2018 at the earliest.

At CES 2018 Intel announced that it had started shipping mobile Cannon Lake CPUs at the end of 2017 and would ramp up production in 2018.[10][11][12]

On April 26, 2018 in its report on first-quarter 2018 financial results, Intel stated it was currently shipping low-volume 10 nm product and expects 10 nm volume production to shift to 2019.[13] In July 2018, Intel announced that volume production of Cannon Lake would be delayed yet again, to late Q2 2019.[14]

 

[DrMrLordX]

Wait you are saying intel 3 is in the same shape as 10nm back in 2016.

I'm saying Intel 4 is in almost the same shape as 10nm back in 2016. Intel 3 is a derivative node. It took Intel maybe two years to get 10nm+ out the door in commercial products. Even if Intel 4 shows up in good order by the end of 2023 in Meteor Lake, it's completely unreasonable to expect Intel 3 to show up less than 6 months later in viable quantities. Unless we believe "it's not the process it's the design" is the reason for every Intel 4 product to be scotched up to this point, which seems ridiculous.

Maybe Intel can set wafers on fire for huge losses and push out a few Sierra Forest units to key customers by March 2024 (end of Q1). Anything more than that? Nah, not buying it.

 

[DrMrLordX]

I'm saying Intel 4 is in almost the same shape as 10nm back in 2016. Intel 3 is a derivative node. It took Intel maybe two years to get 10nm+ out the door in commercial products. Even if Intel 4 shows up in good order by the end of 2023 in Meteor Lake, it's completely unreasonable to expect Intel 3 to show up less than 6 months later in viable quantities. Unless we believe "it's not the process it's the design" is the reason for every Intel 4 product to be scotched up to this point, which seems ridiculous.

Maybe Intel can set wafers on fire for huge losses and push out a few Sierra Forest units to key customers by March 2024 (end of Q1). Anything more than that? Nah, not buying it.

@A///

You're splitting hairs. You've been registered here long enough to know what BK was doing in 2017 with Cannonlake to keep investors off his back. "Cannonlake when?" achieved meme-tier status back then. It was really supposed to be a 2016 product but got pushed back to "it's done when it's done", then got launched in some Chinese laptops in 2c i3 format with disabled iGPU in Q4 2017 and was dead-and-buried. 2018 was meant to be the general date range for volume shipping which Intel never achieved.

BK limped it out the door in Q4 2017 to hit his ship target and keep investors at bay.

 

[techinvestor1]

I'm saying Intel 4 is in almost the same shape as 10nm back in 2016. Intel 3 is a derivative node. It took Intel maybe two years to get 10nm+ out the door in commercial products. Even if Intel 4 shows up in good order by the end of 2023 in Meteor Lake, it's completely unreasonable to expect Intel 3 to show up less than 6 months later in viable quantities. Unless we believe "it's not the process it's the design" is the reason for every Intel 4 product to be scotched up to this point, which seems ridiculous.

Maybe Intel can set wafers on fire for huge losses and push out a few Sierra Forest units to key customers by March 2024 (end of Q1). Anything more than that? Nah, not buying it.

As far as I understood, each of these nodes is done in parallel to avoid the issues of the past. Much more likely to scrap one and just skip to the next node if there are issues as it is separate teams now as far as I understand it.

The problem with AMD and TSMC's relationship is that without real competition (Samsung is NOT reliable enough to be competition, ask Apple how come they switched), TSMC will squeeze AMD's margins because it's common sense/great business. So while TSMC is superior to Intel in manufacturing, that is not an infinite "moat" for TSMC. Intel can always have about 20-30% worse yields than TSMC and still be competitive in prices with AMD, because that is TSMC's current margin.

Intel's mistake was underinvesting, something it's clearly fixing now. I am amazed at how many people here act as Intel's current operations are "business as usual" (same as the last 10 years). In the last 3 years Intel has spent $60b on new nodes, which is the same amount spent over the 5 years before that! And before you say "TSMC spent $100b" or similar, keep in mind that getting new nodes online is not a "more is better" ad infinitum. TSMC manufactures much more quantity so needs more capacity, but getting new process technology is ~$20b and Intel is investing everything needed to make its roadmap.

 

[jpiniero]

Intel can always have about 20-30% worse yields than TSMC

The yields are going to be way way worse than 20-30% than TSMC. Meteor Lake and Sierra Forrest might be the guinea pigs as to whether the "f it, we'll launch it anyway!" strategy can be viable if the tiles are salvageable enough.

 

[DrMrLordX]

As far as I understood, each of these nodes is done in parallel to avoid the issues of the past. Much more likely to scrap one and just skip to the next node if there are issues as it is separate teams now as far as I understand it.

I could see 20a being developed in parallel. Intel 4 and Intel 3? Probably not, since Intel 3 is an iterative step.

 

[coercitiv]

As far as I understood, each of these nodes is done in parallel to avoid the issues of the past. Much more likely to scrap one and just skip to the next node if there are issues as it is separate teams now as far as I understand it.

We've been over this before in the forums: volume production in a node is an important step in preparing a healthy transition to the next node, field data from volume production is needed for R&D. Scrapping a node and skipping to the next shrink is risky.

 

[jpiniero]

We've been over this before in the forums: volume production in a node is an important step in preparing a healthy transition to the next node, field data from volume production is needed for R&D. Scrapping a node and skipping to the next shrink is risky.

Intel 3 isn't really a new node. It's more like 7+.

 

[techinvestor1]

Intel 3 isn't really a new node. It's more like 7+.

Compare it on density and metrics.

We've been over this before in the forums: volume production in a node is an important step in preparing a healthy transition to the next node, field data from volume production is needed for R&D. Scrapping a node and skipping to the next shrink is risky.

Sure, but that doesn't factor in much on the first year of running it. Volume helps perfect the yield for sure.

I could see 20a being developed in parallel. Intel 4 and Intel 3? Probably not, since Intel 3 is an iterative step.

I am not familiar enough with the process of developing the chips to be able to address this, but from how they presented it, it sounded like they aren't dependent on one another. I might be wrong on this.

The yields are going to be way way worse than 20-30% than TSMC. Meteor Lake and Sierra Forrest might be the guinea pigs as to whether the "f it, we'll launch it anyway!" strategy can be viable if the tiles are salvageable enough.

I don't think they'll have an issue footing the bill to stay competitive, especially if it's for external Foundry customers. Keep in mind the subsidies Intel will receive will probably end up at around $40b+, so they have a lot of short term leeway to catch up, poor yields or not.

The only big question is if they will have another big stumble on delivery, since they've eaten up all the margin of error they can with SPR. If they can delivery on 20A and 18A on time, they will do very well. If not, bleak future.

 

[mikk]

I'm saying Intel 4 is in almost the same shape as 10nm back in 2016. Intel 3 is a derivative node. It took Intel maybe two years to get 10nm+ out the door in commercial products. Even if Intel 4 shows up in good order by the end of 2023 in Meteor Lake, it's completely unreasonable to expect Intel 3 to show up less than 6 months later in viable quantities. Unless we believe "it's not the process it's the design" is the reason for every Intel 4 product to be scotched up to this point, which seems ridiculous.

Maybe Intel can set wafers on fire for huge losses and push out a few Sierra Forest units to key customers by March 2024 (end of Q1). Anything more than that? Nah, not buying it.

Noboody with some deeper inside knowledge is saying this, we hear quite the opposite. MTL-P ES1 hits 3.6-4Ghz already. 10nm back in 2016 could only dream of this. It's just trash talk what you are posting.