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

Page 707 - 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
851
802
106
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 - NIntel Wildcat LakeIntel Lunar LakeMediatek D9500
Launch DateQ1-2023Q2-2026 ?Q3-2024Q3-2025
ModelIntel N300?Core Ultra 7 268VDimensity 9500 5G
Dies2221
NodeIntel 7 + ?Intel 18-A + TSMC N6TSMC N3B + N6TSMC N3P
CPU8 E-cores2 P-core + 4 LP E-cores4 P-core + 4 LP E-coresC1 1+3+4
Threads8688
Max Clock3.8 GHz?5 GHz
L3 Cache6 MB?12 MB
TDP7 WFanless ?17 WFanless
Memory64-bit LPDDR5-480064-bit LPDDR5-6800 ?128-bit LPDDR5X-853364-bit LPDDR5X-10667
Size16 GB?32 GB24 GB ?
Bandwidth~ 55 GB/s136 GB/s85.6 GB/s
GPUUHD GraphicsArc 140VG1 Ultra
EU / Xe32 EU2 Xe8 Xe12
Max Clock1.25 GHz2 GHz
NPUNA18 TOPS48 TOPS100 TOPS ?






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.



LNL-MX.png
 

Attachments

  • PantherLake.png
    PantherLake.png
    283.5 KB · Views: 24,030
  • LNL.png
    LNL.png
    881.8 KB · Views: 25,524
  • INTEL-CORE-100-ULTRA-METEOR-LAKE-OFFCIAL-SLIDE-2.jpg
    INTEL-CORE-100-ULTRA-METEOR-LAKE-OFFCIAL-SLIDE-2.jpg
    181.4 KB · Views: 72,432
  • Clockspeed.png
    Clockspeed.png
    611.8 KB · Views: 72,319
Last edited:
Jul 27, 2020
28,107
19,174
146
Why did it take so long to beat the 4 minute mile and then so many quickly achieved it afterward?
Excellent point. The mental barrier of believing what's possible changes reality. In my C class, the teacher said whoever creates a diamond formation of asterisks using just a single printf is a real problem solver with logical thinking. I was the only one who managed it because I believed someone had done it before. Everyone else dismissed it as impossible.
 

ondma

Diamond Member
Mar 18, 2018
3,310
1,696
136
It's a tradeoff and informed customers will make the decision that makes more sense to them.

9600X:

5% faster in games on average.
AVX-512 support.
Drop-in upgrade to X3D in future, saving on the cost of a whole platform upgrade.
Can't think of any serious cons.

245K:

Higher RAM speeds with CUDIMM in future when DDR5-9600 becomes cheaper.
+10% faster in productivity on average.

I/O speed issues with NVMe drives (https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...akes-discussion-threads.2606448/post-41324708)

No upgrade path as far as we know.
No AVX-512 support.
Unattractive for those interested in playing emulated games.
Ehh... I wouldnt buy a six core cpu now from either manufacturer, but especially from intel w/o hyperthreading. 8 cores or bust. And no, I dont count the E cores.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Win2012R2

controlflow

Member
Feb 17, 2015
195
339
136

CyberPunk update 2.2:
"Optimized threading system to improve performance by up to 33% on Intel Arrow Lake based CPUs."
 

controlflow

Member
Feb 17, 2015
195
339
136
What does that mean? Up to? Certain sections are 33% better?

Need to wait for more benchmarks but a user on Overclock.net tried it with the in game benchmark and saw a 13% increase in average FPS and 32% improvement in minimum FPS. Seems to improve FPS in the most compute intensive scenes in the game.

Will be interesting if other games get similar updates to tune for ARL and if the upcoming microcode update further improves gaming performance.
 
Jul 27, 2020
28,107
19,174
146
Certain sections are 33% better?
Goes up and down as the threads ping pong between P and E cores :)

I think the optimization would be that the game engine is now aware which core is P and which one is E and making sure to target E-cores for sustained MT tasks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: maddie

OneEng2

Senior member
Sep 19, 2022
841
1,108
106
Goes up and down as the threads ping pong between P and E cores :)

I think the optimization would be that the game engine is now aware which core is P and which one is E and making sure to target E-cores for sustained MT tasks.
I would agree.

This also provides evidence that Lion Cove isn't as useless as some have believed it to be and that Skymont isn't the one-core-to-rule-them-all as believed as well.
 

ajsdkflsdjfio

Member
Nov 20, 2024
185
133
76
I would agree.

This also provides evidence that Lion Cove isn't as useless as some have believed it to be and that Skymont isn't the one-core-to-rule-them-all as believed as well.
Turning off P-cores and overclocking E-cores actually outperforms default config in some cases. The fact that overclocked E-core only configuration outperforms the stock core configuration is not just a testament to how broken Arrow Lake was at launch but also how good the E-cores are. The fact that you can essentially have a E-core only cpu and have it perform comparably to current generation cpus, in some cases, is insane.

IDK whether this idea would be feasible economically wise/design wise, but I wish Intel would release an E-core only cpu with 12-16 darkmont cores and sell it for like 100-200 bucks and either create a new cheaper arrow lake chipset or better yet somehow engineer the chip to work on older boards like pre-alder lake generations for an easy slot in upgrade. Possibly zen4/alder lake performance at lower power and extremely low die space. If each skymont core is 33% of a lion cove core that means a 12 skymont core cpu would be similar size to a 4-core lion-cove cpu meaning an extremely cheap silicon cost even with darkmont's increased size. It'd be perfect for mini-pcs with crazy levels of power/perf and just in general for people looking for a cheap upgrade from older generations.

Back when the IPC number slides for skymont were first leaked I remember some people on ChipsNCheese's discord doing some very rough calculations on skymont vs golden cove ipc. Apparently their initial calculations put it at like within 5% or something crazy like that using the 1.38x advertised int improvement and using crestmont/gracemont numbers. I'd take this information with a huge grain of salt so i'd say something like 10-20 percent under golden cove to be safe, but still with an ipc improvement with darkmont and clock/performance improvement from 18a. Add improvements from designing a smaller monolithic chip without all the arrowlake/meteor lake chiplet bs and just in general improvements from engineering a chip using only one core and with tiny adjustments to improve darkmont perf for consumer use like how redwood cove in data center is different from redwood cove in meteor lake. Add the fact that skymont can already clock up to 5.2 Ghz stable despite not being designed for pushing performance, it's not crazy to say you could have a 7950x/14900k which uses a third of the power and costs a third of the price(100-200). Even in late 2025 this would be a killer product for a lot of consumers, even me on my 8600k.

https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1tW14YGEmz/
 
Last edited:

maddie

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2010
5,156
5,545
136
Turning off P-cores and overclocking E-cores actually outperforms default config in some cases. The fact that overclocked E-core only configuration outperforms the stock core configuration is not just a testament to how broken Arrow Lake was at launch but also how good the E-cores are. The fact that you can essentially have a E-core only cpu and have it perform comparably to current generation cpus, in some cases, is insane.

IDK whether this idea would be feasible economically wise/design wise, but I wish Intel would release an E-core only cpu with 12-16 darkmont cores and sell it for like 100-200 bucks and either create a new cheaper arrow lake chipset or better yet somehow engineer the chip to work on older boards like pre-alder lake generations for an easy slot in upgrade. Possibly zen4/alder lake performance at lower power and extremely low die space. If each skymont core is 33% of a lion cove core that means a 12 skymont core cpu would be similar size to a 4-core lion-cove cpu meaning an extremely cheap silicon cost even with darkmont's increased size. It'd be perfect for mini-pcs with crazy levels of power/perf and just in general for people looking for a cheap upgrade from older generations.

https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1tW14YGEmz/
What was the 8P + 0E config? Anyone compared an all P or all E?
 

maddie

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2010
5,156
5,545
136
It's in the same video. I can't attest to their methodologies or whether this result would be seen in games other than cyberpunk/baldurs gate, but the fact that the result is even attainable at all is crazy.
Glanced and I didn't see all E. 8P+16E, 1P+16E and 8P. I think the 1P is a hint. Can we solve the puzzle?
 

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,141
3,734
136
Let's do a differential diagnosis on Arrow Lake. Data from TechPowerup review.
Compared to the 14900K this is where the 285K does significantly better than the 14900K.

The AI apps are over performing obviously due to the AI processor on ARL. But how about the other applications? What do each group (the ones that do better than the 14900K and the ones that do worse) have in common with one another?

AI Photo Photo Enhance +45%
AI Stable Diffusion +31%
AI NLP +18%
Blender +17%
COMSOL +16%
AV1 +15%
SHA3 +14%
NAMD +13%
V-Ray +11%
Y-Cruncher +9%

This is where it is significantly behind.
Gaming - Down about 6% on average at 1080p
Powerpoint -27%
WinRaR -24%
Premiere Pro - 18%
7 Zip decompression -18% ("only" down about 6% for compression)
Speedometer -16%
Outlook -15%
JetStream2 -14%
Avast -13%
AES -13%
MySQL -12%
Word --11%
Altium -10%
Excel -9%
Let's assume L3 latency is a bottleneck for ARL. Do the applications in the second group, which are lagging performance-wise, rely more on L3 than the first group?

Powerpoint, WinRaR,a nd Premiere Pro are showing terrible performance in particular. Are they L3 heavy?
 

OneEng2

Senior member
Sep 19, 2022
841
1,108
106
That was a wrong conclusion to draw in the first place. Skm is a smaller core that makes has to make tradeoffs to be area efficient. It's still an E core
Some have imagined that Intel should drop Lion Cove completely, and replace P cores with a better Skymont/Darkmont.

I agree that the MUCH smaller footprint for the E-Core. I do agree that the P cores are not efficient in space (compared to Zen 5 for instance), but that doesn't mean that it is possible for the E Core performance to be made to work as well on single threaded applications across the board as well as a P core does.
Turning off P-cores and overclocking E-cores actually outperforms default config in some cases. The fact that overclocked E-core only configuration outperforms the stock core configuration is not just a testament to how broken Arrow Lake was at launch but also how good the E-cores are. The fact that you can essentially have a E-core only cpu and have it perform comparably to current generation cpus, in some cases, is insane.

IDK whether this idea would be feasible economically wise/design wise, but I wish Intel would release an E-core only cpu with 12-16 darkmont cores and sell it for like 100-200 bucks and either create a new cheaper arrow lake chipset or better yet somehow engineer the chip to work on older boards like pre-alder lake generations for an easy slot in upgrade. Possibly zen4/alder lake performance at lower power and extremely low die space. If each skymont core is 33% of a lion cove core that means a 12 skymont core cpu would be similar size to a 4-core lion-cove cpu meaning an extremely cheap silicon cost even with darkmont's increased size. It'd be perfect for mini-pcs with crazy levels of power/perf and just in general for people looking for a cheap upgrade from older generations.

Back when the IPC number slides for skymont were first leaked I remember some people on ChipsNCheese's discord doing some very rough calculations on skymont vs golden cove ipc. Apparently their initial calculations put it at like within 5% or something crazy like that using the 1.38x advertised int improvement and using crestmont/gracemont numbers. I'd take this information with a huge grain of salt so i'd say something like 10-20 percent under golden cove to be safe, but still with an ipc improvement with darkmont and clock/performance improvement from 18a. Add improvements from designing a smaller monolithic chip without all the arrowlake/meteor lake chiplet bs and just in general improvements from engineering a chip using only one core and with tiny adjustments to improve darkmont perf for consumer use like how redwood cove in data center is different from redwood cove in meteor lake. Add the fact that skymont can already clock up to 5.2 Ghz stable despite not being designed for pushing performance, it's not crazy to say you could have a 7950x/14900k which uses a third of the power and costs a third of the price(100-200). Even in late 2025 this would be a killer product for a lot of consumers, even me on my 8600k.

https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1tW14YGEmz/
I guess I just always assume that Intel engineers are very talented. Who would put useless P Cores in a design where they could have just beefed up E Cores instead?

I just can't buy into the line of thinking where the P core is totally useless and that they could have easily just used all Skymont with a little more special sauce to raise the IPC another 10%.
1P is required by the Bios you can disable it's use by setting affinity manually if they were smart enough
Affinity is only a "suggestion" to the OS. I suspect you can't "disable" it like that.