• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

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

Page 436 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Tigerick

Senior member
Wildcat Lake (WCL) Specs

Intel Wildcat Lake (WCL) is upcoming mobile SoC replacing Raptor Lake-U. 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 Q1 2026.

Intel Raptor Lake UIntel Wildcat Lake 15WIntel Lunar LakeIntel Panther Lake 4+0+4
Launch DateQ1-2024Q2-2026Q3-2024Q1-2026
ModelIntel 150UIntel Core 7 360Core Ultra 7 268VCore Ultra 7 365
Dies2223
NodeIntel 7 + ?Intel 18-A + TSMC N6TSMC N3B + N6Intel 18-A + Intel 3 + TSMC N6
CPU2 P-core + 8 E-cores2 P-core + 4 LP E-cores4 P-core + 4 LP E-cores4 P-core + 4 LP E-cores
Threads12688
Max Clock5.4 GHz4.8 GHz5 GHz4.8 GHz
L3 Cache12 MB6 MB12 MB12 MB
TDP15 - 55 W15 - 35 W17 - 37 W25 - 55 W
Memory128-bit LPDDR5-520064-bit LPDDR5x-7467128-bit LPDDR5x-8533128-bit LPDDR5x-7467
Size96 GB48 GB32 GB128 GB
Bandwidth83 GB/s60 GB/s136 GB/s120 GB/s
GPUIntel GraphicsIntel GraphicsArc 140VIntel Graphics
RTNoNoYESYES
EU / Xe96 EU2 Xe8 Xe4 Xe
Max Clock1.3 GHz2.6 GHz2 GHz2.5 GHz
NPUGNA 3.017 TOPS48 TOPS49 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: 24,049
  • LNL.png
    LNL.png
    881.8 KB · Views: 25,534
  • INTEL-CORE-100-ULTRA-METEOR-LAKE-OFFCIAL-SLIDE-2.jpg
    INTEL-CORE-100-ULTRA-METEOR-LAKE-OFFCIAL-SLIDE-2.jpg
    181.4 KB · Views: 72,443
  • Clockspeed.png
    Clockspeed.png
    611.8 KB · Views: 72,329
Last edited:
I threw in towel AND THUS SOLD or returned on any 13th or 14th Gen part because of stability and degradation issues. SO never really tested it,
I have a 7800X3D right now.

But if they have a 12 P core on a single ring bus Raptor Lake and it has stability issues fixed (I would think given new die or otherwise Intel will not make it), I am for sure a buyer. If it has the 8 + 16 RPL die stability and degradation issues, a hard pass despite me wanting such a product.
Would you trust Intel enough to buy such a 12P processor at launch? Or how many months would you wait?
 
Would you trust Intel enough to buy such a 12P processor at launch? Or how many months would you wait?

I will play that by ear. I think I would trust it at launch as long as it's determined that the issue is with the current stepping and not a design flaw in Raptor Lake itself.

Cause Alder Lake stepping are reliable and stable also on same 10nm node.

If there is some flaw with cache or ring structure of RPL (have heard rumors there may be and not just a stepping issue) and it is not stepping than no unless intel makes it Alder Lake based. Those I suppose its possible those flaws are based on the current die or they could be based on Raptor Cove cores and the ring and cache not sure. If its the latter its a hard pass.

Not sure what to do. Given its coming out in 1 year, hard to wait a few months. If it was out like now then yes I would wiat a few minutes. Hope to have more data for a good informed decision by then given its tardy release date.
 
Last edited:
Reviewer using XMP they should compare JEDEC as well cause freaking 90% of users run it

Maybe they need two results, one is "this is the performance typical users who mostly use defaults will see" and "this is the best you can get if you perform the full list of optimizations/tweaks listed in the footnotes".

It is really no different than if they overclocked the CPU by 500 MHz in their results. Just like core parking, buying faster RAM and tweaking it, and so forth, that's just another optimization to get more performance, right? But I have a feeling more people would find that to be "cheating" than the stuff they're currently doing. Not sure why.
 
Maybe they need two results, one is "this is the performance typical users who mostly use defaults will see" and "this is the best you can get if you perform the full list of optimizations/tweaks listed in the footnotes".
Exactly. All good reviews do this. Spec memory/clocks/settings (which is what almost all users will see when they buy a Dell, HP, Lenovo, or similar). Then max everything (which throws money and power consumption concerns out the window).
 
Hot off the press:

Based on the chart within, ST is about 11% higher than the 14900K and MT is about 10% higher.
 

Attachments

  • 1724222784838.png
    1724222784838.png
    49.3 KB · Views: 58
  • 1724222740431.png
    1724222740431.png
    49.3 KB · Views: 51
There’s some really good news in these results. If you dig into the subtests, ARL gets wins in text processing and HTML5. It’s only real big losses are object detection and background blur both of which are accelerated by AVX512.

So if you go by just the int performance, ARL looks promising against Zen 5.
 
Yours is overclocked. Normal 9950X will be 3.5% slower than Core Ultra 9 285K.

This change nothing, 14900K and 9950X score 3236 and 3427 in ST respectively, both using stock speed RAM at 5600, this 285K GB submission use 6400 RAM and 5.7GHz ST frequency, so the 9950X is certainly not 3.5% slower in ST at stock RAM speeds.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot 2024-08-21 at 10-46-01 AMD Ryzen 9 9900X und 9950X im Test Benchmarks in neuen Anwe...png
    Screenshot 2024-08-21 at 10-46-01 AMD Ryzen 9 9900X und 9950X im Test Benchmarks in neuen Anwe...png
    82.8 KB · Views: 45
This change nothing, 14900K and 9950X score 3236 and 3427 in ST respectively, both using stock speed RAM at 5600, this 285K GB submission use 6400 RAM and 5.7GHz ST frequency, so the 9950X is certainly not 3.5% slower in ST at stock RAM speeds.
6400MT/s is the supposedly official speed for Ultra 9 285K,9950X is 5600 according to AMD so both running at STOCK 🙂
 
Hot off the press:

Based on the chart within, ST is about 11% higher than the 14900K and MT is about 10% higher.
Looks pretty nice. Now it all comes down to power usage.
 
Also, there are some results for Geekbench 5. The P-core in Intel Core 285K matches the one in Apple M4:

View attachment 105879

That's not a fully fair comparison because of the Geekbench Windows tax, but it is pretty interesting.
Seems like the 285K does alittle worse in GB5 ST than GB6 ST in comparison against the same OC'ed 9950X (?)

1724235331913.png


1724235392951.png

 
Last edited:
6400MT/s is the supposedly official speed for Ultra 9 285K,9950X is 5600 according to AMD so both running at STOCK 🙂
Supposedly...

And the submission was made at JEDEC lose timings for DDR 6400 you think.?.

Anyway even at 6400 it score a paltry 0.67% better than the 9950X at 5600.
It matters a lot. Looks like Zen5 isn't that good compared to ARL. Seems both are actually running at stock. :tearsofjoy:

9950X run within 200W while ARL is at 250W, and Intel already made a reservation for 297W/329W PL2/PL4 in case 250W still falling short in a lot of benches, wich will be likely the case if we look at the 43118 pts CB R23 score at 250W.
 
Back
Top