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

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:
Videocardz is being ignorant(comparing to NBC XPS 14's 2800x1800 display) but the XPS 14 using 1920x1200 display got 43 hours on a web browsing test. This is with variable refresh rate enabled.

So the XPS 16 without VRR got 26.6 hours. With VRR the 14 gets 43 hours.


Personally though I don't think VRR is worth it. It's not good for your eyes. 27 hours is more than fine anyway.
Meteor Late said:
I disagree about WCL being good, yeah it is cheap, but I hated how Mendocino onlly had 2 CU.
Click to expand...
You just answered your own question. A larger chip would mean higher cost. WCL basically replaces Alderlake-N and Twinlake.

Also remember the 4 Xe3 cores in Pantherlake comes nearly on par with 8 Xe2 core in Lunarlake.
dttprofessor said:
WCL is a new market : pocket pc !
Click to expand...
It might make a semi-decent x86 Tablet and budget mini laptop since the only ones are the Alderlake-N ones in Aliexpress with a small 30-35WHr battery. That's 5-6.5 hours now, but ~50% boost gets to 8-11 hours.
 
Last edited:
511 said:
Maybe with WCL refresh but i don't make the decision i would have removed the NPU all together if i could and made it cheaper.
Click to expand...

Single tile of NPU5 on current WCL makes sense. It's small enough, has way better area-efficiency vs the NPU4 used in LNL. 4Xe3 units instead of 2Xe3 would require more area than 1-tile NPU5 and once you go 4Xe3 config you are thinking to enable RT units as well to not fragment it from the usual 4Xe3 configs. NPU also gets you better battery life for Background blur on MS Teams and likes which is a fairly common usage. WCL targets Edge/Embedded markets/Kiosks as well of which a decent part would prefer having NPU.

Now NVL desktop/-HX is supposed to have greater than 70TOPS INT8 NPU but just 2Xe3 iGPU, some would say there they should have gone 4Xe3 iGPU and a smaller NPU.
 
regen1 said:
Single tile of NPU5 on current WCL makes sense. It's small enough, has way better area-efficiency vs the NPU4 used in LNL. 4Xe3 units instead of 2Xe3 would require more area than 1-tile NPU5 and once you go 4Xe3 config you are thinking to enable RT units as well to not fragment it from the usual 4Xe3 configs. NPU also gets you better battery life for Background blur on MS Teams and likes which is a fairly common usage. WCL targets Edge/Embedded markets/Kiosks as well of which a decent part would prefer having NPU.

Now NVL desktop/-HX is supposed to have greater than 70TOPS INT8 NPU but just 2Xe3 iGPU, some would say there they should have gone 4Xe3 iGPU and a smaller NPU.
Click to expand...
I blame the NPU on Microsoft Co Pilot we should stop after 50 TOPS
 
From Microcenter. Did Intel change the list price of the 270K? I thought it was supposed to be $299?
1775225176128.png
 
MoistOintment said:
MSRP is still ~$299 on Ark.

Retailers launched them above MSRP for whatever reason.
Click to expand...
Yes. It's just strange that MC has "349.99" crossed out like that is the MSRP. Pricing strategies from big vendors like this is always interesting to me. Who at MC decided, "We're not selling this at MSRP, we're selling it over MSRP, and we're going to advertise a fake MSRP." Why? Has someone at MC determined there is too much value in the part and they are going to cash in on it? Does Intel care if they ignore the MSRP? Isn't Intel planning a production run based on sales based on a $300 price?

Even more interesting is the fact that they seem to be avoiding listing the 250K because the pricing on that part completely blows up the bottom end of the market. I mean like they are going to have to price the 245K at $150 or something like that.

Did MC buy these older parts at prices will they will lose money if they have to drop the price to work around the new more aggressive pricing of the new parts? Will Intel provide them with rebates considering how they have devistated the pricing structure? Will Intel be putting new prices on the 245K and 265K?

I find these pricing moves facinating. Not only manufacturer moves but how the vendors respond to them.

Meanwhile, AMD just sits there. "Meh, we're leaving our pricing as it."
 
Hulk said:
Yes. It's just strange that MC has "349.99" crossed out like that is the MSRP. Pricing strategies from big vendors like this is always interesting to me. Who at MC decided, "We're not selling this at MSRP, we're selling it over MSRP, and we're going to advertise a fake MSRP." Why? Has someone at MC determined there is too much value in the part and they are going to cash in on it? Does Intel care if they ignore the MSRP? Isn't Intel planning a production run based on sales based on a $300 price?

Even more interesting is the fact that they seem to be avoiding listing the 250K because the pricing on that part completely blows up the bottom end of the market. I mean like they are going to have to price the 245K at $150 or something like that.

Did MC buy these older parts at prices will they will lose money if they have to drop the price to work around the new more aggressive pricing of the new parts? Will Intel provide them with rebates considering how they have devistated the pricing structure? Will Intel be putting new prices on the 245K and 265K?

I find these pricing moves facinating. Not only manufacturer moves but how the vendors respond to them.

Meanwhile, AMD just sits there. "Meh, we're leaving our pricing as it."
Click to expand...
pricing is very volatile now no matter the electronics thanks AI
 
Hulk said:
Yes. It's just strange that MC has "349.99" crossed out like that is the MSRP. Pricing strategies from big vendors like this is always interesting to me. Who at MC decided, "We're not selling this at MSRP, we're selling it over MSRP, and we're going to advertise a fake MSRP." Why? Has someone at MC determined there is too much value in the part and they are going to cash in on it? Does Intel care if they ignore the MSRP? Isn't Intel planning a production run based on sales based on a $300 price?
Click to expand...
Lenovo does that all the time. I've been looking at a news report of a Lenovo laptop a month before release, and it was rumored to be $999.

Then it released and on Day 1 I check the site. It said $1299 crossed out and $999 as the price. Like it was actually on sale. Predatory pricing for sure.
 
270K has disappeared from Microcenter. 250K has yet to make an appearance. I have enabled "show out-of-stock" items so this appears to be a deliberate removal of that part. It's like the pricing of those parts is simply causing too much disruption to their pricing strategy. Also the 285K price has increased $40.

When MC purchases CPUs from AMD and Intel do they pay up front for the parts or is there some other type of transaction going to that insulatate them somewhat from pricing flucuations? Such as a rebate program or something similar?

1775654604086.png
 
Quite. I only see it as part of an integral bundle (pre-installed no less) vs as a standalone CPU after it disappeared at the local/nearby MC site for me. Lists as sold out for now.

1775717619421.png
1775717503491.png
 
Hulk said:
270K has disappeared from Microcenter. 250K has yet to make an appearance. I have enabled "show out-of-stock" items so this appears to be a deliberate removal of that part. It's like the pricing of those parts is simply causing too much disruption to their pricing strategy. Also the 285K price has increased $40.

When MC purchases CPUs from AMD and Intel do they pay up front for the parts or is there some other type of transaction going to that insulatate them somewhat from pricing flucuations? Such as a rebate program or something similar?

View attachment 141443
Click to expand...

Last I checked it was also nowhere to be found on Amazon/Newegg. As in not even showing out of stock. B&H Photo does list it as out of stock. If they don't reappear this will be the biggest joke of a launch I can recall.

I want to believe they are just waiting on resupply/adjusting prices but why delist them if that's all it is?
 
Cstops said:
Quite. I only see it as part of an integral bundle (pre-installed no less) vs as a standalone CPU after it disappeared at the local/nearby MC site for me. Lists as sold out for now.

View attachment 141493
View attachment 141492
Click to expand...
I'm not understanding the bundle pricing? Let's assume the CPU is $350 and the memory is $300, that's $650 right there. Why give away the motherboard? I understand that 1851 is at EOL but do they need to take such a hit as to basically give them away? I understand margins are higher if you sell more goods but this math doesn't seem to add it. I mean it must or they wouldn't do it but I can't decipher the logic behind it.
 
Thunder 57 said:
Last I checked it was also nowhere to be found on Amazon/Newegg. As in not even showing out of stock. B&H Photo does list it as out of stock. If they don't reappear this will be the biggest joke of a launch I can recall.

I want to believe they are just waiting on resupply/adjusting prices but why delist them if that's all it is?
Click to expand...
I agree. Crazy conspiracy ... Perhaps Nova Lake is closer than expected and Intel wants people to wait for a 250/270K, if they wait long enough and then Intel provides a Nova Lake date that isn't that far off people will hold off for that. So the rationale would be to prevent AMD sales.

But, as I've been told many times here, DIY CPU sales is basically a niche market, so it's the pre-builts that are more a factor driving Intel sales planning. Maybe all of the ARL Refresh parts are going there where margins are higher as you can "hide" the price of various components?
 
My pet theory is that they have certain volume commitments to OEMs for those parts and are having difficulty serving both the OEMs and DIY. DIY is probably a bigger margin on a per unit basis, but those volume contracts have teeth, and they can't afford not to fill them.
 
Hulk said:
I agree. Crazy conspiracy ... Perhaps Nova Lake is closer than expected and Intel wants people to wait for a 250/270K, if they wait long enough and then Intel provides a Nova Lake date that isn't that far off people will hold off for that. So the rationale would be to prevent AMD sales.

But, as I've been told many times here, DIY CPU sales is basically a niche market, so it's the pre-builts that are more a factor driving Intel sales planning. Maybe all of the ARL Refresh parts are going there where margins are higher as you can "hide" the price of various components?
Click to expand...
Well it may be surprising but OEMs want Raptor Lake they want something Cheap and good enough
 
For decades, Intel's foundry costs have primarily stemmed from excessively high factory operating costs, especially for non-cutting-edge processes like Intel 7/4/3. This is the main focus of LPT's efforts to reduce foundry costs. Intel will also be launching the more affordable Intel 12 series in collaboration with UMC, making operational cost control a top priority.
 
LightningZ71 said:
My pet theory is that they have certain volume commitments to OEMs for those parts and are having difficulty serving both the OEMs and DIY. DIY is probably a bigger margin on a per unit basis, but those volume contracts have teeth, and they can't afford not to fill them.
Click to expand...
Volume matters more than margin, (run full). However as long as we are speculating I will throw out there that Intel may have sold some of their TSMC N3 wafer capacity to Nvidia. Intel gets guaranteed money and Nvidia gets capacity for much higher margin chips with strong immediate demand. Intel is short some processors for a while but the margin isn’t great because they are paying TSMC for die. This might have been part of the $5 billion investment that Nvidia made in Intel.
 
oak8292 said:
Volume matters more than margin, (run full). However as long as we are speculating I will throw out there that Intel may have sold some of their TSMC N3 wafer capacity to Nvidia. Intel gets guaranteed money and Nvidia gets capacity for much higher margin chips with strong immediate demand. Intel is short some processors for a while but the margin isn’t great because they are paying TSMC for die. This might have been part of the $5 billion investment that Nvidia made in Intel.
Click to expand...
I doubt that tbh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top