Intel's Meteor Lake Allegedly Spotted in Laptop Benchmark
Dell is apparently testing a next-generation laptop.
A Dell Inspiron 15 laptop allegedly based on Intel's upcoming 14th Generation Core 'Meteor Lake' processor has been spotted by @Komachi_Ensaka in the UserBenchmark database. The chip apparently has 12 cores.
Intel's next-generation Meteor Lake laptop processors are several months away, so, unsurprisingly, large PC makers are hard at work testing their machines based on the new CPU. The U3E1 processor allegedly has 12 cores, can process 16 threads (which implies a 4P + 8E configuration), has a base clock of 1.20 GHz and a turbo clock of 0.55 GHz. This is obviously an error or a peculiarity of this pre-production CPU sample.
Given the odd clocks, it does not make any sense to even try drawing any concrete conclusions about the performance of this product (even if the UserBenchmark app could actually provide detailed test results).
However, it is not the frequency configuration that grabs our attention. Surprisingly, the system spotted in the UserBenchmark database reports itself as the Dell Inspiron 15 5330. This product actually exists, yet it is based on Intel's 12th Generation Core 'Alder Lake' processor, and while it is not uncommon to use previous-generation motherboards and chassis to test upcoming CPUs, we have serious doubts that Intel's Meteor Lake is pin-to-pin compatible with Alder lake as the two are very different.
Intel's next-generation Meteor Lake CPU will feature a unique multi-chiplet design where each chiplet will be manufactured using a different process technology, a first for Intel's client offerings. The processor will consist of four distinct tiles, including a compute tile (CPU cores) produced using Intel 4 process technology (also known as 7nm EUV), a graphics tile built by TSMC (likely using its N3 or N5 node), an SoC tile, and an I/O tile. These tiles will be interconnected by Intel's Foveros 3D technology.
While Intel's Meteor Lake may share its form factor with existing mobile CPUs in a bid to make it easier to produce PCs based on the processor, it is unlikely that it is pin-to-pin compatible with Alder Lake since the two products should have very different voltages and power supply circuity.
While it is completely plausible that Dell is testing a 12-core Meteor Lake processor and that CPU has a 4P + 8E configuration, we are not sure that this UserBenchmark listing correctly illustrates one of these processors. To that end, take all the information (or rather lack of it, truth to be told) with a grain of salt.
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Anton Shilov is a contributing writer at Tom’s Hardware. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.
-
cyrusfox
It is a better UI for data conglomeration for all parts of the system then passmark or any of the other generic compare x vs y part websites out there that always come up in the first 5 results on Google. Yes the grading/ranking system can be somewhat arbitrary (Imparting much more worth to single thread than some think it deserves) but as long as you go into it knowing you shouldn't necessarily compare AMD vs Intel (I think GPU is more fair), its still a great resource and its testing tool is light weight. I particularly like how it compares SSD and the multiple metrics it gives at your fingertips.tamalero said:People still use userbenchmark? XD
Crazy homerism aside, I still like the site and find it extremely useful when spot checking parts I don't have direct experience with. -
The Historical Fidelity I am running out of salt grains thanks to all these Tom’s hardware articles lol. It seems I have to take a grain with every article I read nowadays hahaha.Reply -
tamalero
Maybe, but it was proved over and over and over how the owner of that site has blatant favoritism for Intel.cyrusfox said:It is a better UI for data conglomeration for all parts of the system then passmark or any of the other generic compare x vs y part websites out there that always come up in the first 5 results on Google. Yes the grading/ranking system can be somewhat arbitrary (Imparting much more worth to single thread than some think it deserves) but as long as you go into it knowing you shouldn't necessarily compare AMD vs Intel (I think GPU is more fair), its still a great resource and its testing tool is light weight. I particularly like how it compares SSD and the multiple metrics it gives at your fingertips.
Crazy homerism aside, I still like the site and find it extremely useful when spot checking parts I don't have direct experience with.
Even to the point of changing their metrics when AMD gave Intel a resounding paddling in almost all fronts.
So it does not matter if they have "multiple metrics" if they are biased as hell. -
cyrusfox
Its still a useful tool for comparison regardless of how abhorrent the owner/founder is. Especially because most leaks seem to be using the ubiquitous userbenchmark tool, the download weighs in at 510KB and auto test everything and uploads without even a request... unlike passmark which weighs in at 65MB and makes you confirm you want to upload at the end.tamalero said:Maybe, but it was proved over and over and over how the owner of that site has blatant favoritism for Intel.
Even to the point of changing their metrics when AMD gave Intel a resounding paddling in almost all fronts.
So it does not matter if they have "multiple metrics" if they are biased as hell.
its easy enough to remove the bias, just compare AMD to AMD, or Intel to Intel. I don't notice the bias bleeding to other metrics like GPU or storage.