A new PugetBench result shared by @Benchleaks on Twitter has revealed yet another Meteor Lake processor with Intel's new "Core Ultra" branding. This time the new naming scheme was seen on a mysterious new chip called the Intel Core Ultra 7 1003H.
We were introduced to Intel's new naming system a month ago, when Intel told us it would be rebranding in preparation for the upcoming Meteor Lake launch. Intel didn't officially say the new branding meant adding "Ultra" to the name, but we also saw an Ashes of Singularity listing showing a Meteor Lake processor called the Core Ultra 5 1003H — suggesting this was the re-branding Intel was referring to.
This new PugetBench result from PugetSystems is the second leak we've seen with the Core Ultra branding. We're not sure what "Ultra" implies, but it could be one of several names (e.g. "Ultra," "Pro," "Max," etc.) to further split SKUs between the entry-level, mid-range, and high-end markets.
The new PugetBench listing does imply that Intel will be keeping its 3/5/7/9 numbering system. The newly-spotted chip is the Core Ultra 7, and the chip we saw earlier was the Core Ultra 5.
According to the PugetBench benchmark results, the new Core Ultra 7 1003H appears to be a mobile SKU (if the letter H didn't give that away). The chip scored a mediocre 534.5 points in the PugetBench Lightroom Classic benchmark, which is just 32.5 points beyond another PugetBench system featuring a much older Intel Core i7-8665U mobile processor.
Obviously this benchmark score needs to be taken with a grain of salt, since the chip could be a pre-production sample with performance issues that still need to be worked out. Also, the Lightroom Classic benchmark usually isn't indicative of real-world performance, anyway.
Meteor Lake will serve as Intel's 14th-generation CPU architecture, sporting several major enhancements over Raptor Lake — including an upgraded process node called Intel 4, a new multi-tile design language, Low-Power E-Cores, AI enhancements, and more powerful Arc Alchemist integrated graphics.
Stay on the Cutting Edge
Join the experts who read Tom's Hardware for the inside track on enthusiast PC tech news — and have for over 25 years. We'll send breaking news and in-depth reviews of CPUs, GPUs, AI, maker hardware and more straight to your inbox.
Aaron Klotz is a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware US, covering news topics related to computer hardware such as CPUs, and graphics cards.
Will the name match the performance? I prefer the simple Core with out modifiers, but if there is a huge battery/power difference maybe warranted? I liked how they came back from the ugly Ice/Tiger lake naming (Adding a G1/G4/G7 graphic modifier).Reply
You shouldn't need a decoder ring to understand what a product generation and performance class is. Less is more
did they just ditch the # for a word?Reply
Yes, they just dropped the "i" letter for Ultra. This new naming/branding idea is super confusing for the end user though.Reply
I think the upcoming chips will be divided into three major categories (just my prediction, so it doesn't make much sense for now):
Intel Core 3/5/7 (maybe they can divide this into pro/max variants ?)
Intel Core Ultra 3/5/7
Intel Core Extreme 3/5/7So the low-end CPUs, like the non-K offerings, might be stacked into the base Core lineup/number 1. Non-K pro/max ? And then the Ultra chips will be designed for a more high-end audience and mainstream gamers, who want the best performance from their setups.
Lastly, the Extreme lineup, on the other hand, could be designed for overclockers/enthusiasts ? /end of prediction.
I'm holding out for the Core SuperUltraMegaExtremeDeluxe™!Reply
Also, that was my idea, so if Intel uses it, I'm suing! :LOL:
Instead of spending hundreds of millions of dollars on a marketing company to come up with a new naming idea this dumb, they could have just given the money to me. I'm really good at stupid ideas.... Just sayin'...Reply
I keep hoping this stuff is either a fever dream or someone messing with naming in benchmarks because it makes no sense. Intel could use a streamline in naming just because of how they've shifted mobile naming, but this is not the way to do it.Reply
I would love a return of the Extreme moniker, but maybe that's just wishful thinking.Reply
They are just following Apple's naming convention (<no buz name>, pro, max, ultra), only with way more complication because it's Intel.thestryker said:I keep hoping this stuff is either a fever dream or someone messing with naming in benchmarks because it makes no sense. Intel could use a streamline in naming just because of how they've shifted mobile naming, but this is not the way to do it.
I think you're right about the mimicking Apple with the naming convention, and due to SKU count they don't have a choice but to make it complicated.JamesJones44 said:They are just following Apple's naming convention (<no buz name>, pro, max, ultra), only with way more complication because it's Intel.
While desktop is typically pretty straightforward I've never quite grasped why they have such a problem with mobile naming. They've mostly got the right idea, but they need to pick either 4 digit or 5 digit as their choice and stick with it. I'd say they could identify number of P/E in the naming, but I have a feeling cores aren't going to be that simple going forward.