Intel addresses Arrow Lake blunder: 'We needed to build back our reputation' — says Arrow Lake Refresh's low price a key first step, laying the groundwork for Nova Lake

Core Ultra 250K Plus and 270K Plus on a box
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

Intel knows that Arrow Lake dealt a huge blow to its reputation among gamers and enthusiasts. The underperforming chips sporting a radically different architecture didn’t make the cut in games, underperforming in some titles compared to even last-gen parts, and although application performance is competitive, it isn’t enough to earn a spot among the best CPUs. Tom’s Hardware asked Intel’s Nish Neelalojanan, senior director of product management for Intel’s Client Computing Group, about the low prices of the newer Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and 250K Plus at Computex 2026, and he told us the prices were chosen to help build back Intel’s reputation.

We’ve presented this same question to Intel multiple times before, and always with the same response. Fundamentally, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus undermines Intel’s existing Arrow Lake range. It’s faster in games and applications compared to the Core Ultra 9 285K, and it costs half the price. So, we pressed Neelalojanan further about this issue in an attempt to understand why exactly Intel decided to target such aggressive pricing.

“From an enthusiast perspective, it was... we needed to build back our reputation. I am sure you would agree with that, and this was, hey, [we’re] making sure we are providing value to the gamers, and we start with Arrow Lake Refresh, and we have a very strong roadmap to come,” Neelalojanan told me. “In terms of desktop, that was an effort to [say] ‘let's go with value focus first, and that will help us then gain confidence.’ I mean, this is obvious... I'm not saying anything which you already don't know.”

Latest Videos From

The next step in that roadmap is Nova Lake, which is a generation Intel has been talking about for quite some time. The company has reiterated that Nova Lake is set to launch at the end of 2026, but it’s not clear if we’ll have actual products by then. Speaking to a different Intel representative, they told me that demand for CPUs spans everywhere from the data center down to mainstream laptops, and that the company sometimes has meetings on a daily basis to address these changes. The rapidly evolving market around CPUs could push Nova Lake out to next year, but, at the moment, Nova Lake is still slated for the end of the year.

It seems like each new generation that isn’t a refresh from Intel is some make-or-break moment, but outside of the hype, Nova Lake has a lot of interesting murmurs surrounding it. First and most obvious is bLLC. We’ve heard continual rumors that Intel is working on a “big last-level cache” in a bid to finally combat AMD’s X3D chips, and apparently, that will show up with Nova Lake. Intel hasn’t confirmed that’s the case yet, of course.

Nova Lake has a different context compared to the launch of Arrow Lake Refresh, as well. My conversations with Intel point to a reset in the company’s enthusiast roadmap, as it clearly knows the damage Arrow Lake did to its reputation. We’re still far off from Nova Lake pricing discussions, but given the aggressive rollout of Arrow Lake Refresh, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Intel undercut AMD across the spectrum.

Neelalojanan certainly implies that’s the case. We’ll need to wait until Intel has more to share on Nova Lake, which hopefully we will hear about soon. Again, the company has said Nova Lake is on track for the end of 2026, so barring a delay announcement, that’s when we expect to see the chips in the flesh.

Google Preferred Source

Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.

TOPICS
Jake Roach
Senior Analyst, CPUs

Jake Roach is the Senior CPU Analyst at Tom’s Hardware, writing reviews, news, and features about the latest consumer and workstation processors.

  • Gururu
    Well I think the biggest issue is that AMD realized that every website was testing with a 4090/5090. They then proceeded to make a CPU that worked extra good and only extra good with GPUS of that tier. To this day, still no one admits that.
    Reply
  • psyconz
    Gururu said:
    Well I think the biggest issue is that AMD realized that every website was testing with a 4090/5090. They then proceeded to make a CPU that worked extra good and only extra good with GPUS of that tier. To this day, still no one admits that.
    Oh, ok. I thought the X3Ds vastly improved 1% lows and frame drops on any GPU. Not just the high-end.
    Reply
  • King_V
    Gururu said:
    Well I think the biggest issue is that AMD realized that every website was testing with a 4090/5090. They then proceeded to make a CPU that worked extra good and only extra good with GPUS of that tier. To this day, still no one admits that.
    This doesn't seem in the slightest bit accurate. Care to provide evidence? Because it sounds like you're saying what amounts to "AMD made CPUs that work extra-good ONLY with GPUs that don't hold back the CPU."
    Reply
  • Gururu
    psyconz said:
    Oh, ok. I thought the X3Ds vastly improved 1% lows and frame drops on any GPU. Not just the high-end.
    That would be something good to know, if sites actually tested new CPUs with lower end GPUs.
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    Gururu said:
    Well I think the biggest issue is that AMD realized that every website was testing with a 4090/5090. They then proceeded to make a CPU that worked extra good and only extra good with GPUS of that tier. To this day, still no one admits that.
    I have hot takes, but damn. This is a very wrong hot take.

    --

    In regards to the news: good to know Robert Hallock is setting the record straight on the minds of the Intel people. They need to rebuild instead of just "fake it 'till you make it". I'll keep saying it: AMD lost a lot when they let Mr. Hallock walk away.

    I'm hopeful Nova Lake will be good both CPU and overall platform. Let's see some good competition, Intel.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • Gururu
    -Fran- said:
    I have hot takes, but damn. This is a very wrong hot take.
    Just admit it.
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    Gururu said:
    Just admit it.
    Admit what exactly? You're just telegraphing anyone that knows about CPUs you have no idea what you're talking about here.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • TechieTwo
    You mean Intel was selling a turd with lipstick on it? Perish the thought. Intel is the best... and they can do no wrong. Just ask them. Their products are so good that they have been convicted on multiple continents for violation of trade law for intimidation, retaliation, coercion and bribes to prevent a level marketplace where AMD could steal their lunch via superior products.
    Reply
  • Gururu
    -Fran- said:
    Admit what exactly? You're just telegraphing anyone that knows about CPUs you have no idea what you're talking about here.

    Regards.
    Admit that an X3D paired with anything less than a 5090 has horrible diminishing returns.
    Reply
  • thestryker
    I know ARL is the proverbial whipping boy, but I think RPL degradation and the piss poor response followed by ARL delivering nothing new for gamers was the real problem here. There's nothing actually wrong with ARL anymore than there is with Zen 5 being a minimal improvement over Zen 4. The top gaming buyers got the Zen 5 X3D parts which are a big deal though and Intel has nothing to compete with those period.

    The cynic in me says that the ARL refresh pricing is more about moving the silicon coming from TSMC than it is their reputation (this is not to say it doesn't help reputationally). I have zero doubt that NVL will carry a premium price if they can beat AMD across the board.
    Reply