Intel's Arrow Lake chips may have lower clock speeds than previous CPUs — Core Ultra 9 QS achieves 5.7 GHz boost and 5.4 GHz across all P-cores

News
By
published

Arrow Lake QS sample reportedly improves boost clock speed by 100 MHz over the ES sample.

CPU Chip
CPU Chip (Image credit: Shutterstock)

Hardware leaker Jaykihn on X has leaked the alleged specifications for one of Intel's looming Arrow Lake processors. The clock speeds suggest that Arrow Lake, which will contend against the best CPUs, may not be as impressive as Intel's previous processors.

Jaykihn didn't reveal the exact model of the Arrow Lake chip. However, the 8+16 configuration points to the Core Ultra 9 285K or Core Ultra 9 275. The leaker highlighted the clock speed improvements from the engineering sample (ES) to the qualification sample (QS).

Qualification samples are some of the last units produced before a CPU goes into production. As a result, qualification samples are generally the most similar to their eventual production-ready counterparts. On the other hand, engineering samples are more similar to prototypes, which is why the clock speeds are significantly lower.

The ES chip seemingly operates with a maximum rated turbo frequency of 4.7 GHz for up to two P-cores, 4.5 GHz under an all-P-core workload, and 3.9 GHz for an all-E-core workload. Meanwhile, the QS chip reportedly runs at significantly higher clock speeds. The maximum turbo frequency is 5.7 GHz for single and dual P-core workloads. For all core workloads on the P-cores, the maximum rated boost is 5.4 GHz. Finally, the E-cores are rated at 4.6 GHz (when all the E-cores are fully loaded). The supported memory speed is seemingly DDR5-6400, a significant improvement over Raptor Lake and Raptor Lake Refresh's DDR5-5600.

Regardless, the clock speeds on the Arrow Lake-S qualification samples suggest that Arrow Lake will have a clock frequency regression compared to outgoing Intel architectures, Raptor Lake, and Raptor Lake Refresh. Intel's Core i9-13900KS and Core i9-14900K have a peak turbo clock of 6 GHz flat — 6.2 GHz on the Core i9-14900KS. Assuming the flagship Arrow Lake-S part comes with a 5.7 GHz turbo clock, Arrow Lake's flagship SKU will have a 300 MHz clock deficit compared to the Core i9-13900KS/14900K and a 500 MHz deficit compared to the Core i9-14900KS.

Nonetheless, clock speeds aren't the be-all and end-all of a processor. Remember that Arrow Lake wields Intel's Lion Cove and Skymont cores, which are substantial upgrades over the Raptor Cove and Gracemont combination on current Raptor Lake and Raptor Lake Refresh parts.

Arrow Lake is slated to launch in October, so we'll know soon enough if the new CPU architectures can mitigate the rumored lower clock speeds. More importantly, it will be exciting to see if Arrow Lake can rival AMD's existing Zen 5 chips.

See more CPUs News
Aaron Klotz
Aaron Klotz
Contributing Writer

Aaron Klotz is a contributing writer for Tom’s Hardware, covering news related to computer hardware such as CPUs, and graphics cards.

14 Comments Comment from the forums
  • King_V
    Agreed with the statement that clock speeds aren't the be-all and end-all.

    If these things run lower clock speeds, but still perform better, and/or consume less power, then it's a good thing. Intel's been pushing this "MOAR HERTZES" for a bit too long, now. 12th gen was a nice step for them, but then they went brute force again after that.

    I welcome this step.
    Reply
  • Amdlova
    When intel see the amd Benchmarks... nah downclock the cpus make it overclockable again..
    Before amd fiasco they say will have 100w less than the old generation now? 150w less
    Reply
  • TheSecondPower
    This is hardly surprising. The 14k series is more or less 10nm+++++, a process which has had a chance to become very tuned for high clock speeds. It wasn't until 10nm+++ 10ESF Intel 7—about the fourth generation—that Intel's N7 competitor came to desktops. Candidates for manufacturing Arrow Lake-S include Intel 20A (brand new), Intel 3 (Intel 4+, about 9 months old), and TSMC N3B (N3E+, about 10 months old). It's doubtful that any of these could achieve the same clock speeds. But any will support more transistors at less power.
    Reply
  • usertests
    AMD hoping for a small enough increase to keep the lead with Zen 5 X3D (and fixed drivers).
    Reply
  • JRStern
    I'm in no freaking hurry. I don't need seriously more power than my ten year old desktop with 3.9ghz turbo but I'd like it fanless with integrated graphics, that Panther Lake chips sound good to me so far. Hopefully a few more cores, especially the e-cores, help keep power down and performance up. And the 20a, 18a, whatever, get the same performance and more for less power. Intel has been a power pig for way too long.
    Reply
  • The Historical Fidelity
    King_V said:
    Agreed with the statement that clock speeds aren't the be-all and end-all.

    If these things run lower clock speeds, but still perform better, and/or consume less power, then it's a good thing. Intel's been pushing this "MOAR HERTZES" for a bit too long, now. 12th gen was a nice step for them, but then they went brute force again after that.

    I welcome this step.
    Looks like Intel realized pushing way too much voltage through their cores to get to that 6.0 ghz number will bring nothing but pain and suffering 6 months after release.
    Reply
  • The Historical Fidelity
    TheSecondPower said:
    This is hardly surprising. The 14k series is more or less 10nm+++++, a process which has had a chance to become very tuned for high clock speeds. It wasn't until 10nm+++ 10ESF Intel 7—about the fourth generation—that Intel's N7 competitor came to desktops. Candidates for manufacturing Arrow Lake-S include Intel 20A (brand new), Intel 3 (Intel 4+, about 9 months old), and TSMC N3B (N3E+, about 10 months old). It's doubtful that any of these could achieve the same clock speeds. But any will support more transistors at less power.
    It’s interesting that this QS sample and AMD’s 9950x both top out at 5.7 GHz.

    Also, call me thick headed but I have a big problem with Intel adopting a 10x measurement that is NOT an official SI measurement. Angstroms are rarely used in anything other than 3D conformation analyses of protein structures and atomic layouts. Let’s just call Intel 20A what it is, Intel 2….the semiconductor industry went from micrometers to nanometers which is a 1000x or 3 factor step, the logical step after this is picometers, not a 1 factor 10x half step like angstrom. Feels like Intel marketing had something to do with adopting this non-SI unit to fool laymen consumers . “Oh look Intel is in the Ångström era, Intel 20A must be better than TSMC’s old era 2nm.”
    Reply
  • froggx
    The Historical Fidelity said:
    It’s interesting that this QS sample and AMD’s 9950x both top out at 5.7 GHz.

    Also, call me thick headed but I have a big problem with Intel adopting a 10x measurement that is NOT an official SI measurement. Angstroms are rarely used in anything other than 3D conformation analyses of protein structures and atomic layouts. Let’s just call Intel 20A what it is, Intel 2….the semiconductor industry went from micrometers to nanometers which is a 1000x or 3 factor step, the logical step after this is picometers, not a 1 factor 10x half step like angstrom. Feels like Intel marketing had something to do with adopting this non-SI unit to fool laymen consumers . “Oh look Intel is in the Ångström era, Intel 20A must be better than TSMC’s old era 2nm.”

    It's probably because once you hit 1 Angstrom you're below the atomic radius of silicon which is a hard limit on process node shrinks using our current physics. Realistically more like 2 Angstroms due to Van Der Waals forces. Doubt you can even go that small, but quantum physics and semiconductor manufacture aren't my specialties.

    Something about 200ish picometers as a hard stop doesn't look that nice from a marketing view after everyone got used to sizes like 3nm.
    Reply
  • The Historical Fidelity
    froggx said:
    It's probably because once you hit 1 Angstrom you're below the atomic radius of silicon which is a hard limit on process node shrinks using our current physics. Realistically more like 2 Angstroms due to Van Der Waals forces. Doubt you can even go that small, but quantum physics and semiconductor manufacture aren't my specialties.

    Something about 200ish picometers as a hard stop doesn't look that nice from a marketing view after everyone got used to sizes like 3nm.
    But a “1A” process is not 1 Ångström in size. It’s much bigger. For instance, the smallest features for a 2nm process is actually 20nm in size and 1nm is 16nm according to the IEEE. So we will be well into the picometer naming scheme before we hit the silicon monolayer theoretical limit.
    Reply
  • thestryker
    JRStern said:
    I'm in no freaking hurry. I don't need seriously more power than my ten year old desktop with 3.9ghz turbo but I'd like it fanless with integrated graphics, that Panther Lake chips sound good to me so far.
    If Intel releases Skymont based parts as a replacement for ADL-N these could be perfect for that application. Passive boxes with sufficient cooling don't tend to happen for the full fledged laptop parts from my experience. My passive N305 based router box does pull up to 29W and doesn't overheat so it'd certainly be possible though.
    Reply