Chinese news outlet Benchlife claims to have insider information on Intel's upcoming Arrow Lake processors, which will battle it out with the best CPUs on the market. Intel will purportedly market the next-generation chips under the Core Ultra 200 series branding, with 13 alleged SKUs in the works.
After 15 years of utilizing the Core i series branding, Intel transitioned to the Core Ultra branding with Meteor Lake. Whether we like it or not, the new terminology for product branding is here to stay. Instead of expecting something like the 15th Generation, Arrow Lake will debut under the Core Ultra family, the first desktop chips to do so. The current rumor is that Intel will launch Arrow Lake as the Core Ultra 200 series since Meteor Lake has already taken the Core Ultra 100 series.
According to Benchlife, Intel has prepared 13 SKUs for Arrow Lake. The Core Ultra 200 K series (125W) and non-K series (65W) lineup reportedly feature three models each. There's a possibility that the non-K counterparts may have different model numbers, unlike in the past, when Intel just dropped the 'K' suffix from the model name. Meanwhile, the Core Ultra 200 F series (125W and 65W) and Core Ultra 200 T series check in with two and five SKUs, respectively.
Arrow Lake is rumored to feature a chiplet design, much like Meteor Lake, consisting of a compute tile that houses the processor cores. It's still a hybrid design with P-cores and E-cores, which have logically been upgraded since Raptor Lake. According to early speculation, Arrow Lake may combine Intel's Lion Cove P-cores with Skymont E-cores. If the rumors are true, Arrow Lake may not feature Hyper-Threading, so seeing how that affects performance will be intriguing.
Intel Core Ultra Arrow Lake Specifications
Processor | Cores / Threads (P+E) | PBP (W) |
---|---|---|
Core i9-14900K | 24 / 32 (8+16) | 125 |
Core Ultra 9 285K | 24 / 24 (8+16) | 125 |
Core i7-14700K | 20 / 28 (8+12) | 125 |
Core Ultra 7 265K | 20 / 20 (8 + 12) | 125 |
Core i5-14600K | 14 / 20 (6+8) | 125 |
Core Ultra 5 245K | 14 / 14 (6 + 8) | 125 |
*Specifications are unconfirmed.
Intel will likely release the Core Ultra 200 K-series processors first. That means we could see the introduction of the Core Ultra 9 285K, Core Ultra 7 265K, and Core Ultra 5 245K, which are likely the successor to the Core i9-14900K, Core i7-14700K, and Core i5-14600K, respectively. The core count for Arrow Lake is identical to their Raptor Lake Refresh predecessors. For instance, the Core i9-14900K and Core Ultra 9 285K offer 24 cores. The layout is the same, albeit the eight P-cores with 16 E-cores, as seen on the flagships.
However, the most noteworthy change is the lack of Hyper-Threading on Arrow Lake. So, while Arrow Lake delivers the same amount of cores as Raptor Lake Refresh, it doesn't have the same number of threads. Arrow Lake seems to have 25% to 30% fewer threads than Raptor Lake Refresh. The PBP (Processor Base Power) values for the Core Ultra 200 K series remain unchanged at 125W. We don't have the clock speeds for Arrow Lake yet, so it's impossible to project what kind of performance we can expect. If you believe in Intel's internal projections, Arrow Lake seemingly delivers up to 21% higher performance than Raptor Lake and up to 2X better iGPU performance.
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.
Arrow Lake will reside on new Intel motherboards with LGA1851 sockets and 800-series chipsets. Although the upcoming socket has 9% more pins than the existing LGA1700 socket, the dimensions didn't change, so you might be able to recycle your existing CPU cooler. Arrow Lake continues to leverage DDR5 memory, another piece of hardware you can carry over from an existing build.
Intel hasn't provided details on when Arrow Lake will hit the market. But we suspect it'll be sometime in the fourth quarter of the year since AMD's upcoming Zen 5 Ryzen processors are on track for launch before the year is over.
Zhiye Liu is a news editor and memory reviewer at Tom’s Hardware. Although he loves everything that’s hardware, he has a soft spot for CPUs, GPUs, and RAM.
-
It appears Intel did change the nomenclature, as the site claims. Because the numbers ending in "90", "70" and "60" series, would be replaced by "85", "65" and "45" instead. And non-K SKUs have slightly different Model numbers as well.Reply
So the full "rumored" lineup:
Core Ultra 9 285K (Intel Core i9-14900K Successor)Core Ultra 7 265K (Intel Core i7-14700K Successor)Core Ultra 5 245K (Intel Core i5-14600K Successor)Add these non-K parts in the table if you wish:
Core Ultra 9 275Core Ultra 7 255Core Ultra 5 240Most likely the last SKU is the Core Ultra 5 10c/10t (6+4) processor, 240/240F. This processor was recently spotted in a coreboot patch.
Total 13 processors as the site claims.
3 K
3 non-K
2 F
5 T, 35 Watts series.
Speculation:
Either Intel might opt for a bigger "8+16" die configuration/H0 for its top Core Ultra 9 & Ultra 7 SKUs, and use the 6+8 die/C0 for its Core Ultra 5 SKUs.
Or, another possibility is that all three "K" SKUs would be featuring the 8+16 die config, while the non-K SKUs could end up using the 6+8 die instead. -
TerryLaze I very much doubt that it won't have HTT it would make them be slower, or in the best case same speed if the new rentable units thing can make up for the loss, than the previous gen which would be very bad for sales.Reply
But then again intel had good sales in the past with minimal to no change in performance so who knows. -
Let me point this again. Copy/paste of my previous comment.Reply
Arrow Lake might not come with HyperThreading
Speaking of HT, I'm still wondering of Intel's patent which focuses on "Rentable Units" which they filed back last year. The patent calls it as “Instruction Processing Circuit“.
News went silent on this one though, so I'm not sure what to say.
https://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2023/0168898.html
IDK, if you go through the patent carefully, some details are mentioned. Here in the figure below, Intel has highlighted the difference between hyper-threading and Rentable Units on hybrid-core processors, assuming this is still in Intel's consideration for future client CPUs.
The densely shaded areas are P-cores while the lightly shaded ones represent the E-cores.
The Rentable Unit splits the first thread of incoming instructions into two partitions, assigning two different cores to each based on the complexity. There are two threads (1 and 2). The scheduler divides each into three partitions (A, B, C).
The first two partitions of 1 (1A, 1B) are executed on the P-core, while the third (1C) is handed to the E-core. Likewise, the first partition of thread 2 (2A) is processed by the E-core, while the other two (2B, 2C) are executed by the P-core.
https://i.imgur.com/h8OVtsH.jpeg
So it would appear that the Renting Unit is passing part of the work of the E-Core to the P-Core so that the second one does not find a part of the time stopped.
The patent also mentions that "Rentable Units" will use timers and counters to measure P/E core utilization and send parts of the thread to each core for processing. This inherently requires larger cache sizes, and Arrow Lake is already rumored to have 3 MB of L2 cache per core.
So basically, this appears to be a pseudo-multi-threaded solution that splits the first thread of incoming instructions into two partitions, assigning them to different cores based on complexity more like. -
TerryLaze
They will split every thread into complicated and not-so-complicated parts, this first thread thing in the description is just to make it easier to follow the explanation, and then cram them into as many p and e cores as they can to get the fastest result.Metal Messiah. said:So it would appear that the Renting Unit is passing part of the work of the E-Core to the P-Core so that the second one does not find a part of the time stopped.
The patent also mentions that "Rentable Units" will use timers and counters to measure P/E core utilization and send parts of the thread to each core for processing. This inherently requires larger cache sizes, and Arrow Lake is already rumored to have 3 MB of L2 cache per core.
So basically, this appears to be a pseudo-multi-threaded solution that splits the first thread of incoming instructions into two partitions, assigning them to different cores based on complexity more like.
It's a great concept for general computing and should provide a good boost to the user experience.
The problem for me is that reviews just run benchmarking programs and those are only complicated, from beginning to end, so I don't think that it will make enough of a difference since all cores e and p are already fully, or almost fully, used by those, I very much doubt that it will be able to make up the 20-30% that HTT provides to cinebench or similar. -
usertests
Background: MLID has been saying HT is dropped in Arrow Lake for a long time. He also leaked "rentable units" but has said they're not ready. Tom's Hardware has been running with the no HT narrative since at least January.TerryLaze said:The problem for me is that reviews just run benchmarking programs and those are only complicated, from beginning to end, so I don't think that it will make enough of a difference since all cores e and p are already fully, or almost fully, used by those, I very much doubt that it will be able to make up the 20-30% that HTT provides to cinebench or similar.
A decent IPC increase could counteract the loss of HT in the great benchmarking game. We've heard as low as 10%, but maybe it will be better. A multi-threaded performance regression is bad but not the end of the world. Most users wouldn't notice. Though we have to see how games will handle 8 P-core threads instead of 16.
If Arrow Lake increases power efficiency significantly (avoiding the current instability fiasco), has a better than 10% IPC increase and maybe a small clock increase, and 50% larger L2 cache as rumored, then it could end up looking decent. Also, the iGPU may be significantly improved from UHD 770, good for when office PCs hit the used market in 5+ years.
An Arrow Lake Refresh could add another 16 E-cores at the top, taking it to 8+32 and ensuring it has better multi-threading chart-topping potential than the 14900KS. -
Amdlova There's no reason at all to upgrade from a raptor lake to a new cpu from any brand.Reply
You can skip the dd5 generation and goes directly to ddr6 and pci 6 gen :) -
Eximo
I'm more curious if they are going to stick to DIMMs or consider CAMM2 or future versions for desktop. Getting to that point where the trace length and signal integrity are going to be very tricky to reach higher speeds.Amdlova said:There's no reason at all to upgrade from a raptor lake to a new cpu from any brand.
You can skip the dd5 generation and goes directly to ddr6 and pci 6 gen :)
Or will CPUs just keep piling on the cache to alleviate memory bandwidth problems. -
TerryLaze
IPC might have counteracted the loss if the benchmarks would run the same amount of threads but now it has to compensate for the missing HTT and fewer threads so less work send to the CPU in the first place and less for the scheduler and rentable units to choose from.usertests said:Background: MLID has been saying HT is dropped in Arrow Lake for a long time. He also leaked "rentable units" but has said they're not ready. Tom's Hardware has been running with the no HT narrative since at least January.
A decent IPC increase could counteract the loss of HT in the great benchmarking game. We've heard as low as 10%, but maybe it will be better. A multi-threaded performance regression is bad but not the end of the world. Most users wouldn't notice. Though we have to see how games will handle 8 P-core threads instead of 16.
If Arrow Lake increases power efficiency significantly (avoiding the current instability fiasco), has a better than 10% IPC increase and maybe a small clock increase, and 50% larger L2 cache as rumored, then it could end up looking decent. Also, the iGPU may be significantly improved from UHD 770, good for when office PCs hit the used market in 5+ years.
An Arrow Lake Refresh could add another 16 E-cores at the top, taking it to 8+32 and ensuring it has better multi-threading chart-topping potential than the 14900KS.
Games are one of the things were this might show a benefit, at least for games that still have a main thread, in those cases simpler parts of the code could be send to the e-cores allowing the p-core(s) to run more of the complex parts in the same time increasing overall performance. But those games only become fewer and fewer. -
alceryes
Good info. Thanks.Metal Messiah. said:It appears Intel did change the nomenclature, as the site claims. Because the numbers ending in "90", "70" and "60" series, would be replaced by "85", "65" and "45" instead. And non-K SKUs have slightly different Model numbers as well.
So the full "rumored" lineup:
Core Ultra 9 285K (Intel Core i9-14900K Successor)Core Ultra 7 265K (Intel Core i7-14700K Successor)Core Ultra 5 245K (Intel Core i5-14600K Successor)Add these non-K parts in the table if you wish:
Core Ultra 9 275Core Ultra 7 255Core Ultra 5 240Most likely the last SKU is the Core Ultra 5 10c/10t (6+4) processor, 240/240F. This processor was recently spotted in a coreboot patch.
Total 13 processors as the site claims.
3 K
3 non-K
2 F
5 T, 35 Watts series.
Speculation:
Either Intel might opt for a bigger "8+16" die configuration/H0 for its top Core Ultra 9 & Ultra 7 SKUs, and use the 6+8 die/C0 for its Core Ultra 5 SKUs.
Or, another possibility is that all three "K" SKUs would be featuring the 8+16 die config, while the non-K SKUs could end up using the 6+8 die instead.
They're getting rid of HT and supposedly using the rentable units. I'm not surprised.
I wonder if anyone has done performance testing on HT cores vs E-cores? I still think E-cores would win. HT cores are just pre-computation cache fillers. HT adds heat and power, and security vulnerabilities. Intel now thinks they can use that same heat and power elsewhere and gain a net positive in performance.
Personally, I have SMT off on my 7950X. I have no need for more than 16 cores and would rather keep my CPU cooler and able to clock higher in games (giving better performance vs having SMT enabled).
The one potential issue I see coming up is that, the more Intel fiddles with the execution order and core assignments for work, the more resources will be used for just this ordering of work. It's like they're making a super-HT that might allow for performance gains now but may become more of a mess down the road. Time will tell.