Intel's promising upcoming Nova Lake-S lineup reportedly includes an iGPU-focused SKU with 12 Xe3P cores — new leak claims a midrange 16-core CPU with powerful integrated graphics is in the works

News
By published

All other Nova Lake SKUs feature only 2 Xe3 cores.

Intel 12th Generation Alder Lake CPU
(Image credit: Intel)

As we get closer to the expected launch of Intel's upcoming desktop CPU family, Nova Lake, rumors and leaks about the next-gen lineup are only intensifying. The latest report comes from reliable tipster Jaykihn, who's claiming that a special 16-core Nova Lake-S SKU is in the works featuring an iGPU rocking 12 Xe3P cores. The chip will purportedly require two VccGT VRM phases, pinning it as powerful, high-performance silicon on the graphics front.

With 12 Xe3P cores, this rumored SKU would compete with AMD's Ryzen G-series APUs instead of the mainline Ryzen family, and would mark Intel going beyond basic display functionality, giving budget-conscious gamers an affordable entry point to run modern titles. Of course, DDR5 RAM is still overpriced, and integrated graphics are entirely reliant on system memory, so not needing a discrete GPU may not turn out to be as much of a relief.

Latest Videos From

Panther Lake already debuted Xe3 graphics, showing a truly generational leap in performance. Naturally, Intel will be looking to build on its performance with Xe3P. Nova Lake has been rumored to use a combination of Xe3 and Xe3P so far, reserving the Xe3 architecture for the iGPU while delegating Xe3P to the display engine. Some mobile variants are reported to use Xe3P across both.

Therefore, having 12 Xe3P cores on an NVL-S desktop CPU would be a big deal. It's a rumor reminiscent of the reportedly cancelled Nova Lake-AX lineup that was supposed to pack a whopping 48 Xe3 cores and 28 CPU cores. Perhaps, Intel still wants to explore the high-performance APU segment, but with a more controlled approach that specifically targets the budget market — someone buying a flagship CPU is likely going to pair it with a discrete GPU anyway.

Lastly, prior leaks have teased that Intel is putting bLLC on some of its higher-end Nova Lake SKUs. Since the lineup tops out at 52 cores with dual-tile variants, this 16-core SKU is purely midrange, making it unlikely to carry any extra cache. That being said, bLLC will help extract even more performance out of those integrated graphics. AMD hasn't created an X3D chip with a Ryzen G-series-level iGPU either, so Intel could be the first to leverage this formula.

All of this is speculation, as even Jaykihn calls the leaked specs "preliminary," which means they're subject to change. The uncertainty is only exacerbated by the current global climate. But we know that the Xe3 architecture is impressive; in some cases, it beats the Radeon 890M (inside Ryzen AI 9 HX 370) with 16 RDNA 3.5 CUs. In contrast, AMD has only used a Radeon 860M with 8 CUs for its desktop Ryzen AI 400 APU lineup, so Nova Lake-S has a clear gap waiting for it.

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.

Hassam Nasir
Hassam Nasir
Contributing Writer

Hassam Nasir is a die-hard hardware enthusiast with years of experience as a tech editor and writer, focusing on detailed CPU comparisons and general hardware news. When he’s not working, you’ll find him bending tubes for his ever-evolving custom water-loop gaming rig or benchmarking the latest CPUs and GPUs just for fun.

19 Comments Comment from the forums
  • usertests
    The desktop APU value proposition can be dubious, but sometimes cheap or refurbished pre-builts can help. Refurb OmniDesks with 8700G / 32 GB / 1 TB have been sub-$600. If this is real and Intel gets this into OEM PCs, I'll be watching for it.

    If Xe3P is significantly better than Xe3, this part is potentially 2x the GPU performance of Strix Point, with an even larger lead over the 8700G. Maybe it's between the performance of an RTX 3050 8GB and GTX 1080. With a better set of features than pre-RTX cards.

    We probably won't see this for at least a year.
    Reply
  • ezst036
    It would be awesome if Intel capitalizes off of all of the buzz that's going around about Nova Lake and also changes its future policy toward having sockets that last longer than just tick tock.

    That would really be a nice sparkly bow on the present.
    Reply
  • beyondlogic
    If intel and AMD want better apu adoption put it in midrange to low end

    For amd Ryzen 3 and 5
    Intel i3 to i5.

    If a cpu costs so much that you can get a CPU and GPU cheaper it becomes pointless.

    I'd be curious to see a Ryzen 5 with more GPU heavy should be doable as your making more space for GPU portion by going from 8 to 6 cores
    Reply
  • Notton
    I would hope the desktop variant uses the I/O die with more PCIe lanes.
    Depending on total price, it might be a good APU to pair for LSFG dual GPU.
    Reply
  • thestryker
    usertests said:
    The desktop APU value proposition can be dubious
    I think most of the problem here has been due to the sacrifices made to get the integrated graphics. For AMD it has been a combination of the cache cut, lower clocks, less PCIe and having to buy the most expensive CPU to get the best graphics.

    Unfortunately this looks like Intel may be following AMD on the pricing side. The NVL SKU leak has 4/8/4 being a U7 part which means this likely would be as well. It won't be faster than the U5 6/12/4 for gaming and I can't imagine it will be cheaper. So even if there are no other sacrifices it doesn't seem likely to make sense to buy unless you're buying it as DIY NUC (or OEM system as you suggest).

    While I know Intel isn't going to put a big Graphics Tile with the big Compute Tile if a part like this was priced where the lowest K SKUs usually are I could see more potential. Buyers would know that spending less money wouldn't get them more CPU performance so the choice becomes graphics vs CPU at the same price.
    Reply
  • usertests
    thestryker said:
    While I know Intel isn't going to put a big Graphics Tile with the big Compute Tile if a part like this was priced where the lowest K SKUs usually are I could see more potential. Buyers would know that spending less money wouldn't get them more CPU performance so the choice becomes graphics vs CPU at the same price.
    CPU performance is what I'm least worried about. 4P + 8E of the latest cores (bit higher IPC than Raptor/Arrow Lake) should be good enough for almost all games, and fine for everything else.

    If it's outperforming the Arc B390 iGPU from being upgraded to Xe3P/Celestial, maybe it could be credibly equivalent to $150-200 dGPUs. But you bring the expensive DDR5 and speed can affect performance. Maybe a bit less than usual if it has a large L2 cache (Arc B390 has 16 MiB L2, which is what I'm calling "large").
    Reply
  • thestryker
    usertests said:
    CPU performance is what I'm least worried about. 4P + 8E of the latest cores (bit higher IPC than Raptor/Arrow Lake) should be good enough for almost all games, and fine for everything else.
    The CPU is the important part for the long term value proposition. If I'm building a system and the choice is for $250 I can get a good integrated GPU or better CPU performance that's one thing. If the choice is $250 for a better CPU or $350 for better integrated graphics and worse CPU that equation looks significantly worse. Spending more money like that just for better integrated graphics really doesn't make sense unless you're doing it for the form factor.
    Reply
  • IntelUser2000
    usertests said:
    If Xe3P is significantly better than Xe3, this part is potentially 2x the GPU performance of Strix Point, with an even larger lead over the 8700G. Maybe it's between the performance of an RTX 3050 8GB and GTX 1080. With a better set of features than pre-RTX cards.
    I had a GTX 1080 with Pentium Gold G6400(10th Gen). On Expedition 33, Pantherlake's 12 Xe3 cores already run equal or better than my system.

    So Xe3P would be significantly faster than the GTX 1080, considering desktop variants are unrestrained in power management and TDP thus perform even better.
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    This is actually interesting. I hope Intel gets the APU balance right.

    Also, re: APUs are not really "good value". They have never been designed to really replace a GPU with their iGPU and Strix Halo is just the very first commercial unit we've seen making a proper jump trying to minimise all the obvious issues with stronk GPU and weak IMC or memory bandwidth. Their "value" has always been in small builds. And no, "shoe boxes"* are not "small". Think RaspberryPi sized competitors; bigger than, but around that ballpark. That is where they are unbeatable. Just look at the Steam Deck and most handhelds of the last several years. So, in short, this is the main takeaway: APUs are not meant to replace low entry budget builds, but enable truly compact HTPC and custom miniature PCs. At best, in "normal" sized PCs, act as a stopgap or in-between a CPU+GPU pairing. Yes, you can always get a better "performance" level from buying used or new, but heavily discounted CPUs with any GPU, but that comes with tradeoffs, not in the monetary cost area.

    Anyway, going back to Intel's news: if they get me a very nice APU, I'll give it a try inside my HTPC.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • usertests
    IntelUser2000 said:
    I have a GTX 1080 with Pentium Gold G6400(10th Gen). On Expedition 33, Pantherlake's 12 Xe3 cores already run equal or better than my system.

    So Xe3P would be significantly faster than the GTX 1080, considering desktop variants are unrestrained in power management and TDP thus perform even better.
    I was guessing using TPU. I may have undershot it, but if Arc B390 is considered slightly behind RTX 4050 (laptop), I don't think it's faster than a GTX 1080. Also, is there a CPU bottleneck with that dual-core?

    We don't know what Xe3P will bring over Xe3, but +20% should be enough to get them to around double Strix Point's performance. Any more than that would be great. AMD hasn't even committed to releasing a desktop APU with Radeon 890M, their best for now is still the 8700G with Radeon 780M.
    thestryker said:
    The CPU is the important part for the long term value proposition. If I'm building a system and the choice is for $250 I can get a good integrated GPU or better CPU performance that's one thing. If the choice is $250 for a better CPU or $350 for better integrated graphics and worse CPU that equation looks significantly worse. Spending more money like that just for better integrated graphics really doesn't make sense unless you're doing it for the form factor.
    It could take a long time before the 4+8+4/16t CPU becomes a real gaming bottleneck. Just look at the happy Pentium Gold G6400 user.

    The biggest problem I see is that even if this (hypothetical) Nova Lake-G could perform like a $200 dGPU today, all it would take is one good new budget GPU in 2027 to knock it out of the park. AMD RDNA5 "AT4" with 12 GB LPDDR5X could do it. Or an RTX 6050. If Intel bothers to launch a low-end discrete Celestial GPU, that could do it.
    Reply