Leaked Intel Nova Lake product list has three 'BFC' chips with up to 144MB of game-boosting L3 cache — next-gen CPU lineup reportedly takes shape with up to 28 cores in Core Ultra 9 4970K BFC

Raptor Lake CPU
Raptor Lake CPU (Image credit: Intel)

A rumored SKU table for Intel's upcoming Nova Lake desktop CPUs has surfaced, showcasing seven models that will (presumably) make up Intel's initial NVL-S lineup. The list includes three models with the "BFC" tag, which seems to be Intel's branding for bLLC, or big last level cache. It's been heavily rumored to show up with Nova Lake, countering AMD's assault on the best CPUs for gaming with its X3D chips.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
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.

  • Vicecrow
    Yeah it's time to bring the BFG to the table!
    Reply
  • usertests
    The 32-EU count here likely comes out to 4 Xe cores (each core has eight matrix and vector ALUs).
    It should be 2 Xe3 cores. I think they were increased to 16 "EUs" each.

    Vicecrow said:
    Yeah it's time to bring the BFG to the table!
    I don't think Intel could have come up with a better name than "BFC" for their "X3D" competitor.

    They will get free advertising from memes and explainer articles.
    Reply
  • bigdragon
    4000-series Intel CPUs? Ivy Bridge returns!

    I do find this lineup to be mildly confusing given how similar each of the chips are. I'm sure it'll make more sense once speeds and prices are applied. I wish my 270k+ had a bigger cache. I've been thrilled with its performance so far!
    Reply
  • thestryker
    usertests said:
    I don't think Intel could have come up with a better name than "BFC" for their "X3D" competitor.
    Ressurecting the Extreme Edition moniker would have been an infinitely better option. They also already have "S" which they could easily pivot to using since I doubt we're going to see binned silicon like that has been again.
    usertests said:
    They will get free advertising from memes and explainer articles.
    They have to come up with an official name as well though. No matter what naming convention was chosen the explainer articles would happen. So that leaves the memes which could easily blow up in their faces if they don't beat Zen 6 X3D in performance.
    bigdragon said:
    Ivy Bridge
    Haswell!

    While I don't dislike the 4 digit naming scheme I wish they'd just left things alone. Laptops are keeping the 3 digit naming, but the HX will shift to 4 digit making the move even sillier.
    bigdragon said:
    I do find this lineup to be mildly confusing given how similar each of the chips are.
    I know why they're doing it, it's a 65W part, but calling the 6P bLLC part a U9 when there's an 8P bLLC part as U7 sucks. Doubly so when the rest of the 6P parts are under the U5 designation.
    Reply
  • SkyBill40
    Guess Intel is finally tired of having their faces punched and their lunch stolen by AMD, eh?
    Reply
  • usertests
    SkyBill40 said:
    Guess Intel is finally tired of having their faces punched and their lunch stolen by AMD, eh?
    X3D leading the benchmark charts over and over was indeed intolerable for Intel. Unless something goes terribly wrong, they will leapfrog past the 9850X3D, since they'll have (up to) 144 MiB of L3 cache per tile instead of 96 MiB, IPC improvements, the return of AVX-512 (relevant for some emulators like RPCS3), etc.

    And since they're rumored to be making a large planar die with the cache, completely separate from the non-bLLC offering, it looks to me like they are throwing money at the problem to make it go away.
    Reply
  • Vicecrow
    I'am waiting for ddr6. Maybe update to raptor lake next and keep my ddr4 4000 a little longer.
    Reply
  • thestryker
    me-three said:
    Not sure why Intel would care about winning gaming benchmarks at this point, when gaming is a distant afterthought for every chip vendor.
    In what world is gaming a distant afterthought for client parts?

    Gaming is the only thing Intel has not been able to outperform AMD on since the launch of the 7800X3D (Jan 2023). They've gone back and forth on everything else (aside from AVX512) throughout the generations which have launched since. Yet if you look at the general sentiment it's that Intel isn't competitive despite it really only being a narrow portion which isn't. This is simply because gaming is a primary driver for client sales to individual buyers.

    If your argument is that companies are focused on enterprise sales this is certainly true, but Intel's enterprise and client have an extremely narrow overlap. This isn't like AMD where client and enterprise use the same manufacturing nodes and has an overlap in CCD. Intel bought TSMC N2P wafer allocation which needs to be used, and currently none of their enterprise CPUs use TSMC nodes for any portion of them. That means they need to be looking at client parts for this manufacturing: PTL only uses an advanced TSMC node for the big Graphics Tile and ARL uses N3B so it would need to be retooled which would be a stupid waste of resources when they could make NVL instead.

    I don't particularly expect NVL-S to be a full SKU lineup, and it seems likely that bLLC will be relatively low volume, but this doesn't make it pointless. These parts aren't going to be aimed at the general market since that's been the hardest hit which is probably why the leaks have indicated bLLC are the launch processors. There's always a market for the fastest hardware and chances are these will fit that bill which means they'll sell.
    me-three said:
    Yes, the "BFC" moniker implies a gaming angle. But wasn't X3D more than sufficient to meet gaming needs of even 5090 gamers? Was there a big outcry for more CPU oomph, like for GPUs?
    So what you're saying is that this is a market Intel should simply cede to AMD then?
    Reply
  • factchecker
    Too little too late for Intel. The damage has been done
    Reply
  • TerryLaze
    factchecker said:
    Too little too late for Intel. The damage has been done
    No damage is ever done....
    Not to nvidia with burning down cards
    not to amd with exploding CPUs
    not to intel with nuclear reactor power draw.
    (And many many other examples for all of them)

    Nobody cares, if it's the best product at the moment then people will buy it no matter what.
    Reply