Sunday, February 26th 2023
Intel to Go Ahead with "Meteor Lake" 6P+16E Processor on the Desktop Platform?
Late last year, it was reported that Intel is skipping its upcoming "Meteor Lake" microarchitecture for the desktop platform, giving it a mobile-platform debut in late-2023, with "Arrow Lake" following on in 2024, which would address both platforms. In the interim, Intel was expected to release a "Raptor Lake Refresh" architecture for desktop in 2023. It turns out now, that both the "Raptor Lake Refresh" and "Meteor Lake" architectures are coming to desktop—we just don't know when.
Apparently, Intel will brazen it out against AMD with a maximum CPU core-count of just 6 performance cores and 16 efficiency cores possible for "Meteor Lake." It's just that both the P-cores and a E-cores get an IPC uplift with "Meteor Lake." The processor features up to six "Redwood Cove" P-cores with an IPC uplift over the current "Raptor Cove" cores; and introduce the new "Crestmont" E-cores. A lot will depend on the IPC uplift of the latter. Leaf_hobby, a reliable source with Intel leaks on social media, has some interesting details on the I/O capabilities of "Meteor Lake" on the desktop platform.
Apparently, "Meteor Lake-S" (the desktop variant), comes with a PCI-Express host interface of 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and 12 PCIe Gen 4 lanes from the processor. This works out to a PCI-Express 5.0 x16 PEG interface, one PCI-Express 5.0 x4 interface for the first CPU-attached NVMe SSD, one PCI-Express 4.0 x4 for a second CPU-attached NVMe SSD; and 8 PCI-Express 4.0 lanes toward the DMI chipset bus.
The companion Z890 chipset, the top desktop motherboard chipset option for "Meteor Lake-S," comes with an all-Gen 4 PCIe interface. It puts out 24 PCIe Gen 4 downstream lanes. With this platform, Intel could standardize Wi-Fi 7 (IEEE 802.11be), a new wireless networking standard with a theoretical maximum bandwidth of over 40 Gbps.
Lastly, there's the question of platform. "Meteor Lake-S" is unlikely to be supported on the current LGA1700 platform, and Intel is expected to debut the new Socket LGA1851 for "Meteor Lake-S" and its succeeding "Arrow Lake." The new socket could maintain cooler-compatibility with LGA1700, though.
Source:
leaf_hobby
Apparently, Intel will brazen it out against AMD with a maximum CPU core-count of just 6 performance cores and 16 efficiency cores possible for "Meteor Lake." It's just that both the P-cores and a E-cores get an IPC uplift with "Meteor Lake." The processor features up to six "Redwood Cove" P-cores with an IPC uplift over the current "Raptor Cove" cores; and introduce the new "Crestmont" E-cores. A lot will depend on the IPC uplift of the latter. Leaf_hobby, a reliable source with Intel leaks on social media, has some interesting details on the I/O capabilities of "Meteor Lake" on the desktop platform.
The companion Z890 chipset, the top desktop motherboard chipset option for "Meteor Lake-S," comes with an all-Gen 4 PCIe interface. It puts out 24 PCIe Gen 4 downstream lanes. With this platform, Intel could standardize Wi-Fi 7 (IEEE 802.11be), a new wireless networking standard with a theoretical maximum bandwidth of over 40 Gbps.
Lastly, there's the question of platform. "Meteor Lake-S" is unlikely to be supported on the current LGA1700 platform, and Intel is expected to debut the new Socket LGA1851 for "Meteor Lake-S" and its succeeding "Arrow Lake." The new socket could maintain cooler-compatibility with LGA1700, though.
128 Comments on Intel to Go Ahead with "Meteor Lake" 6P+16E Processor on the Desktop Platform?
Most of the complaints about the E-core are conjecture. Incidentally, I have also encountered hybrid-specific problems, but it is questionable whether those who complain about E-cores are really putting in the kind of load that runs into E-core-specific problems.
And disabling the e-cores are more likely to benefit you in gaming overall
So my points still stands.
As a gaming CPU,
Intel would be better off giving us 10/12 P-cores instead of 8+16
Having to stream your games, or if you are not a streamer, maybe run continuous virus checks or other tasks in the background just to justify the presence of E cores, is not exactly a good argument.
As for complains, well, when the new Xeons get out and you start seeing left and write what 16 P cores can do, you might understand why we SHOULD HAVE a problem seeing DESKTOP CPUs copying SMARTPHONE SOCs in having more than one type of cores. When in the future you will be reading in the specs 3 types of cores, like for example
"16 Core CPU: 2 Performance cores, 2 (mid range) M cores (maybe even older arch) and 12 E cores"
at the price of $300, you will understand. Intel waits for AMD to get in the game of E cores, with their Zen4c and then the consumers lose.
On the other hand, shareholders win, so I shouldn't complain.
and if i3 would use p+e cores, it would no longer be quad core... depending on how many e-cores you would give it, it could be 6 or 8 core unit
open your eyelids i guess
As I said,
I value these CPUs based on my own use cases.
And my use case works best on many equal cores.
E-cores are totally useless in my use cases.
At the time of the 13900K review, the processing speed of each application, at least in Windows 11, was as expected from typical benchmarks.
I give it low chance though.
- 8 real cores, doing work,
- With the 4x e-cores tied and bound to the web-browser, incl. all other background apps like messengers, skype and other micro-apps hogging resources etc.
Leave my 8x real cores alone. And the OS scheduler had better not put any real work onto those e-cores. And had better keep micro-hogs off my p-cores!But then, the scheduler needs rethinking. I don't want it doing dynamic load balancing - it needs to tie workloads to certain core-types.
Is that a waste of silicon? No more so than having silicon dedicated to sound, or to network, or to GPU, and not using it when you are not using it.
And possibly in corporate office desktops in their thousands to reduce power consumption.
But for workstation users - I see not benefit going beyond 4 e-cores to cover standby and background tasks with scheduler providing binding. All silicon and second processor sockets to p-cores! ie. keep e-cores off xeon thank you!
=====
6P + 16E is just nonsense and just marketing and PR
moar cores
lower power usage per core
show benchmarks?scratch thatAnyone that "needs" 6P cores would get better performance with 8P+8E than 6P+16E, but one says "16 cores" the other says "22 cores" and on retail shelves that might make a difference to Joey and Granddad.
- IPC +10%.
- Same max clock
- 30% reduction in power consumption per core
With this assumption, 6P+16E can be estimated to have the same MT performance as 13900K at 180W. Frankly I still doubt the existence of MTL-S, but if 6P+16E exists, it will be similar to the relationship between Rocket lake and Comet lake.
Your pragmatic approach of "Wait and see benchmarks" is the sensible approach.
Useful but not exactly enticing compared to last generation, no Ty Intel.