Monday, July 17th 2023
Intel "Arrow Lake-S" Desktop Processor Projected 6%-21% Faster than "Raptor Lake-S"
Intel's future-generation "Arrow Lake-S" desktop processor is already being sampled internally, and to some of the company's closest industry partners, and some of the first performance projections of the processor, comparing it with the current "Raptor Lake-S" (Core i9-13900K), have surfaced, and upcoming "Raptor Lake Refresh" desktop processor (probably the i9-14900K), have surfaced. First, while the "Raptor Lake Refresh" family sees core-count increases across the board for Core i3, Core i5, and Core i7 brand extensions, the 14th Gen Core i9 series is widely expected to be a damp squib compared to the current i9-13900 series, and it shows in the performance projection graphs, where the supposed-i9-14900K is barely 0% to 3% faster, probably on account of slightly higher clock speeds (100-300 MHz).
The "Arrow Lake-S" processor in these graphs has a core-configuration of 8P+16E. Since this is a projection, it does not reflect the final core-configuration of "Arrow Lake-S," but is a guideline on what performance increase to expect versus "Raptor Lake," assuming the same core-configuration and power limits. All said and done, "Arrow Lake-S" is projected to offer a performance increase ranging between 6% in the worst case, to 21% in the best-case benchmark, compared to the current i9-13900K, assuming an identical core-config and power-limits. The CPU benchmarks in the projection span the SPECrate2017 suite, CrossMark, SYSmark 25, WebXPRT 4, Chrome Speedometer 2.1, and Geekbench 5.4.5 ST and MT.
One area where "Arrow Lake-S" is expected to offer a performance leap is with its integrated graphics. Based on the Xe-LPG graphics architecture (DirectX 12 Ultimate capable), and armed with 8 Xe cores (128 EU), the iGPU is projected to offer a massive 240% graphics performance uplift over the current Xe-LP based iGPU of the "Raptor Lake-S" that has 32 EU.
With Intel expected to call 2023 a wrap with the "Raptor Lake Refresh" series planned for Q4-2023 on the existing LGA1700 platform, all eyes are on what Intel does in 2024. The company's subsequent desktop platform will introduce the new Socket LGA1851, and require a new motherboard. It's unclear if the platform will debut with a "Meteor Lake-S" as the microarchitecture's compute tile tops out at a 6P+16E core-count. "Arrow Lake-S" surfaced on leaked roadmap slides with a mid-2024 mass-production commencement timeline, which should put product launches some time in the second half of 2024.
Source:
Igor's Lab
The "Arrow Lake-S" processor in these graphs has a core-configuration of 8P+16E. Since this is a projection, it does not reflect the final core-configuration of "Arrow Lake-S," but is a guideline on what performance increase to expect versus "Raptor Lake," assuming the same core-configuration and power limits. All said and done, "Arrow Lake-S" is projected to offer a performance increase ranging between 6% in the worst case, to 21% in the best-case benchmark, compared to the current i9-13900K, assuming an identical core-config and power-limits. The CPU benchmarks in the projection span the SPECrate2017 suite, CrossMark, SYSmark 25, WebXPRT 4, Chrome Speedometer 2.1, and Geekbench 5.4.5 ST and MT.
With Intel expected to call 2023 a wrap with the "Raptor Lake Refresh" series planned for Q4-2023 on the existing LGA1700 platform, all eyes are on what Intel does in 2024. The company's subsequent desktop platform will introduce the new Socket LGA1851, and require a new motherboard. It's unclear if the platform will debut with a "Meteor Lake-S" as the microarchitecture's compute tile tops out at a 6P+16E core-count. "Arrow Lake-S" surfaced on leaked roadmap slides with a mid-2024 mass-production commencement timeline, which should put product launches some time in the second half of 2024.
75 Comments on Intel "Arrow Lake-S" Desktop Processor Projected 6%-21% Faster than "Raptor Lake-S"
As for the CPU part, until Intel fixes it's manufacturing, we shouldn't expect much. When they do, we might see a huge jump in performance with a significantly lower power consumption.
It's amd that in fact needs to do something about efficiency, in the lower mid range segment. The new and almighty r7 7700x and 7800x 3d is less efficient than the 12700f which is like 2 years old already, as tested by hwunboxed.
But if you want to get the most out of your motherboard that you pay for dearly, s1700 stops at 14th a dead end. 1851 should be 15-17th 20 18 16A cpu tile. 6 Ghz at lower power.
those wanting a budget cpu i3 has 6 cores with ht ...
i5 14600k now bumped up to 8performance cores along with 8 ecores ...
the i7 and i9 might not be so stellar but regardless lets have a look at benchmarks
the cpu coming out after 14th gen should be exciting
The 14th series as well as any 12th and 13th series are good upgrades for customers who buy Intel only and still use Skylake architecture. For anyone already on socket 1700 or AM5 there is no reason to upgrade to 14th gen. Probably the same goes for upcoming Zen 5 as well.
Edit: For example, a gamer on a budget buys a Core i5 12400F six P-core for $167 MSRP two years ago. Upgrade choices are Core i5 13400F six P-core plus four E-core for $196 MSRP or Core i3 14300F six P-core for $150ish. No IPC increases, a few hundred MHz clock and loss of E-cores over 13th gen if the gamer goes 14th gen. Wow exciting. /sarcasm
I'd argue this goes exactly the other way around: AMD is good at attracting DIY enthusiast class who want to stick every new gen in the same motherboard for 5 years for measly +10% upticks, average joe on a budget IMHO couldn't care less.
All three “generations” use the same chip architecture with minor changes to the core config, clock speeds and cache with no IPC increases. Most understand that there is no reason to upgrade within the socket since this is just a cash grab by Intel. What we endusers really want are CPU generations on a two year cadence with MAJOR architecture changes each generation.
These CPU's I expect to be of interest to people on coffee lake or older on intel or maybe people on older AM4 who for whatever reason dont want to upgrade to Zen 3 or AM5.
Thats one area where reviewers can be lacking as they dont always show older gens (which are the likely upgrade path) in their tables, instead just comparing most recent 2-3 gens. I assume because they dont want to retest on older systems and consider old data not valid (due to diff os/drivers etc.).
However there is still a sane upgrade path on LGA 1700 which would be of course maybe from something like an i3 to i5/7/9 (upwards on product stack) if you want a P core/clock bump, or perhaps want the e-cores for encoding/compiling purposes.
Of course if you are going from Core i3 to Core i7 or higher within or across any generation on the same platform, you get a big performance uplift but this is also true for AMD users going from Ryzen 3 to Ryzen 7 or higher. However, this is not a budget argument but maybe applies to you if you started a higher paying job sometime in between. Again this has always been true for any platform and not unique to the current socket 1700 situation.
Edit: oh you were replying to the article. The source link is Igor’s labs. And they just state that they were given the projections by an unnamed third party. I guess they want to stay anonymous to prevent getting sued/fired for leaking pre-release info. This is typical for tech news and media in general.
Edit 2: Upon further reading, the source link (Igor Labs) implies that the projections came from Intel directly.
And that's a generous comparison, Intel's competitor for the 7800X3D in the 13900KS consumes many times more power.
Second, HWUB stated nothing of the sort. They publish their text version on TechSpot: www.techspot.com/review/2657-amd-ryzen-7800x3d/
They didn't even test the 12700f or 12700K, you seem to have fabricated numbers.
Intel efficiency is good if you don't crank up the frequency but the Zen 4 architecture scales much better in that regard loosing less performance at much lower power envelopes, particularly the X3D cache models. The problem for Intel is that they need that frequency on the current architecture to remain competitive in the high end.
The inflation between 2019 and 2023 (actually the 7600x was released in 2022 but its fine) is basically 20%. If you add that 20% on the 15%, that's just 3%. So sure, after 3 generations we got a 18% performance increased for the money. That's 4.5% a year, lol :roll:Techspot did in fact test the 12700.
www.techspot.com/review/2391-intel-core-i7-12700/
At 65w with an intel stock cooler and an el cheapo b660 board it scored 16.017 points. That's 246 pts / watt, and the system power draw was at 136 watts.
The 7800x 3d at 77w scored 18395 points (as per your link), so that's 238 pts / watt, while using a 200€ ΑΙΟ and a 500-600€ motherboard. System power draw was a 207w
So, the 7800x 3d is in fact less efficient than a locked and terribly binned i7 from soon to be 3 generations ago, all the while consuming 50% more power (136 vs 207), with a much more expensive cooler and motherboard. That freaking amd efficiency, you gotta love it.
AMD is just not efficient due to the lack of cores - especially at the low end. They only seem efficient cause Intel uses higher power limits in the reviewed models. If they start reviewing the T and non k versions, oh boy, its's going to be a rude awakening