With Skymont getting massive IPC uplift over Gracemont, hard to see how in 2025 pure P core based on Raptor Lake, will have much advantage. Isn't Intel claiming Skymont is 2% stronger than even Raptor cove? Arrow Lake S should be more than competitive, so the only reason for this would be to entice people that don't want to upgrade MB's to get Arrow Lake.

Also to further confuse the public apparently Intel is to release Arrow lake refresh later next year, oh and also Panther Lake which I guess is only mobile.

We asked for this since like....2021

release just in time for 13900K/14900K to die from degradation :laugh:

There's probably a reason for this but why couldn't Intel do something like this with the next generation CPUs?

Should have done this already... but power consumption could be a huge problem.

Exciting! This will more likely be in Q4 of 2025 nonetheless exciting for new tech...

Wait. A 12 core P-core only CPU?
Can we reschedule that to like, next week?
Also - the timing seems a little weird to me from a product stack standpoint. A new LGA1700 series after a refresh generation? That I can accept, but managing a whole new lineup after the launch of a completely new platform, and possibly beating it in many speed & CU oriented performance metrics - seems a bit backwards.

If such products exist - I would expect to see them launched for LGA1851, not an EOLing platform.

Seems like a irrational trade off honestly, but I mean that very much depends on other factors. The pricing especially though there could be other implications that would make a 12P or 10P option enticing like increased cache and/or other differences in design like maybe the IMC is more robust. Like from where I'm standing with a 14700K with 8P cores and 12E cores I don't find purging 12 E cores in favor of 2P cores or 4P cores overly enticing in and of itself. The P cores are hopefully Lion Cove that would certainly make it a little bit more enticing though it still comes across as a bit too insignificant.

If I had a Alder Lake CPU on the other hand I'd almost 100% take it into consideration and weigh the relative pro's and con's versus building a new system on a new MB and socket. That's actually pretty enticing for a drop in replacement. It's really the sweet spot too core count I'd say for gamer.

Like 8 cores is all you more or less need for gaming now to be mostly fine strictly for that purpose, but another 2 to 4 cores to handle a bit light background activity is certainly welcome that want do certain background tasks like streaming or maybe running a game light server in the background for game you host and play on. Like it provides a nice bit of leeway. It's not like workstation leeway mind you for heavy heavy MT task scenario, but it's not too shabby.

I think honestly had this option been available when I got 14700K I would have weighed the pro's and con's and gone with it potentially at least if it's based on Lion Cove and what we've heard around that. The ST uplift is nothing to slouch at. If it does away with HT and like security concerns surrounding that and just general HT dynamics that end up being quirky in practice and sometimes better and worse trade-offs it seems a bit justifiable in spite of being better and worse depending situational circumstances.

I think in terms of performance it's generally going to be a touch worse for like HT aware and beneficial tasks like decompression, but in other cases it could be better. Some stuff HT just doesn't seem benefit and creates more heat waste and draws more power which is a concern and issue at times anyway especially with boost frequencies and cooling and so HT relationship status is complicated.

I'd say for people on Alder Lake in particular this is interesting. Even in the case of certain Raptor Lake/Raptor Lake refresh SKU's it's going to be less enticing or more enticing I'm sure to handful of people. It seems like a good decision by Intel. I only wonder if it'll really arrive soon enough. Like will enough people want or consider this option by the time it even arrives becomes a legitimate question. I'd say defiantly maybe for people on Alder Lake looking for some uplift economically that's a simple drop in replace it's probably going to be heavily considered by a handful of individuals.

It's funny I pretty much said this same hypothetical scenario would be plausible for Intel to do and could make justifiable sense just a little while ago. I had some other hypotheticals as well, but I think it certainly strikes a balance on a economical niche being filled pretty well.

We'll have to see what details it really entails and pricing, but it looks to be sound in theory.

dj-electricWait. A 12 core P-core only CPU?
Can we reschedule that to like, next week?
Also - the timing seems a little weird to me from a product stack standpoint. A new LGA1700 series after a refresh generation? That I can accept, but managing a whole new lineup after the launch of a completely new platform, and possibly beating it in many speed & CU oriented performance metrics - seems a bit backwards.

If such products exist - I would expect to see them launched for LGA1851, not an EOLing platform.

Perhaps Intel is kind of testing the waters a bit with this. I mean if it's successful they can always extend the P core only option to the newer socket platform. I mean a number of consumers have clamored for it all along and maybe a handful want more than 10 to 12 at the same time so they can stagger it out a bit and have something new to insert later alongside what they already launched that differs. In terms of the newer socket I could see Intel exploring other options further with this same type of idea.

I mean I literally suggested that they could go down this route not too long ago and explained how and why they could go about and offer different options for different consumers based on differing interest and metrics with how they plan to utilize CPU's for their given usages.

They could easily offer a CPU that's more E core heavy in design or more P core heavy in design or a mixture that more of a 1/4 to 3/4 split of either or or more of a 1/3 to 2/3 split between the different core types. I think ultimately that benefits consumers and puts more purchasing power in consumers and allowing them really kind of pick the right option best suited to serve their particular needs and weighted trade offs between the various design differences of each.

I see this is a smart play on Intel's behalf honestly. Like personally I'd deviate more towards something of a 4P core option a lot more E cores in place of fewer P cores. It'll get better too with time if they start making more core types like they did with the low power island cores. Like how many of those might we get in place of a few of the standard E cores? What about like a high power P core island variant? Like a bit separated from the other P cores and can boost a bit higher.

I think there is wiggle room for Intel to get a little creative and flexible on the engineering side to allow for more SKU options. Like they could stand to take some cues from Nvidia with products SKU's even though they can be a bit scummy on many of those they still offer way more SKU options than AMD is able to offer by contrast and sometimes that's better than no option for a consumer really itching for a upgrade. Not every SKU can be the price to performance leader in the end however more SKU options available to pick from in general is a positive I would say.

Too few product SKU's is one area where I'd say AMD has failed itself at a times at least on the GPU side or in recent years. I'd say on CPU side they've done a better job and have bit closer parity especially taking into account server space where they'd done nicely with Ryzen.

It makes me wish that Intel could do something else as well with LGA1700 and older sockets like maybe shrink the chipset and insert some cores or like AI chips or something into that design for a MB upgrade, but at that point you'd probably be better off switching sockets anyways with the the way current MB's are designed.

Now maybe they could start integrating chipsets that are socketed and replaceable perhaps in the future and it would change that dynamic and possibilities a bit, but who knows and seems a little unlikely given it hasn't happened yet though I'd like to hope that maybe eventually we might see something like it.

I think socketed replaceable chipsets could be interesting. They also just seem like a logical place to try to insert some low power cores for more mundane stuff at low energy draw. I'm tossing around hypotheticals around though.

64KThere's probably a reason for this but why couldn't Intel do something like this with the next generation CPUs?

I think they absolutely can and probably will eventually. I see it as a staging ground for Intel. Like let's test the waters and dip are toes in a bit with this and see how it goes over and if it seems promising let's perhaps wade in a bit deeper. Like this allows them to see how consumers react w/o having to full commit to it quite the same.

Sabotaged_EnigmaShould have done this already... but power consumption could be a huge problem.

Huge factor into probably why they didn't already. Comet Lake ran rather hot and power hungry from what I recall. It's ultimately why Intel ended up reducing core count for the follow up Rocket Lake. That's kind of what we're seeing as well with Arrow Lake as well. It's bit of a down grade or side grade in area's in relative terms from what's been leaked about it. It's fascinating to see what else Intel might do based on this. To me it carries heavy implications.

I think they could even insert more low power island cores in favor of P cores or E cores. Let's just L cores for loser cores because they suck at latency though are efficient and lighten your power load. Like sure you take a hit on relative performance, but it is more efficient and free's up power budget a bit so it's a trade off consideration.

Intel sir would like you more loser cores!!? We can offer you many more moar. We'd really like like to offload some of these dumpster fire silicone lottery chips. We've got factories to the roof tops full of them please we'll practically pay you to take them. Jokes aside though I'm genuinely interested as a technology enthusiast in what they do, where how, and for what reasons!!? LGA1700 now with 4 less P cores, but +16L cores...

welp... i see my next CPU

Minus InfinityWith Skymont getting massive IPC uplift over Gracemont, hard to see how in 2025 pure P core based on Raptor Lake, will have much advantage. Isn't Intel claiming Skymont is 2% stronger than even Raptor cove? Arrow Lake S should be more than competitive, so the only reason for this would be to entice people that don't want to upgrade MB's to get Arrow Lake.

Also to further confuse the public apparently Intel is to release Arrow lake refresh later next year, oh and also Panther Lake which I guess is only mobile.

This is probably to address warranty flood from 14900K / 13900k RMAs. It's probably just a rebranded xeon.

I did read about this but was wondering if true or not.

Count me in :)

CrackongWe asked for this since like....2021

Yeah, about time!

nguyenrelease just in time for 13900K/14900K to die from degradation

Reminds me of the old school P4EE - Emergency Editions ;)

The first interesting Intel CPUs since Coffee Lake, imo. They'll be welcome. :)

dj-electricWait. A 12 core P-core only CPU?
Can we reschedule that to like, next week?
Also - the timing seems a little weird to me from a product stack standpoint. A new LGA1700 series after a refresh generation? That I can accept, but managing a whole new lineup after the launch of a completely new platform, and possibly beating it in many speed & CU oriented performance metrics - seems a bit backwards.

If such products exist - I would expect to see them launched for LGA1851, not an EOLing platform.

Probably a needed in case they end up have to recall a lot of 13 &14th gen parts even if they don't recall would probably need still since they can't very well replace with same bad chips.

InVasManiSeems like a irrational trade off honestly, but I mean that very much depends on other factors. The pricing especially though there could be other implications that would make a 12P or 10P option enticing like increased cache and/or other differences in design like maybe the IMC is more robust. Like from where I'm standing with a 14700K with 8P cores and 12E cores I don't find purging 12 E cores in favor of 2P cores or 4P cores overly enticing in and of itself. The P cores are hopefully Lion Cove that would certainly make it a little bit more enticing though it still comes across as a bit too insignificant.

If I had a Alder Lake CPU on the other hand I'd almost 100% take it into consideration and weigh the relative pro's and con's versus building a new system on a new MB and socket. That's actually pretty enticing for a drop in replacement. It's really the sweet spot too core count I'd say for gamer.

Like 8 cores is all you more or less need for gaming now to be mostly fine strictly for that purpose, but another 2 to 4 cores to handle a bit light background activity is certainly welcome that want do certain background tasks like streaming or maybe running a game light server in the background for game you host and play on. Like it provides a nice bit of leeway. It's not like workstation leeway mind you for heavy heavy MT task scenario, but it's not too shabby.

I think honestly had this option been available when I got 14700K I would have weighed the pro's and con's and gone with it potentially at least if it's based on Lion Cove and what we've heard around that. The ST uplift is nothing to slouch at. If it does away with HT and like security concerns surrounding that and just general HT dynamics that end up being quirky in practice and sometimes better and worse trade-offs it seems a bit justifiable in spite of being better and worse depending situational circumstances.

I think in terms of performance it's generally going to be a touch worse for like HT aware and beneficial tasks like decompression, but in other cases it could be better. Some stuff HT just doesn't seem benefit and creates more heat waste and draws more power which is a concern and issue at times anyway especially with boost frequencies and cooling and so HT relationship status is complicated.

I'd say for people on Alder Lake in particular this is interesting. Even in the case of certain Raptor Lake/Raptor Lake refresh SKU's it's going to be less enticing or more enticing I'm sure to handful of people. It seems like a good decision by Intel. I only wonder if it'll really arrive soon enough. Like will enough people want or consider this option by the time it even arrives becomes a legitimate question. I'd say defiantly maybe for people on Alder Lake looking for some uplift economically that's a simple drop in replace it's probably going to be heavily considered by a handful of individuals.

It's funny I pretty much said this same hypothetical scenario would be plausible for Intel to do and could make justifiable sense just a little while ago. I had some other hypotheticals as well, but I think it certainly strikes a balance on a economical niche being filled pretty well.

We'll have to see what details it really entails and pricing, but it looks to be sound in theory.



Perhaps Intel is kind of testing the waters a bit with this. I mean if it's successful they can always extend the P core only option to the newer socket platform. I mean a number of consumers have clamored for it all along and maybe a handful want more than 10 to 12 at the same time so they can stagger it out a bit and have something new to insert later alongside what they already launched that differs. In terms of the newer socket I could see Intel exploring other options further with this same type of idea.

I mean I literally suggested that they could go down this route not too long ago and explained how and why they could go about and offer different options for different consumers based on differing interest and metrics with how they plan to utilize CPU's for their given usages.

They could easily offer a CPU that's more E core heavy in design or more P core heavy in design or a mixture that more of a 1/4 to 3/4 split of either or or more of a 1/3 to 2/3 split between the different core types. I think ultimately that benefits consumers and puts more purchasing power in consumers and allowing them really kind of pick the right option best suited to serve their particular needs and weighted trade offs between the various design differences of each.

I see this is a smart play on Intel's behalf honestly. Like personally I'd deviate more towards something of a 4P core option a lot more E cores in place of fewer P cores. It'll get better too with time if they start making more core types like they did with the low power island cores. Like how many of those might we get in place of a few of the standard E cores? What about like a high power P core island variant? Like a bit separated from the other P cores and can boost a bit higher.

I think there is wiggle room for Intel to get a little creative and flexible on the engineering side to allow for more SKU options. Like they could stand to take some cues from Nvidia with products SKU's even though they can be a bit scummy on many of those they still offer way more SKU options than AMD is able to offer by contrast and sometimes that's better than no option for a consumer really itching for a upgrade. Not every SKU can be the price to performance leader in the end however more SKU options available to pick from in general is a positive I would say.

Too few product SKU's is one area where I'd say AMD has failed itself at a times at least on the GPU side or in recent years. I'd say on CPU side they've done a better job and have bit closer parity especially taking into account server space where they'd done nicely with Ryzen.

It makes me wish that Intel could do something else as well with LGA1700 and older sockets like maybe shrink the chipset and insert some cores or like AI chips or something into that design for a MB upgrade, but at that point you'd probably be better off switching sockets anyways with the the way current MB's are designed.

Now maybe they could start integrating chipsets that are socketed and replaceable perhaps in the future and it would change that dynamic and possibilities a bit, but who knows and seems a little unlikely given it hasn't happened yet though I'd like to hope that maybe eventually we might see something like it.

I think socketed replaceable chipsets could be interesting. They also just seem like a logical place to try to insert some low power cores for more mundane stuff at low energy draw. I'm tossing around hypotheticals around though.



I think they absolutely can and probably will eventually. I see it as a staging ground for Intel. Like let's test the waters and dip are toes in a bit with this and see how it goes over and if it seems promising let's perhaps wade in a bit deeper. Like this allows them to see how consumers react w/o having to full commit to it quite the same.



Huge factor into probably why they didn't already. Comet Lake ran rather hot and power hungry from what I recall. It's ultimately why Intel ended up reducing core count for the follow up Rocket Lake. That's kind of what we're seeing as well with Arrow Lake as well. It's bit of a down grade or side grade in area's in relative terms from what's been leaked about it. It's fascinating to see what else Intel might do based on this. To me it carries heavy implications.

I think they could even insert more low power island cores in favor of P cores or E cores. Let's just L cores for loser cores because they suck at latency though are efficient and lighten your power load. Like sure you take a hit on relative performance, but it is more efficient and free's up power budget a bit so it's a trade off consideration.

Intel sir would like you more loser cores!!? We can offer you many more moar. We'd really like like to offload some of these dumpster fire silicone lottery chips. We've got factories to the roof tops full of them please we'll practically pay you to take them. Jokes aside though I'm genuinely interested as a technology enthusiast in what they do, where how, and for what reasons!!? LGA1700 now with 4 less P cores, but +16L cores...

If level one tech is correct they will need something to replace all the server variants of 13-14900k chips that's under service contract because they can't very well keep putting in dodgy chips. It's very telling when support companies charge 1000.00 more to support these chips. Just a guess.

Broken ProcessorProbably a needed in case they end up have to recall a lot of 13 &14th gen parts even if they don't recall would probably need still since they can't very well replace with same bad chips.


If level one tech is correct they will need something to replace all the server variants of 13-14900k chips that's under service contract because they can't very well keep putting in dodgy chips. It's very telling when support companies charge 1000.00 more to support these chips. Just a guess.

This could be some possibility, but here we're talking about a core architecture change (no pun intended) that pretty much forces Intel to use an entirely revised monolithic silicon and fabricate it from 0 stock.
This means doing post-silicon again, a decently lengthy process.
I would of course love it if Intel could actually include in-silicon fixes and improvements outside of the replacement of E-core clusters with P-cores.
Just that the time of Q4-2024 or possibly even Q1 2025 seems a bit... moot? The only comforting thing is that LGA1700 is actually getting some side-grades even when we're into the next platform, sort-of AM4-esque.

AusWolfThe first interesting Intel CPUs since Coffee Lake, imo. They'll be welcome. :)

Honestly if this was already out I'd be rocking intel....

If the price to performance is sensible, and thermal is under control, looks like it could be time to upgrade my 12400F.

Been around long enough to expect nothing from Intel though, so..... I will believe it when I see it.

dj-electricI would of course love it if Intel could actually include in-silicon fixes and improvements outside of the replacement of E-core clusters with P-cores.
Just that the time of Q4-2024 or possibly even Q1 2025 seems a bit... moot? The only comforting thing is that LGA1700 is actually getting some side-grades even when we're into the next platform, sort-of AM4-esque.

This had me thinking as well but to offer AL as a replacement will require a motherboard swap a new chip on same socket won't. This would also help with retail. Another consideration is AL if it does launch this year which I doubt will probably be a paper launch and I've got a feeling this is a sooner rather than later situation for Intel. A new chip will be the most elegant solution.

oxrufiioxoHonestly if this was already out I'd be rocking intel....

Probably me too, simply because I've always found cooling monolithic chips easier, even at a higher power consumption.

Sabotaged_EnigmaShould have done this already... but power consumption could be a huge problem.

No it's not. Intel has cpus with 56 P cores cooled by a single tower noctua air cooler, you think power will be an issue for 12 of them? Lol

fevgatosNo it's not. Intel has cpus with 56 P cores cooled by a single tower noctua air cooler, you think power will be an issue for 12 of them? Lol

I think he means it'll consume 250‐300w under heavy load not that it'll be hard to cool. Regardless of what temp the actual cpu runs at you'll still need to dissipate whatever energy it consumes Into your room/office... Not an issue for me but paired with a 4090/5090 it wouldn't surprise me if it hits 600-700w total system power in some games.

Well, I guess Intel now have a high end P core only chip for those who think e-cores are a waste of space, its good they are supporting this chipset further. Z690 is a lovely chipset, glad its been given some more time in limelight.

chrcolukWell, I guess Intel now have a high end P core only chip for those who think e-cores are a waste of space, its good they are supporting this chipset further. Z690 is a lovely chipset, glad its been given some more time in limelight.

A lot of 13900k/14900k owners gonna need new cpus soon and some 12900k owners who got carried away with Overclocking lol perfect timing

oxrufiioxoI think he means it'll consume 250‐300w under heavy load not that it'll be hard to cool. Regardless of what temp the actual cpu runs at you'll still need to dissipate whatever energy it consumes Into your room/office... Not an issue for me but paired with a 4090/5090 it wouldn't surprise me if it hits 600-700w total system power in some games.

It can only consume that much if you let it via a poor bios configuration.

oxrufiioxoA lot of 13900k/14900k owners gonna need new cpus soon and some 12900k owners who got carried away with Overclocking lol perfect timing

Dont know on that, there is all sorts of wild speculation at the moment, bear in mind pretty much no one is using the TVB fix currently, and many are likely still using boards that have whacked defaults, running silicon loser chips undervolted etc.

But of course it does offer a convenient replacement for anyone who is replacing those chips.

chrcolukIt can only consume that much if you let it via a poor bios configuration.

I expect it to consume a similar amount of power to the 13900k/14900k with the bios intel recommends which is around 260w..... At least till they degrade and Intel recommends The 125w bios.... Which performance isn't very good on even gaming.

Hopefully that's ironed out by then.

oxrufiioxoI expect it to consume a similar amount of power to the 13900k/14900k with the bios intel recommends which is around 260w..... At least till they degrade and Intel recommends The 125w bios.... Which performance isn't very good on even gaming.

Hopefully that's ironed out by then.

They dont recommend that, this is something the board vendors did of their own back.

Also 125w is more than enough for gaming, I have never seen my CPU go anywhere near 125w, unless of course guess what? I run cinebench,

oxrufiioxo14900k owners gonna need new cpus soon

Yeah, might have to start Raptor Baking mine soon, get a credit for a new one :pimp: