Monday, August 19th 2024
Intel Core Ultra 200 "Arrow Lake-S" Lineup and Clock Speeds Revealed
Intel is preparing at least twelve Core Ultra 200-series "Arrow Lake-S" desktop processor SKUs for the consumer segment, with more variants possible for the commercial desktop segment in the future. Q4 2024 could see the company debut its first SKUs targeting the PC enthusiast and gamer crowd with as many as five unlocked K or KF series SKUs. These, and finer details such as clock speeds, were revealed in a massive info dump by Jaykihn, a reliable source with Intel leaks. Intel is expected to debut the series later this year with the Core Ultra 9 285K, the Core Ultra 7 265K and 265KF; and the Core Ultra 5 245K and 245KF. The company is skipping a KF SKU for its top Core Ultra 9 part.
As has been consistent for several past generations of Intel processors, the top Core Ultra 9 (formerly Core i9) tier gets Thermal Velocity Boost, Turbo Boost Max 3.0, and classic Turbo Boost 2.0. The 285K maxes out the "Arrow Lake-S" B0 silicon, enabling all 8 "Lion Cove" P-cores, and all 16 "Skymont" E-cores. It comes with a P-core base frequency of 3.70 GHz, and an impressive 3.20 GHz E-core base frequency. The maximum P-core boost frequency achievable for up to two cores is 5.70 GHz, and 3-6 as well as 7-8 cores boost up to 5.40 GHz, making it the all-P-core boost frequency for this chip. The four E-core clusters are assured an all-E-core boost frequency of 4.60 GHz. The iGPU has 64 execution units, and ticks at up to 2.00 GHz.
The Core Ultra 7 265K/KF are supposed to succeed the Core i7-14700K/KF, and lose out on the TVB algorithm. Intel is giving these chips an 8P+12E core configuration. These come with a P-core base frequency of 3.90 GHz, and E-core base frequency of 3.30 GHz. The P-cores boost up to 5.50 GHz for 1-2 cores, and has 5.20 GHz as its all-P-core boost frequency, while the E-cores boost up to 4.60 GHz, same as the 285K/KF.
The Core Ultra 5 245K/KF are successors of the Core i5-14600K/KF, with a 6P+8E core configuration. This time around, Intel isn't recycling older silicon for the lower tiers of the Core Ultra 5 series, so you're assured increased IPC across the lineup. The P-cores of the 245K/KF come with a base frequency of 4.20 GHz, and the E-cores 3.60 GHz, which is the highest in the series. There's no Turbo Boost Max 3.0, and the classic Turbo Boost algorithm boosts up to 2 P-cores to 5.20 GHz, while its all-P-core boost frequency is 5.00 GHz. The E-cores boost up to 4.60 GHz.
There are several non-K/KF SKUs featured in the table, which Intel will likely launch in Q1-2025. These lack CPU overclocking features, and come with generally lower clock speeds than their K/KF siblings, besides lower power values. One SKU that caught our eye is the Core Ultra 5 225/225F. This chip appears to succeed the Core i5-14400/F, and comes with a 6P+4E configuration. The P-cores boost up to 4.90 GHz (up to 4.70 GHz all-P-core), while the E-cores go up to 4.40 GHz. We like how the Core Ultra 5 series isn't cluttered this time around, and you're only choosing between the 245K/KF and the 225/F.
Sources:
Jaykihn (Twitter), VideoCardz
As has been consistent for several past generations of Intel processors, the top Core Ultra 9 (formerly Core i9) tier gets Thermal Velocity Boost, Turbo Boost Max 3.0, and classic Turbo Boost 2.0. The 285K maxes out the "Arrow Lake-S" B0 silicon, enabling all 8 "Lion Cove" P-cores, and all 16 "Skymont" E-cores. It comes with a P-core base frequency of 3.70 GHz, and an impressive 3.20 GHz E-core base frequency. The maximum P-core boost frequency achievable for up to two cores is 5.70 GHz, and 3-6 as well as 7-8 cores boost up to 5.40 GHz, making it the all-P-core boost frequency for this chip. The four E-core clusters are assured an all-E-core boost frequency of 4.60 GHz. The iGPU has 64 execution units, and ticks at up to 2.00 GHz.
The Core Ultra 5 245K/KF are successors of the Core i5-14600K/KF, with a 6P+8E core configuration. This time around, Intel isn't recycling older silicon for the lower tiers of the Core Ultra 5 series, so you're assured increased IPC across the lineup. The P-cores of the 245K/KF come with a base frequency of 4.20 GHz, and the E-cores 3.60 GHz, which is the highest in the series. There's no Turbo Boost Max 3.0, and the classic Turbo Boost algorithm boosts up to 2 P-cores to 5.20 GHz, while its all-P-core boost frequency is 5.00 GHz. The E-cores boost up to 4.60 GHz.
There are several non-K/KF SKUs featured in the table, which Intel will likely launch in Q1-2025. These lack CPU overclocking features, and come with generally lower clock speeds than their K/KF siblings, besides lower power values. One SKU that caught our eye is the Core Ultra 5 225/225F. This chip appears to succeed the Core i5-14400/F, and comes with a 6P+4E configuration. The P-cores boost up to 4.90 GHz (up to 4.70 GHz all-P-core), while the E-cores go up to 4.40 GHz. We like how the Core Ultra 5 series isn't cluttered this time around, and you're only choosing between the 245K/KF and the 225/F.
29 Comments on Intel Core Ultra 200 "Arrow Lake-S" Lineup and Clock Speeds Revealed
If you aren't interested in attempting to over lock/kill the silicon quicker, the 265 looks like a solid offering - would be interesting to how much the non-K part differs in power ratings Vs the K variant.
www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/sku/233483/intel-xeon-w93495x-processor-105m-cache-1-90-ghz/specifications.html
4 grand but still a real CPU.
But so I'm poor AMD is the only company that shows they are for gamers now with pure 16 core cpu's
That’s unfathomably silly. The Xeon will be absolute pants in any normal day-to-day desktop tasks compared to the P/E-core processors. Not to mention that pretty much no desktop task will be able to leverage 56 cores. The whole “E-cores aren’t real cores” discourse is ridiculous. They are an absolute valid way of increasing MT performance and handling background tasks.
That´s the kind of test that would give me peace-of-mind.
I'd rather have seen a 10P 8E variant instead but without hyper-threading it would be a lower performing part in terms of multi-thread performance.
I think that's the real problem - you no longer have hyper-threading on the P cores but get lots of a bit slower E cores to make up for it.
Will be really curious to see how that plays out with thread heavy tests vs LGA 1700 offerings.I'd have a bit more peace of mind if one would expect a Xeon variant of these products / platform, but I don't think there will be. That leaves out a bit of extra validation testing that Intel/OEMs would be doing for their respective HEDT/WS/Mini-server product lines.
Not sure Intel want to necessarily move to a similar/same seperate chiplets on CPU substrate - they have done it before and still do it when they need to, e.g. i3/5/7 1st gen LGA 1156, right through to tiger lake chips.
Their more modern reintroduction was the 1st gen Core i3/5/7 - I exclude the Pentium D (P4 Dual core) as it was a bit of a panic move and not really a proper chiplet design with both cores just tied to the same FSB connections. I'll be honest I wasn't sure why everyone back in the day when Zen2 was released were like "Chiplets, OMFG!!! AMD are amazing... Wow :clap:o_O"
Not saying it wasn't a good engineering approach on their part, just "yeah, ok, makes sense".
Just that Intel's response to AMD's chiplet approach has been to move to foveros instead of pursue a chiplet approach for the desktop, although they did with the laptop (as mentioned tiger lake for example but repeating what they did with the 1st gen Core where you had a CPU chiplet and GPU chiplet).
They are still pricy, the most relevant would probably be w5-2455X at $1039 (12-core 3.2/4.6 GHz), w5-2465X at $1389 (16-core 3.1/4.7 GHz) or w7-2495X at $2189 (24-core 2.5/4.8 GHz).
The most relevant motherboard would probably be Asus Pro WS W790-ACE at ~$900 and a specialized cooler, probably Noctua NH-U14S DX-4677 at ~$190.
So, depending on your needs for memory, storage and GPU, you're probably looking at a system cost ~$4000-6000.
But if you're looking for just something consistent, solid, and with good IO, you can go for one of the lower core CPUs and get it cheaper than that.
The bigger issue with such parts is limited availability. Most computer stores wouldn't have these parts, and those who do rarely have it in stock. Compared to the good old HEDT days (x79/x99/x299), great deals are hard to come by. But be aware that when they get discontinued, there can be some great discounts. And the used market do have some amazing deals if you don't need the latest and greatest.
I do wish Intel and AMD would bring back "proper" HEDT platforms, as the mainstream platforms are increasingly held back by IO and memory bottlenecks, as well as thermal limits. For pure gamers this shouldn't be a big concern though.May I ask how the user experience of these platforms are to you?
Click the spoiler for context:
Or to put it more bluntly; if you had to choose only one to have at home, which one would you prefer?
I'm just curios, although I will probably wait until the next iteration before buying any.