Intel Core Ultra 200V "Lunar Lake" Launches on September 3: Acer

[btarunr]

Intel's ambitious new ultraportable mobile processor series, the Core Ultra 200V series "Lunar Lake," launches on September 3, according to an Acer announcement for a media event covering the launch of its notebooks based on these chips. Acer scheduled this event on September 4, which means Intel to launch these processors no later than September 3. Media events by PC OEMs tend to follow a day after Intel's launch of a new processor generation or platform. A September 3 launch would precede the IFA 2024 Conference in Berlin, which kicks off on September 6, but which is open to press and industry delegates a little sooner, as is the norm for trade shows.

The Core Ultra 200V "Lunar Lake" is Intel's first processor generation to implement MoP (memory on package), eliminating the need for discrete memory modules. This reduces the Z height as well as PCB footprint of the platform, enabling thinner notebooks. MoP also has certain power and latency advantages compared to discrete memory. The compute complex of "Lunar Lake" consists of a 4P+4E CPU with "Lion Cove" P-cores, and "Skymont" E-cores. This is also the first processor to debut Intel's Xe2 "Battlemage" graphics architecture, as it powers its iGPU. It packs a powerful NPU that meets Microsoft Copilot+ AI PC requirements. You can learn all about "Lunar Lake" in our architecture deep-dive.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[The Quim Reaper]

If we are being forced down this path of non upgradeable memory in laptops then the baseline amounts of RAM need to rise from 16, 32 & 64GB to 24, 48 and 96 or 128GB.

16GB isn't going to be enough from 2025 onwards.

 

[usiname]

If we are being forced down this path of non upgradeable memory in laptops then the baseline amounts of RAM need to rise from 16, 32 & 64GB to 24, 48 and 96 or 128GB.

16GB isn't going to be enough from 2025 onwards.

This is 4P+4E system, 16 and 32GB options are fine, if you need more, you are looking at the wrong segment

 

[Chaitanya]

This is 4P+4E system, 16 and 32GB options are fine, if you need more, you are looking at the wrong segment

Since most of these laptops wont come with dGPU, iGPU will take its chunk of RAM and even things like simple web browsers are memory hogs and 16GB of RAM will drag the system down far too quickly. 24GB should be bare minimum going forward.

 

[Vayra86]

Since most of these laptops wont come with dGPU, iGPU will take its chunk of RAM and even things like simple web browsers are memory hogs and 16GB of RAM will drag the system down far too quickly. 24GB should be bare minimum going forward.

Ofc not! This is laptop-Sparta! First you gotta show customers the current state of technology isn't good on a 16GB laptop for a few years, lose lots of sales, and then come to the conclusion you might want to offer a proper product. They'll then do that at an excessive premium and probably sell after all. And all the while you're marketing the stuff as 'AI capable, perfect for your needs, does your laundry too, etc.'

 

[Minus Infinity]

Since most of these laptops wont come with dGPU, iGPU will take its chunk of RAM and even things like simple web browsers are memory hogs and 16GB of RAM will drag the system down far too quickly. 24GB should be bare minimum going forward.

Then wait for Arrow Lake or better yet Panther Lake.

 

[kondamin]

i hope intel has them ready in volume and it’s nothing like mtl

 

[phints]

Since most of these laptops wont come with dGPU, iGPU will take its chunk of RAM and even things like simple web browsers are memory hogs and 16GB of RAM will drag the system down far too quickly. 24GB should be bare minimum going forward.

Huh? Did you not read their comment 4P+4E system users will hardly need it. Like macOS users where most are 8GB/16GB the userbase with more than that is extremely small. 16GB is plenty for Win11. Hell my desktop never uses more than that gaming, discord and having chrome with a couple tabs open, etc. all at once. If you are gaming then you absolutely should be in the market for something with a dedicated GPU.

 

[Yttersta]

If we are being forced down this path of non upgradeable memory in laptops then the baseline amounts of RAM need to rise from 16, 32 & 64GB to 24, 48 and 96 or 128GB.

16GB isn't going to be enough from 2025 onwards.

Because the current topology of traditional cpu + memory + gpu on a motherboard is been utterly defeated in portability by Apple. We had already lost replaceable CPUs and GPUs on laptops long ago around early 2010s. While x86 remains, ARM efficiency advantages cannot be wholly overcome, but this is a good start.

I cannot carry my desktop with me to conferences, to presentations, to work and typing this on an Intel 13th gen workstation right now, none of my windows devices are truly portable. Portability begins with 6-7 hours of high performance use, which Mac delivers.

So unless something revolutionary happens I'll have to let almost universal compatibility go and switch to a Mac as my Studiobook 16 ages in a few years. Macs aren't as compatible, as usable, or as dynamically enabling but I won't have to give up 70% of my performance when I unplug and I can remain uplugged 2-3x as much. This matters.

 

[Wirko]

things like simple web browsers are memory hogs and 16GB of RAM will drag the system down

Browsers adapt well to the amount of RAM available, probably better than any other software.

The real deadly combination is low RAM and a small, soldered down SSD. There's a high probability that swapping will wear down the SSD in as little as a couple years, and voilà, one more kilogram of E-waste.

 

[AnotherReader]

Because the current topology of traditional cpu + memory + gpu on a motherboard is been utterly defeated in portability by Apple. We had already lost replaceable CPUs and GPUs on laptops long ago around early 2010s. While x86 remains, ARM efficiency advantages cannot be wholly overcome, but this is a good start.

I cannot carry my desktop with me to conferences, to presentations, to work and typing this on an Intel 13th gen workstation right now, none of my windows devices are truly portable. Portability begins with 6-7 hours of high performance use, which Mac delivers.

So unless something revolutionary happens I'll have to let almost universal compatibility go and switch to a Mac as my Studiobook 16 ages in a few years. Macs aren't as compatible, as usable, or as dynamically enabling but I won't have to give up 70% of my performance when I unplug and I can remain uplugged 2-3x as much. This fucking matters.

The efficiency of ARM based mobile CPUs is due to very low idle power. That is a consequence of their smartphone heritage. Intel's Atom line of CPUs had SKUs designed for smartphones and devices featuring them had decent battery life for the time.

 

[Yttersta]

The efficiency of ARM based mobile CPUs is due to very low idle power. That is a consequence of their smartphone heritage. Intel's Atom line of CPUs had SKUs designed for smartphones and devices featuring them had decent battery life for the time.

Their efficiency is also because of how much simpler the ARM instruction set is and as I have said that's idle endurance isn't what I am interested in. It's a direct effect of their efficiency and an indirect effect of how terribly unoptimized Intel voltages, power curves, and architecture is. My laptop (an Asus W7604 with 13980Hx) has a liquid metal thermal interface, a double sided intake for each of its two fans (keyboard side + grills at bottom), and many heat pipes; thus it performs insanely well when plugged, better than a desktop 13700 in fact. Well done, no issues there. But unplug it and it suddenly is worse than an M3 on battery, not even an M3 pro or max as its SKU levels would suggest.

Not to mention that Intel and Asus doesn't allow me to undervolt this overvolted CPU because I'm not on a gaming laptop (as evidenced by Asus supporting undervolt on cheap strix laptops while they don't in their workstations).

 

[Prima.Vera]

This new name convention really sucks big time. Why did they have to frack up the i3, i5, i7 or i9 naming scheme? Now it's another Xeon naming disaster without any meaning and logic...

 

[AnotherReader]

Their efficiency is also because of how much simpler the ARM instruction set is and as I have said that's idle endurance isn't what I am interested in. It's a direct effect of their efficiency and an indirect effect of how terribly unoptimized Intel voltages, power curves, and architecture is. My laptop (an Asus W7604 with 13980Hx) has a liquid metal thermal interface, a double sided intake for each of its two fans (keyboard side + grills at bottom), and many heat pipes; thus it performs insanely well when plugged, better than a desktop 13700 in fact. Well done, no issues there. But unplug it and it suddenly is worse than an M3 on battery, not even an M3 pro or max as its SKU levels would suggest.

Not to mention that Intel and Asus doesn't allow me to undervolt this overvolted CPU because I'm not on a gaming laptop (as evidenced by Asus supporting undervolt on cheap strix laptops while they don't in their workstations).

ISA differences are immaterial to power efficiency. They only matter for simple, in-order CPUs like the original Atom or the atrocious A55. In any case, if long runtime on battery power is important, then you should eschew laptops like the one you have. There are x86 laptops with decent battery life, e.g. the Asus Zenbook S 16.

 

[Minus Infinity]

This new name convention really sucks big time. Why did they have to frack up the i3, i5, i7 or i9 naming scheme? Now it's another Xeon naming disaster without any meaning and logic...

So noobs will have absolutely no idea what the saleperson is selling them. Remember, information is dangerous, we can't have consumers making informed choices and if they do, we must ensure they have to spend a lot of time digging for said information.

 

[JakoDel]

So noobs will have absolutely no idea what the saleperson is selling them. Remember, information is dangerous, we can't have consumers making informed choices and if they do, we must ensure they have to spend a lot of time digging for said information.

core ultra = brand
5/7/9 = exact same as i5/i7/i9
NNNV
first digit 1/2= gen number, exact same as always
last two digits for the specific model, i7-1360P -> i7-1370P
V = yeah this one makes no sense.
So basically, bigger is better and you cant go wrong, since they only have one H/V line.

To be honest with you, the 12th and 13th gen confused me more. we had U, P, H, all used interchangeably in 1cm thick laptops leaving you wondering why would anyone be willing to get cpus with 2 P cores and 6 awful e cores at a whopping 1/2k. these ones have literally ONE line (without considering the newly released bottom of the barrel 120U amd-inspired ewaste), so it feels way tidier at least to me.

 

[AleXXX666]

If we are being forced down this path of non upgradeable memory in laptops then the baseline amounts of RAM need to rise from 16, 32 & 64GB to 24, 48 and 96 or 128GB.

16GB isn't going to be enough from 2025 onwards.

for LAPTOP? If it's really HIGH END laptop with VERY GOOD cooling, then yes, MAYBE, but for what I see now the 32 is max logical lol