Intel "Raptor Lake Refresh" to Retain 13th Gen Core Branding

[btarunr]

Intel is planning to update its desktop processor product-stack in the second half of 2023 with the Core "Raptor Lake Refresh" series. A VideoCardz report suggests that these chips could remain a part of the 13th Gen Core series, and Intel will not carve the 14th Gen Core out of them. This would be similar to how Intel dealt with delays in the commissioning of its 14 nm node by releasing the "Haswell Refresh" and "Devil's Canyon" processors within the 4th Gen Core family. Intel tried something different with "Coffee Lake Refresh," by branding it inside the 9th Gen Core series, instead of keeping it within the 8th Gen Core. This was done because Intel updated the CPU core-counts of its Core i7 SKUs, and introduced the new Core i9 brand extension for the mainstream-desktop segment.

If 4th Gen Core "Haswell Refresh" is anything to go by, Intel could use updated xx50 processor model numbers for "Raptor Lake Refresh" processors. An example of such a naming scheme would be the Core i9-13950K, which succeeds the i9-13900K (the i9-13900KS is a limited edition / limited-release SKU). At this point we don't know what exactly constitutes this Refresh, other than the high likelihood of clock-speed increases across the board. It's possible that Intel may innovate in the areas of die-thinning, die-binning, and process-level power improvements that open up room for these higher clock-speeds (which is what Intel did with 10th Gen "Comet Lake"). These processors could be built in the existing Socket LGA1700 package, and be compatible with existing Intel 600-series and 700-series chipset motherboards, requiring a UEFI firmware update.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[Hyderz]

so 2-3% of performance bump? hopefully the price stays the same

 

[Klemc]

The more Intel processors of this gen, the more powerplants will be built, it's a good business.

 

[InVasMani]

If I had to speculate probably a clock rate bump to CPU and/or GPU with memory support bumped up to 6000MT/s from 5600MT/s. I can't imagine much will be done beyond that. The only thing I could see them doing otherwise is forgoing some P cores in favoring of more E cores since you don't really need 8 of them for gaming in general especially when not all 8 will clock turbo boost quite as high anyway.

That would be controversial to people that dislike the E cores, but in the grand scheme probably a net gain as a whole. Another option would be forgoing a pair of P cores and adding a layer of cache similar to X3D in place of them. That could actually be really good or both and sticking to 4P cores, but offsetting them with supplementing those with more E cores along with stacked cache. I don't think that's what they've done, but for the following generation that could be a good idea about the same MT performance with better gaming performance across fewer P cores however at good improvement on the efficiency side.

 

[AusWolf]

Just to make sure really no one can properly say Intel product names in a verbal conversation this time.

 

[Haile Selassie]

Refresh is usually just a MLK - mid-life kicker.
You can expect higher clock rates, perhaps a slightly lower TDP (PL1, PL2) or a combination of both at best.

 

[konga]

This is basically the same story as what was reported on just yesterday: https://www.techpowerup.com/307050/intel-14th-gen-core-lineup-confirmed-to-be-meteor-lake-cpu-range

The headline is different, but the implication is the same, with that news story also concluding that the raptor lake refresh would still be considered 13th gen. Is it me, or has there been a number of double-dipping on news stories here lately?

 

[sk8er]

13990k Raptor Canyon

 

[cristi_io]

Maybe, this time, all refresh Raptors are actually Raptor Lake, not some being Alder Lake.
In 13000 series only 13600/700/900 are Raptor Lake.

 

[Wirko]

Refresh is usually just a MLK - mid-life kicker.
You can expect higher clock rates, perhaps a slightly lower TDP (PL1, PL2) or a combination of both at best.

Exactly. Just like the i7-4790 & co., or i3-10105 more recently. And I think Intel did that with mobile CPUs on more occasions, right?

They will probably redesign a couple photomasks to weed out some bugs (and that includes weak points which prevent the chip from reaching higher clocks) and that's it. There are continuous improvements in manufacturing process too, of course.

Another possible improvements would be a small bump in ring bus speed, or slightly reduced cache latencies.

That would be controversial to people that dislike the E cores, but in the grand scheme probably a net gain as a whole. Another option would be forgoing a pair of P cores and adding a layer of cache similar to X3D in place of them. That could actually be really good or both and sticking to 4P cores, but offsetting them with supplementing those with more E cores along with stacked cache. I don't think that's what they've done, but for the following generation that could be a good idea about the same MT performance with better gaming performance across fewer P cores however at good improvement on the efficiency side.

But E-cores didn't turn out to be more efficient in terms of perf/W, at least the way they're tuned for desktop CPUs. They're more efficient in perf/mm2.

 

[pressing on]

In 13000 series only 13600/700/900 are Raptor Lake.

Yes, despite the rumours I suspect that the Raptor Lake refresh will be limited to replacements for the current Alder Lake based 13400/F, 13500 and 13600.

 

[Daven]

Yes, despite the rumours I suspect that the Raptor Lake refresh will be limited to replacements for the current Alder Lake based 13400/F, 13500 and 13600.

Model names aside, Intel has used different L2/L3 cache sizes in the past between Celeron, Pentium and Core processors. I believe that is the only difference that makes a CPU ‘Alder Lake’ or ‘Raptor Lake’ on the low end.

IMHO, Raptor Lake, Alder Lake and Raptor Lake ‘refresh’ are all one processor family and a new way Intel is trying to make it seem they are innovating. As an aside, Meteor Lake is looking like a one step forward, two step backwards transition like going from Comet Lake to Rocket Lake.

 

[AhmadMZ99]

so this is the second time intel skipping generation for desktop pc, but deferent this time the LGA1700 and 700 series chipset have an additional year for life cycle, specially the socket now is become 3 years old unlike other sockets every 2 year, back to 2014 with 5th gen Broadwell cpu which launched only two models for reviewer and very limited stocks before replaced by devil's canyon, it's was the second year for LGA1150 but with new 9 series chipset is already support Broadwell cpu side by side with haswell, haswell refresh and devil's canyon

 

[pressing on]

Model names aside, Intel has used different L2/L3 cache sizes in the past between Celeron, Pentium and Core processors. I believe that is the only difference that makes a CPU ‘Alder Lake’ or ‘Raptor Lake’ on the low end.

IMHO, Raptor Lake, Alder Lake and Raptor Lake ‘refresh’ are all one processor family and a new way Intel is trying to make it seem they are innovating.

The low end Alder Lake CPUs (12100, 12400/F, 12500 and 12600) are based on an Alder Lake die that does not feature E-cores. The Raptor Lake 13100 is a slightly faster 12100. The 13400/F, 13500 and 13600 are based on the Alder Lake die that did feature E-cores, essentially these three processors are non-K variants of the 12600K. The Raptor Lake 13600K upwards use a chip that is based on but significantly different from Alder Lake, probably in the same realm as the Zen 2->Zen 3 changes.

 

[Daven]

The low end Alder Lake CPUs (12100, 12400/F, 12500 and 12600) are based on an Alder Lake die that does not feature E-cores. The Raptor Lake 13100 is a slightly faster 12100. The 13400/F, 13500 and 13600 are based on the Alder Lake die that did feature E-cores, essentially these three processors are non-K variants of the 12600K. The Raptor Lake 13600K upwards use a chip that is based on but significantly different from Alder Lake, probably in the same realm as the Zen 2->Zen 3 changes.

From what I’ve read, the E cores and P cores are exactly the same between Alder Lake and Raptor Lake except for cache, clocks, memory support and number of cores. Here is the slide from Intel showing exactly that:

As you can see, there is zero improvement mentioned from architecture changes because there are none. So again, Alder Lake and Raptor Lake are the exact same E and P cores. Expect the Raptor Lake ‘refresh’ to retain the exact same core architecture as well. To use your analogy, its really Zen -> Zen+.

Intel is not retaining the same socket for three generations because there is really only one generation. I will give Intel credit here because in the past, they would change sockets if only the Intel Inside sticker changed color.

 

[Tek-Check]

If they still do not know the naming scheme this close to launch, then there must be some confusion within Intel as to what they want to achieve with different line-ups. It could be Tiger Lake + Rocket Lake situation, all Gen 11, but Rocket Lake had new Z590 chipset despite the fact that it was canibalized by Alder Lake just 6 months later.

Raptop Lake R seems to stay on the same chipset 700 series, so is it a new generation? It's confusing. Do they still hope to launch i7 MTL on desktop? If so, this would be genuine Gen 14 on a new socket with 800 chipset, so RPL-R must be named Gen 13.

If two or three desktop MTL SKUs consitute entire desktop Gen 14 and then Arow Lake full Gen15 line-up, we could have the smallest and the shortest desktop generation ever, replaced faster then Rocket Lake.

 

[watzupken]

Refresh is usually just a MLK - mid-life kicker.
You can expect higher clock rates, perhaps a slightly lower TDP (PL1, PL2) or a combination of both at best.

Lower TDP is unlikely. Current Raptor Lake chips are already pushed hard to squeeze out more single threaded performance. Just looking at the 13600K vs the 12700K, the former draws more power despite the lower P cores, and higher number of E cores running at higher clockspeed. This is the same Intel 10nm, so there will be no surprises here.

 

[Colddecked]

The low end Alder Lake CPUs (12100, 12400/F, 12500 and 12600) are based on an Alder Lake die that does not feature E-cores. The Raptor Lake 13100 is a slightly faster 12100. The 13400/F, 13500 and 13600 are based on the Alder Lake die that did feature E-cores, essentially these three processors are non-K variants of the 12600K. The Raptor Lake 13600K upwards use a chip that is based on but significantly different from Alder Lake, probably in the same realm as the Zen 2->Zen 3 changes.

Zen2 to Zen3 was a much bigger step up, completely different ccx setup (4 core vs 8 core). I believe Raptor lake has more cache for the p cores and clocks higher due to process refinement and that's it.

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

Intel could use updated xx50 processor model numbers for "Raptor Lake Refresh" processors.

Yes, Intel did have a "xx50" model with 10th-gen. I guess it's in the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT and RX 6750 XT sense, and not because of a defect correction, unlike first-gen Phenom.

 

[Max(IT)]

To just add a little frequency upscale isn’t going to work, since there is little thermal and power headroom

 

[ZoneDymo]

13990k Raptor Canyon

To quote Hammond: "who's hungry"

 

[Luke357]

Had I stuck with my 4690k I could have went from a 4690k to a 13690k.

 

[Minus Infinity]

To just add a little frequency upscale isn’t going to work, since there is little thermal and power headroom

agreed. A RL refresh that just boosts clocks is moronic. The only thing I can see they could do architecturally is finally add the DVR that was cut from RL and was supposed to help with power consumption. If they finally implement that and get appreciable power cuts that would be nice.

 

[InVasMani]

Exactly. Just like the i7-4790 & co., or i3-10105 more recently. And I think Intel did that with mobile CPUs on more occasions, right?

They will probably redesign a couple photomasks to weed out some bugs (and that includes weak points which prevent the chip from reaching higher clocks) and that's it. There are continuous improvements in manufacturing process too, of course.

Another possible improvements would be a small bump in ring bus speed, or slightly reduced cache latencies.


But E-cores didn't turn out to be more efficient in terms of perf/W, at least the way they're tuned for desktop CPUs. They're more efficient in perf/mm2.

Depends a lot on how well one change offsets the other in the end. The TDP difference isn't such a big deal either depending on the SKU how it changes performance for various intended usages.

 

[AusWolf]

agreed. A RL refresh that just boosts clocks is moronic. The only thing I can see they could do architecturally is finally add the DVR that was cut from RL and was supposed to help with power consumption. If they finally implement that and get appreciable power cuts that would be nice.

Or maybe it's time for Intel to pull an AMD move and announce that running a constant 100 °C is intended by design.