Arrow Lake 2024 (and beyond)

Krypton

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 11, 2004
Messages
8,193
I've been holding out for an upgrade as my 9900K / Z390 is still serving my non gaming needs quite well.. With the proliferation of AI and various other reasons to "keep up", I am looking forward to how Arrow Lake is going to pan out.. It would be nice to have a single thread to follow developments...so hoping this thread will serve that purpose.

Ultimately, it would be nice if the process shrink will also yield lower power requirements than Intel's 12th-14th gen.. Half that would be really nice, but probably won't see that until Lunar Lake.. by then, it will be really interesting to see if Windows on ARM / RISC will get legs with Nvidia, AMD, Qualcom, and others ramping up on that front. And of course, AMD's new Ryzen offerings are coming... For now, just trying to weed through the speculation, FUD, etc.., observe any eventual leaks, and finally set expectations... Arrow Lake is claimed to also include Intel's version of "Tile Based" chips on the package... (like AMD's chiplets)...

1703420896861.png



Overview: https://www.trustedreviews.com/news/intel-arrow-lake-release-date-specs-performance-4401940

1703421625609.png

1703421665012.png




Claims from this site: https://gadgetmates.com/intels-arrow-lake-cpus-a-look-into-the-upcoming-15th-gen-processors

1703421470804.png


1703422974652.png


https://www.guru3d.com/story/intel-arrow-lakes-new-lga1851-socket-and-more-technical-details/

15th gen: 30-40% faster single core than 13th gen... (claimed here):


View: https://youtu.be/nccBhS_1uWg?si=LoD08NM2rBSdyzVH&t=347
 
Last edited:
By the time the 15th gen is released I may be in line to upgrade my 13600K. The lower power consumption would be a welcome addition.
 
Does anyone else like the idea of getting rid of Hyperthreading and adding more e-cores instead?
 
Does anyone else like the idea of getting rid of Hyperthreading and adding more e-cores instead?
Sounds like cost cutting measures to reduce complexity. I'm guessing Intel thinks that the overall performance increase is enough where they can drop hyper-threading support entirely.

More e-cores doesn't really add up to more performance in my opinion. It's mainly the P-cores which Intel only has 8 according to leaks that will carry the brunt of the work. E-cores are supposed to do lower priority, background tasks, etc.

Unless these new e-cores are beefed up somehow to assist the p-cores, I don't expect additional e-cores will increase overall performance at all really.

Most of the gains will probably come from improvements to the p-cores, efficiency gains from new architecture, raw IPC improvements, etc.

"It's not a matter of "better"; rather, they serve different purposes. P core are optimized for high-performance tasks, while E core are designed for energy efficiency and background tasks."

Quoted from E-core vs P-core FAQ: https://premioinc.com/blogs/blog/what-are-p-cores-and-e-cores-in-intel-12th-and-13th-gen-cpu#:~:text=It's not a matter of,energy efficiency and background tasks.
 
I’ll probably finally move from my 8700K to the top of the line Arrow Lake at launch. Arrow Lake and RTX 5090 has been my plan for some time. I have no idea what kind of improvement to expect over 14th gen offerings however.
 
The K processors for Arrow Lake are speculated to come out at some point 2H of 2024, more likely Q4.

I'm holding out for one of those models, my Skylake is getting a bit long in the tooth.
 
Does anyone else like the idea of getting rid of Hyperthreading and adding more e-cores instead?
Yes! Hell yes! I've been disabling it in every Intel CPU I've ever owned as a matter of course. Games are just slower with it on (for cpus with enough native cores for the game in question).

Seems 8 threads is a plateu right now for gaming and has been for a while, I assume this is inline with consoles. Once/if consoles start having more performance cores, things will change again.

Intel's hybrid p/e core setup might seem scrappy, but it's also highly practical right now as once you need more than 8 p cores (i.e. massively parallel tasks), it doesn't matter so much the speed as it does the sheer amount of them.
 
I read about december 2024 release Core Ultra 9 285K ? Is this true or it will be faster?
 
IMHO, SMT is an outdated technology. I remember it being amazing when we all bought that Pentium 4. We were just coming from running an Abit BH4 with dual Celeron 300As. Hyperthreading allowed for out of order execution, so small tasks could get executed without causing the main process to stop. In today's world, with the e cores, who on earth would we need hyper threading? Remove the stuff required and push the P cores to higher frequency, less power, and less heat. This is why most serious people turn it off anyways.
 
Does anyone else like the idea of getting rid of Hyperthreading and adding more e-cores instead?
I'm waiting for 15th gen Intel to upgrade because I've been running an i7-9700K for a while; 8 cores without HT on this model. I mostly play games with this and have seen some discussion (although not confirmed) that HT might be the source of stutter in some games, so now I have this thought in the back of my mind that HT might not be great for games, however, I think there have been benchmarks that showed HT actually providing a small performance gain in games.

Anyway, it doesn't upset me to see it go away. This i7-9700K has been running great without HT and games have been smooth, but it's certainly going to be nice to upgrade. Just give me a buncha proper physical CPU cores.
 
who on earth would we need hyper threading?
You can see a list of case :
https://openbenchmarking.org/result/2003237-SERE-SMT082179

even on 128 core cpu that can easily get memory starve, have some case that going 256threads instead of 128 help:
https://www.phoronix.com/review/amd-epyc-9754-smt/2

There a list of workload where they benefit (and a list where they do not or even hurt, has the make memory starving worst)

Seems 8 threads is a plateu right now for gaming and has been for a while, I assume this is inline with consoles
the 2020 Consoles have SMT on and 16 thread, Xbox can go on and off (to reach high mhz or avoir trouble running older Xbox game), not sure if the PS5 can do the same.

It is rare for game to go over that and gains are small, Read dead, Cyberpunk are 2 game that can a little bit, Cities skylines 2 is rare case that 6 core SMT on could beat 8 core SMT off and that 8cores/16 thread made a significant difference vs 8/8, but we can imagine they did not had console in mind that much.
 
Launching in October not sure if I need it. Just upgraded to DDR5 last year. I might run my current board for 2-3 years since I'm not getting crashes like my first Alder Lake board.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Niner
like this
First time I've been interested in an Intel processor in a long time. I conclude it is best to see how Arrow Lake performs compared to Zen 5 X3D in my case. Plus how Intel will support future processors on their next platform. Going from Zen 3 to any new next generation processor should be a rather big jump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noko
like this
HT for Pentium 4 was amazing and the only reason to use it over AMD K7/K8.
Back in early 00's with Windows 2000/XP there was issue with I/O throughput and single core systems could easily experience mouse and GUI stutter. HT helped to resolve this issue and even running real time priority threads wouldn't cause everything to stall. With dual cores it made much less sense but still helped with multi-threading. It introduced scheduling issues and allowed background applications to steal performance from cores used by foreground application e.g. game. It can easily be tested running something that can use as much cores as you throw at it and running CPU heavy games - with HT performance is worse.

Apparently adding HT support only increased transistor budget by ~5%, power consumption by ~20% and MT performance by ~30% and why Intel use this tech.
Personally I am glad they removed it.
Intel should put more e-cores though to keep 32 threads. 8 P cores 24 E cores would make these new CPUs pretty amazing for MT workloads.
 
It can easily be tested running something that can use as much cores as you throw at it and running CPU heavy games - with HT performance is worse.
Which would be quite the unfair way to look at it, the real test is using the same amount of thread in both scenario, HT on or off for all the task running. If someone dedicate all its core to something it is not a background task anymore, it is the thing that they want to run the most and gaming over it would be the thing that is hurting the background task not the other way around.
 
Hi guys. What you think that new Intel ( the fastest version ) Core Ultra 9 285K, will bootleneck Rtx 5090 on 1440P in some games? I have 1440P monitor.
 
Hi guys. What you think that new Intel ( the fastest version ) Core Ultra 9 285K, will bootleneck Rtx 5090 on 1440P in some games? I have 1440P monitor.
Hmm, will an unreleased CPU with unknown specs work well with an unreleased GPU with unknown specs...

Question: You clearly have the financials to throw wads of cash at the best gaming hardware, and yet you only run 1440p?

Bottlenecks be damned. Unless you're also using the hardware for compute tasks, buying the top of the line is just wasting money.
 
Hmm, will an unreleased CPU with unknown specs work well with an unreleased GPU with unknown specs...

Question: You clearly have the financials to throw wads of cash at the best gaming hardware, and yet you only run 1440p?

Bottlenecks be damned. Unless you're also using the hardware for compute tasks, buying the top of the line is just wasting money.
yeap only games : P
 
Hi guys. What you think that new Intel ( the fastest version ) Core Ultra 9 285K, will bootleneck Rtx 5090 on 1440P in some games? I have 1440P monitor.
Who cares? Bottlenecks don't matter, what matters is system performance. And, given that neither part you list has been released, there's no data to speculate with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hu76
like this
What matters to me is reliability. I just hope there aren't too many bugs and glitches when Lunar Lake/Panther Lake comes out. And it's the same for Windows 12.
 
If you think that's weird, Intel came out with an i3-10100 and i3-10300. Then they have the i5-10400, i5-10500 and i5-10600. But where is the i3-10200? :woot:
 
Hello. I have an question. When will be released and ready to buy new 15 gen cpus?
 
I'm gonna skip 15th gen. My $100 12700K is a gaming beast @ 5.2ghz. I'm sure I can get another year+ out of it.
 
Screenshot_20240701-112907.png


Will my older SSD M.2 Gen 3.0 drives work? Since PCI Express Gen 3.0 is no longer standard? Or are the backwards compatible with the newer slots?
 
Last edited:
I would upgrade to that if that was the case 20 percent is a big jump. I hate reinstalling Windows the last install I had a problem with Windows activation since my Windows 8 code no longer works. Redmond had to take control of my PC. Think it's Microsoft's way of saying you need to pay up for a new code.

Right now my 13700k build is stable like zero crashes unlike my 12700k which crashes alot could if been the motherboard or memory or software conflict.
 
Back
Top