Intel Prepares Core Ultra 9 285K, Core Ultra 7 265K, and Core Ultra 5 245K Arrow Lake-S Desktop CPUs

erek

erek

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
10,996
"To enjoy the Core Ultra 200 series, users will need to upgrade to new motherboards featuring the 800-series chipsets and the LGA-1851 socket. Unlike the Core Ultra 200V Lunar Lake models for mobile devices, details about the desktop version have remained scarce, shrouding the impending launch in an air of mystery. While Raichu's leaks carry significant weight, it's essential to approach such information cautiously. There's a possibility that SKUs like the 290K may still be introduced, as a new KS version, aligning with Intel's traditional naming conventions. The Core Ultra 200 series promises to cater to a wide range of desktop users, from the performance-hungry enthusiasts eyeing the Core Ultra 9 285K to budget-conscious consumers seeking the value proposition of the Core Ultra 5 245K. The Core Ultra 7 265K is expected to strike a balance between performance and affordability, targeting the mid-range segment. As more leaks and official information surface, we will continue to provide updates on this release from Intel."

1714697990143.png


Source: https://www.techpowerup.com/322060/...d-core-ultra-5-245k-arrow-lake-s-desktop-cpus
 
DF-1 said:
wtf are these shitty names?
Click to expand...
Intel is doing a hard reset on their naming convention, that's what.

The Ultra thing is supposed to represent the premium segment, whatever that actually means. I guess if you're not ULTRA, you suck?

First digit is the series number. Second and third are the SKU. The suffixes (K, H, U) have carried over from previous convention.

Gone are the 'i' prefix and its generation, although series sounds a lot like the same thing as generation except the count got a reset.

Series '1' has been out a while. Sounds like Series '2' will be the first mainstream desktop products.
 
To enjoy the Core Ultra 200 series, users will need to upgrade to new motherboards featuring the 800-series chipsets and the LGA-1851 socket.
Click to expand...
Oh boy, time to upgrade to yet another motherboard and chipset. :meh:
So glad I dumped Intel after Meltdown/Spectre, and have never looked back.

...Raichu's leaks carry significant weight...
Click to expand...
Why yes, Raichu's do carry significant weight. ⚡
Also, this is how the PSU and AIO feel when these new CPUs are under full load. ⚡⚡⚡

5g2W.gif
 
Wish more details would come out to counter AMD's June announcements. On a 5950X, planning to go to a 9950/X3D. But considering Intel will actually be on a new node this time around, there is a chance of being competitive on power consumption as well. Time will tell though, considering the shit show we've seen from Intel the last decade....I'll probably grab a Zen 5 on launch.
 
Red Falcon said:
Oh boy, time to upgrade to yet another motherboard and chipset. :meh:
So glad I dumped Intel after Meltdown/Spectre, and have never looked back.


Why yes, Raichu's do carry significant weight. ⚡
Also, this is how the PSU and AIO feel when these new CPUs are under full load. ⚡⚡⚡

View attachment 651555
Click to expand...
We've had three generations of Intel releases on the same socket and motherboards. For Intel that's not bad. Despite all the whining about socket longevity, it comes at a cost. The UEFI and microcode situation on AMD boards is often a total shitshow leading to problems you simply don't have on the Intel platform.
 
Dan_D said:
We've had three generations of Intel releases on the same socket and motherboards. For Intel that's not bad. Despite all the whining about socket longevity, it comes at a cost. The UEFI and microcode situation on AMD boards is often a total shitshow leading to problems you simply don't have on the Intel platform.
Click to expand...
Does that include the massive heat/power issues on Intel platforms and CPUs, and the never ending plethora of hardware-level exploits on their processors?
 
Dan_D said:
It's also better than saying ten, nine-hundred, kay, s or some stupid shit like that.
Click to expand...

Intel's naming scheme has been trash about as long as their CPUs stopped being the go-to choice, but this new naming scheme is purposefully confusing for consumers.

instead of product-level-SKU-Modifier (Like Core i7 13700K)
its now Product-Product Level-level-SKU-modifier (Like Core Ultra 7 275H)

And that "Ultra" part isn't a replacement for the "i", it's a second SKU modifier that ultimately has little to do with the overall performance of the product (that 'ultra' does not denote enough performance to transform an i5 into an i7, for instance), yet Intel sells the "core" and "Core Ultra" as completely separate products. So you can have a "Core 7" that's actually faster than a "Core Ultra 5" on the same socket/platform, released about the same time, using the same silicon, but listed as completely separate product families according to Intel, and on separate Ark pages:

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...es/236798/intel-core-processors-series-1.html

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...803/intel-core-ultra-processors-series-1.html


Like, specifically made to obfuscate and confuse.
 
KazeoHin said:
Intel's naming scheme has been trash about as long as their CPUs stopped being the go-to choice, but this new naming scheme is purposefully confusing for consumers.

instead of product-level-SKU-Modifier (Like Core i7 13700K)
its now Product-Product Level-level-SKU-modifier (Like Core Ultra 7 275H)

And that "Ultra" part isn't a replacement for the "i", it's a second SKU modifier that ultimately has little to do with the overall performance of the product (that 'ultra' does not denote enough performance to transform an i5 into an i7, for instance), yet Intel sells the "core" and "Core Ultra" as completely separate products. So you can have a "Core 7" that's actually faster than a "Core Ultra 5" on the same socket/platform, released about the same time, using the same silicon, but listed as completely separate product families according to Intel, and on separate Ark pages:

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...es/236798/intel-core-processors-series-1.html

https://ark.intel.com/content/www/u...803/intel-core-ultra-processors-series-1.html


Like, specifically made to obfuscate and confuse.
Click to expand...
I thought it was actually easier to follow especially if you have their product stack on a spreadsheet for system integration.
 
Lakados said:
I thought it was actually easier to follow especially if you have their product stack on a spreadsheet for system integration.
Click to expand...
I'd like to see a naming system of Product--generation-cores-speed. Like Core 1066 (Core first generation with 6-cores and a 6/10 in terms of single-core clockspeed for this generation) So the Core 1249 is first generation, 24-cores and clocked to the balls. Easy.
 
Lakados said:
https://wccftech.com/overclocker-te...pus-q3-2024-launch-new-ddr5-memory-controller
New and improved memory controller perhaps. What I wouldn't give for a consumer part with more than 2 channels, but it won't have one so it being newer and faster will hopefully suffice.
Click to expand...
I've not tested this assumption, but I wonder what the performance loss would be only running 2 channels of memory on something that supports 4 or more. We all know running 1 channel on a dual channel system hurts performance, I wonder if it works the other way?

Point is, it's hard enough to get companies to correctly provide 2 channels of memory in systems, could you imagine them being required to provide 4?
 
Lakados said:
I thought it was actually easier to follow especially if you have their product stack on a spreadsheet for system integration.
Click to expand...
So, not people who walk into Best Buy or Walmart looking for a new laptop.
 
Lakados said:
90% of the time the only number they look at is the price tag
Click to expand...
Not REALLY true. People look for a good deal at their given price tag. Why buy a Core at $700 when you can get a Core Ultra at $650???
 
KazeoHin said:
Not REALLY true. People look for a good deal at their given price tag. Why buy a Core at $700 when you can get a Core Ultra at $650???
Click to expand...
Or maybe buy AMD for more performance and/or better pricing.

Me, I have forever (at least for now) sworn off Intel CPUs. Also not likely to get an Intel GPU.
 
philb2 said:
Or maybe buy AMD for more performance and/or better pricing.

Me, I have forever (at least for now) sworn off Intel CPUs. Also not likely to get an Intel GPU.
Click to expand...
I agree that AMD is the better option in most price categories right now, but I will say brand loyalty won't get you anywhere. AMD would gladly, without a nanosecond of hesitation, slit your throat, and the throats of everyone you know and love, in exchange for a 0.5% increase in their share price if they were guaranteed to get away with it. You are not their customer, their shareholders are. You are their product. If murdering people were legal and the way they increase value for shareholders, they'd do it with a smile, and get sued by the shareholders if they didn't.

Intel is a shitshow of a corrupt, evil company....

Just like AMD.
 
I love the options Intel vPro gets me at an administrative level I miss it when it’s not there so that keeps the bulk of my machines Intel.
 

Core Configurations of Intel Core Ultra 200 "Arrow Lake-S" Desktop Processors Surface​

by btarunr Today, 10:00 Discuss (1 Comment)
Intel is giving its next-generation desktop processor lineup the Core Ultra 200 series processor model numbering. We detailed the processor numbering in our older report. The Core Ultra 200 series would be the company's first desktop processors with AI capabilities thanks to an integrated 50 TOPS-class NPU. At the heart of these processors is the "Arrow Lake" microarchitecture. Its development is the reason the company had to refresh "Raptor Lake" to cover its 2023-24 processor lineup. The company's "Meteor Lake" microarchitecture topped off at CPU core counts of 6P+8E, which would have proven to be a generational regression in multithreaded application performance over "Raptor Lake." The new "Arrow Lake-S" desktop processor has a maximum CPU core configuration of 8P+16E, which means consumers can expect at least the same core-counts at given price-points to carry over.

According to a report by Chinese tech publication Benchlife.info, the introduction of "Arrow Lake" would see Intel's desktop processor model numbering align with that of its mobile processor numbering, and incorporate the Core Ultra brand to denote the latest microarchitecture for a given processor generation. Since "Arrow Lake" is a generation ahead of "Meteor Lake," processor models in the series get numbered under Core Ultra 200 series.
 
So, without all of the information, I'm going on a hunch that the Core "Ultra" series of CPU's are going to be the ones that we are interested in regarding benchmarks for gaming, productivity etc. It's really going to simplify the list of what to look at, rather than a long product stack of CPU's you don't want.

Then if you are looking at a build for just a basic user, business, education etc, you'll look at the non-Ultra products.

But then I think, what if one of the higher end non-ultra products cost less but performs better than one of the lower end Ultra products.

:mad:
 
bigdogchris said:
So, without all of the information, I'm going on a hunch that the Core "Ultra" series of CPU's are going to be the ones that we are interested in regarding benchmarks for gaming, productivity etc. It's really going to simplify the list of what to look at, rather than a long product stack of CPU's you don't want.

Then if you are looking at a build for just a basic user, business, education etc, you'll look at the non-Ultra products.

But then I think, what if one of the higher end non-ultra products cost less but performs better than one of the lower end Ultra products.

:mad:
Click to expand...
It could be as simple as the "Ultra" part being towards the upper limit for that form factor's power envelope.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top