Thursday, November 18th 2021

Intel "Meteor Lake" Chips Already Being Built at the Arizona Fab

With its 12th Gen Core "Alder Lake-P" mobile processors still on the horizon, Intel is already building test batches of the 14th Gen "Meteor Lake" mobile processors, at its Fab 42 facility in Chandler, Arizona. "Meteor Lake" is a multi-chip module that leverages Intel's Foveros packaging technology to combine "tiles" (purpose built dies) based on different silicon fabrication processes depending on their function and transistor-density/power requirements. It combines four distinct tiles across a single package—the compute tile, with the CPU cores; the graphics tile with the iGPU: the SoC I/O tile, which handles the processor's platform I/O; and a fourth tile, which is currently unknown. This could be a memory stack with similar functions as the HBM stacks on "Sapphire Rapids," or something entirely different.

The compute tile contains the processor's various CPU core types. The P cores are "Redwood Cove," which are two generations ahead of the current "Golden Cove." If Intel's 12-20% generational IPC uplift cadence holds, we're looking at cores with up to 30% higher IPC than "Golden Cove" (50-60% higher than "Skylake."). "Meteor Lake" also debuts Intel's next-generation E-core, codenamed "Crestmont." The compute tile is rumored to be fabricated on the Intel 4 node (optically a 7 nm-class node, but with characteristics similar to TSMC N5).
The graphics tile is an interesting piece of silicon. Based on the same Xe LP graphics architecture as the current generation; this iGPU will be labeled Gen 12.7, with the ".7" denoting an incremental update (such as updates to the media accelerators or display controllers). Intel could bring about a generational doubling in the SIMD power, by deploying up to 192 execution units (EUs), up from 96 on the current-generation "Tiger Lake." To keep the power draw of the iGPU at a minimum while meeting its performance goals, Intel will build the graphics tile on a TSMC node, possibly N3 (3 nm).
The third known tile is the SoC tile, which is essentially an integrated chipset. It's not known whether this tile handles the memory and main PCIe root-complex, but could definitely put out I/O typically associated with the PCH, such as USB, audio bus, storage, downstream PCIe, etc. This tile, too, is expected to be built on a TSMC node. Intel will stick with DDR5 (possibly along with LPDDR5X) and PCI-Express 5.0 as its I/O combination for the 14th generation.

A late-2021 test chip production would put "Meteor Lake" through testing and sampling throughout 2022 and 2023. We expect a late-2023/2024 launch for these chips. This would correspond with when Intel 4 and TSMC N3 nodes hit volume production.
Sources: CNET, Wccftech
Add your own comment

32 Comments on Intel "Meteor Lake" Chips Already Being Built at the Arizona Fab

#1
Nephilim666
Great to see Intel is only 7 years behind AMD on chiplets/glue.
Posted on Reply
#3
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Nephilim666Great to see Intel is only 7 years behind AMD on chiplets/glue.
Xeon Sapphire Rapids is essentially EPYC Rome (four chiplets), with better named glue.

Posted on Reply
#4
Richards
This is very advanced packaging... 40 cores+ 192 eu laptops will make desktops irrelevant very quickly
Posted on Reply
#5
Nuckles56
RichardsThis is very advanced packaging... 40 cores+ 192 eu laptops will make desktops irrelevant very quickly
Where exactly do you see any mention of 40 cores for a laptop CPU? Besides, you'd have 256 cores for desktop at that stage, so desktop would still be massively superior
Posted on Reply
#6
Crackong
btarunrXeon Sapphire Rapids is essentially EPYC Rome (four chiplets), with better named glue.
Isn't Sapphire Rapids similar to first gen EPYC (Naples) ?
- Each Die(Tile) is a complete SoC on its own
- Separated memory controller on each Die(Tile)
- High latency on accessing data located in the memory on the opposite corner.




Posted on Reply
#8
DeathtoGnomes
@btarunr

Intel "Meteor Lake" Chips Already Bring Built at the Arizona Fab

typo here?

Intel "Meteor Lake" Chips Already Being Built at the Arizona Fab

Posted on Reply
#9
rares495
RichardsThis is very advanced packaging... 40 cores+ 192 eu laptops will make desktops irrelevant very quickly
Good luck cooling that in a laptop.
Posted on Reply
#10
londiste
CrackongIsn't Sapphire Rapids similar to first gen EPYC (Naples) ?
- Each Die(Tile) is a complete SoC on its own
- Separated memory controller on each Die(Tile)
- High latency on accessing data located in the memory on the opposite corner.
Intel's idea to mitigate these problems is bunch of EMIB and dies with mirrored layouts. It should - in theory - get close enough to monolithic architecturally. With EMIB the connections are quite a bit more efficient than over PCB and should allow for wide/fast connections between dies/chiplets/tiles.

The really interesting details on Sapphire Rapids (for example whether memory will be UMA or NUMA) are so far quite scarce but we will see soon enough.
Nephilim666Great to see Intel is only 7 years behind AMD on chiplets/glue.
Everything new is well-forgotten old :)
Posted on Reply
#11
Richards
Nuckles56Where exactly do you see any mention of 40 cores for a laptop CPU? Besides, you'd have 256 cores for desktop at that stage, so desktop would still be massively superior
Desktops have terrible power consumption plus they sell way less... more people have laptops than desktops
Posted on Reply
#12
Crackong
londisteIntel's idea to mitigate these problems is bunch of EMIB and dies with mirrored layouts. It should - in theory - get close enough to monolithic architecturally. With EMIB the connections are quite a bit more efficient than over PCB and should allow for wide/fast connections between dies/chiplets/tiles.

The really interesting details on Sapphire Rapids (for example whether memory will be UMA or NUMA) are so far quite scarce but we will see soon enough.
Everything new is well-forgotten old :)
I see

Yea, it will be quite interesting to see how many NUMA nodes there, and how the software licenses respond to them:)
Posted on Reply
#13
Nuckles56
RichardsDesktops have terrible power consumption plus they sell way less... more people have laptops than desktops
You never answered the question: where did the 40 cores for a laptop chip come from?
Posted on Reply
#15
AusWolf
Where is 13th gen? Did Intel become superstitious all of a sudden?
Posted on Reply
#16
ncrs
londisteThe really interesting details on Sapphire Rapids (for example whether memory will be UMA or NUMA) are so far quite scarce but we will see soon enough.
Even since Haswell Xeons the chip is configurable to be NUMA (the feature name changed names: cluster-on-die, sub-NUMA clustering) regardless of it being a monolithic die, since the IMCs are physically closer to some cores. I guess this feature will be retained on Sapphire Rapids, especially that they are physically separate dies.
EPYCs also do this, they even allow you to create NUMA domains by L3 cache so that groups of cores sharing it get the lowest memory latency possible.
CrackongYea, it will be quite interesting to see how many NUMA nodes there, and how the software licenses respond to them:)
Licensing usually doesn't care about NUMA nodes, but core count. In any case NUMA on x86 is nothing new, so the software vendors are probably ready ;)
Posted on Reply
#17
londiste
AusWolfWhere is 13th gen? Did Intel become superstitious all of a sudden?
13th gen is Raptor Lake, rumored ETA end of 2022.
14th gen is Meteor Lake, rumored ETA end of 2023.
Posted on Reply
#18
Soupsammich
Oh wow. News I'm actually ahead of the curve on.

I have been well aware of this for some time. Because it made traffic stupid.
Posted on Reply
#19
AusWolf
londiste13th gen is Raptor Lake, rumored ETA end of 2022.
14th gen is Meteor Lake, rumored ETA end of 2023.
I know. It's just weird to see 14th gen being in pre-production when 12th gen has just been released.
Posted on Reply
#20
Jism
RichardsDesktops have terrible power consumption plus they sell way less... more people have laptops than desktops
99% of the time my desktop is in power saving mode, has some benefits on for example a downclocked CPU. A PC that will hit standby in less then a minute of activity. When i need it i turn it back on to balanced.

But i'm sure the consumption is quite in check running like this.
Posted on Reply
#21
ratirt
RichardsDesktops have terrible power consumption plus they sell way less... more people have laptops than desktops
I think you have a real problem grasping a what desktop represents. Higher power consumption is necessary to achieve certain level of performance. You may argue if the power used by components is higher than expected or not but it all comes down to components. You claim desktops have too high power consumption but yet this is the only scenario where you can actually do this without getting your system constrained. You cant compare a laptop to a desktop because these are two different segments. Saying that desktops use too much power because laptops dont is foolish. Desktops can use more power and have better performance because you can cool those easier than in a confined space laptop gives you. That is why laptop are lower power consuming machines thus less powerful. Desktops dont have terrible power consumption than laptops. They have higher power capabilities which prevents laptops having this due to heat and cooling constraints. Laptops are compact and build with power saving in mind giving certain level of performance.
Now, a processor may have a ridiculous or terrible power consumption to achieve a certain level of performance in today's standard but that is basically it. You can balance it though to get as much as possible from a CPU within a reasonable power consumption range.
People prefer laptops over desktops. That is the most vague and ridiculous thing one can say really.
Posted on Reply
#22
AusWolf
ratirtI think you have a real problem grasping a what desktop represents. Higher power consumption is necessary to achieve certain level of performance. You may argue if the power used by components is higher than expected or not but it all comes down to components. You claim desktops have too high power consumption but yet this is the only scenario where you can actually do this without getting your system constrained. You cant compare a laptop to a desktop because these are two different segments. Saying that desktops use too much power because laptops dont is foolish. Desktops can use more power and have better performance because you can cool those easier than in a confined space laptop gives you. That is why laptop are lower power consuming machines thus less powerful. Desktops dont have terrible power consumption than laptops. They have higher power capabilities which prevents laptops having this due to heat and cooling constraints. Laptops are compact and build with power saving in mind giving certain level of performance.
Now, a processor may have a ridiculous or terrible power consumption to achieve a certain level of performance in today's standard but that is basically it. You can balance it though to get as much as possible from a CPU within a reasonable power consumption range.
That's one thing. Another thing is that your PC basically never runs at 100% usage and power consumption, unless you're using it for CPU-heavy work, like video rendering. Who cares if my Core i7-11700 hits 170 W in Cinebench when it barely needs more than 60-70 W in games?
Posted on Reply
#23
ratirt
AusWolfThat's one thing. Another thing is that your PC basically never runs at 100% usage and power consumption, unless you're using it for CPU-heavy work, like video rendering. Who cares if my Core i7-11700 hits 170 W in Cinebench when it barely needs more than 60-70 W in games?
Lets focus on a desktop part not what are you going to be using it for. Because you will get an answer like I browse the internet and laptop is OK for it. Or I dont play AAA games but old instead and my laptop is more than enough.
Posted on Reply
#24
AusWolf
ratirtLets focus on a desktop part not what are you going to be using it for. Because you will get an answer like I browse the internet and laptop is OK for it. Or I dont play AAA games but old instead and my laptop is more than enough.
If I get that answer, all I can say is, cool, go for it. (So?) :)

It's like saying "I don't need a sports car, I just go shopping once a week." Well, don't buy a sports car, then. :D
Posted on Reply
#25
Richards
Lol Apple's m1 max destroys most of the electricity pig desktops un the market for less power... the m2 will destroy a 3090 or 4090 using 50watts lol
ratirtI think you have a real problem grasping a what desktop represents. Higher power consumption is necessary to achieve certain level of performance. You may argue if the power used by components is higher than expected or not but it all comes down to components. You claim desktops have too high power consumption but yet this is the only scenario where you can actually do this without getting your system constrained. You cant compare a laptop to a desktop because these are two different segments. Saying that desktops use too much power because laptops dont is foolish. Desktops can use more power and have better performance because you can cool those easier than in a confined space laptop gives you. That is why laptop are lower power consuming machines thus less powerful. Desktops dont have terrible power consumption than laptops. They have higher power capabilities which prevents laptops having this due to heat and cooling constraints. Laptops are compact and build with power saving in mind giving certain level of performance.
Now, a processor may have a ridiculous or terrible power consumption to achieve a certain level of performance in today's standard but that is basically it. You can balance it though to get as much as possible from a CPU within a reasonable power consumption range.
People prefer laptops over desktops. That is the most vague and ridiculous thing one can say really.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment