Monday, October 19th 2026

Intel "Nova Lake" Xeon E Series Carries Only P-Core or E-Core SKUs, No Hybrid Configurations

by
AleksandarK
 Discuss (23 Comments)
Intel is preparing to launch its upcoming "Nova Lake" processors in multiple versions, and the latest leaks highlight a particularly interesting Xeon E lineup. According to well-known leaker Jaykihn, Intel will be releasing its Xeon E-series based on "Nova Lake" silicon in two versions: big P-Core only or efficiency E-Core only SKUs. Reportedly, the P-Core only lineup will include five configurations with 4, 6, 8, 12, and 16 P-Cores. Meanwhile, the E-Core lineup will be slightly smaller, featuring four SKUs with 4, 8, 16, and 32 E-Core versions. At the top of the range, Intel Xeon E-series buyers can choose between a 16 P-Core design or a 32 E-Core configuration. There will be no hybrid SKUs with both P-Cores and E-Cores, as those will be reserved for the regular "Nova Lake-S" desktop processors.

Intel's new Xeon E designs will be powered by the W980 chipset platform. Motherboards with the W980 chipset will support native DDR5 memory with ECC, up to 48 PCIe lanes, including 12 PCIe 5.0 lanes directly from the chipset alongside 12 PCIe 4.0 lanes, and Intel vPro technology, along with numerous other optimizations typical of workstation chipsets. The DMI chipset bus bandwidth is set to 128 Gbps per direction, thanks to the implementation of DMI 5.0 x4, which is another great platform addition. It also offers two 40 Gbps USB4 or Thunderbolt 4 ports from the CPU. The PCI-Express 5.0 x16 PEG slot from the processor can be segmented into x8/x8 or other combinations using lane switches. Both CPU-attached M.2 NVMe slots can be configured as Gen 5.
Finally, we have no information about pricing, launch dates, or any specifics, as Intel hasn't confirmed any details or a possible Xeon E update. Since the regular "Nova Lake-S" designs are expected to arrive first in the first quarter of 2027, we can anticipate these other configurations to follow closely after partners complete their motherboard designs and system integrators prepare the workstation designs that will use this platform.
Source: Jaykihn

Related News

Add your own comment

23 Comments on Intel "Nova Lake" Xeon E Series Carries Only P-Core or E-Core SKUs, No Hybrid Configurations

#1
Dr_b_
Since they are locking xeon to the workstation chipset, they should go all in on RDIMMs
Posted on Reply
#2
bgx
would be great to benchmark the 12P and 16P version to understand how they fare (when its out of course).

I didnt see it done for previous xeon, but the configurations may have been either similar (so no point benchmarking) or very different (the X Rapids chips).

Price /perf might not be good cause of the W chipset and what comes with it, but at least we would have an idea what a P only nova lake would be like.
Posted on Reply
#3
jesdals
No thunderbolt 5? isnt that part of Novalake? Or is it only for Laptops?
Posted on Reply
#4
Onasi
jesdalsNo thunderbolt 5? isnt that part of Novalake? Or is it only for Laptops?
No, from what we’ve heard, it should be provided by the CPU itself across the entire architecture range, so I would assume it’s just not mentioned in the leak because of oversight?
Posted on Reply
#5
_roman_
The partly removal of bclk, cpu overclocking and no ecc support for most chipsets is not really something i want to see for a XEON

It's time to get rid of USB 2 on the silicion and upgrade it to usb 3.0

USB 1.1 already supported usb hubs with up top 128 clients. I do not want to see thunderbolt or any usb 2.0 ports on my next purchase. It is a waste of silicion and mechanical ports. USB hubs are very cheap when you really need to connect several legacy usb 1.1 or usb 2 devices

40gb usb i also do not want to see, 80gb or leave it. These cpus already look obsolete before you can buy them
Posted on Reply
#6
AusWolf
Shame it's workstation only. Otherwise, these could mark the return of the Jedi Intel on my horizon.
Posted on Reply
#7
enb141
Why a E-core only Xeon?
P-core only makes sense but E-core only, specially for Xeons, what's the benefit?
Posted on Reply
#8
AusWolf
enb141Why a E-core only Xeon?
P-core only makes sense but E-core only, specially for Xeons, what's the benefit?
Server applications with lots of parallel read/write operations, probably.
Posted on Reply
#9
enb141
AusWolfServer applications with lots of parallel read/write operations, probably.
According to the article will be maxed out to 32 P or 32 E cores, so I don't see how a 32 E cores are going to be a better choice than 32 P cores.
Posted on Reply
#10
tfp
enb141According to the article will be maxed out to 32 P or 32 E cores, so I don't see how a 32 E cores are going to be a better choice than 32 P cores.
I think it says 16P or 32E.
Posted on Reply
#11
enb141
tfpI think it says 16P or 32E.
You are right is either 16 P or 32 E, as far as I know E cores have some limitations in comparison to P cores.
Posted on Reply
#12
Patriot
enb141According to the article will be maxed out to 32 P or 32 E cores, so I don't see how a 32 E cores are going to be a better choice than 32 P cores.
4/6/8/12/16P or 4/8/16/32E

16P or 32E, no 32P

The consumer side has the hybrid still
Jan '27 before next delay.
8 Coyote Cove Performance cores, 16 Arctic Wolf Efficiency cores, and 4 Low-Power Efficiency cores
Sometime later a dual tile variant of it if it doesn't get canceled.
Though something gets truncated in the doubling due to power issues... as 2x28 is not 52...
Posted on Reply
#13
kazuviking
enb141I don't see how a 32 E cores are going to be a better choice
Extremely good efficiency compared to P cores.
Posted on Reply
#14
AusWolf
enb141You are right is either 16 P or 32 E, as far as I know E cores have some limitations in comparison to P cores.
Yes, it's either 16 p or 32 e-cores.
The limitations of e-cores aren't a problem for a file / web server where you don't need the extra instructions (AVX) and clock speed of p-cores, put you need high parallelisation and efficiency.
Posted on Reply
#15
Rulumi
AusWolfYes, it's either 16 p or 32 e-cores.
The limitations of e-cores aren't a problem for a file / web server where you don't need the extra instructions (AVX) and clock speed of p-cores, put you need high parallelisation and efficiency.
Current E-cores do support AVX and AVX2, Nova Lake ones will also support AVX-512 through AVX10.2 and also will add APX support.
Posted on Reply
#16
thestryker6
bgxwould be great to benchmark the 12P and 16P version to understand how they fare (when its out of course).
As far as I'm aware these should be the exact same Compute Tile silicon as every other NVL-S part. That means 12/16P would be binned dual Compute Tile SKUs as would the 32E.
jesdalsNo thunderbolt 5? isnt that part of Novalake?
From some clarification by Jaykihn (it may have since changed) the CPUs have the capability, but it requires specific retimers so is optional. I cannot recall if there is also some chipset limitation aspect as well.
enb141Why a E-core only Xeon?
P-core only makes sense but E-core only, specially for Xeons, what's the benefit?
These are largely aimed at edge customers so it's entirely possible for a workload to need more threads and a lower power profile.
PatriotThough something gets truncated in the doubling due to power issues... as 2x28 is not 52...
The LPE cores are not a part of the Compute Tile so the only thing getting doubled is the 8P/16E.
Posted on Reply
#17
AntiX3DGlazer
Patriot4/6/8/12/16P or 4/8/16/32E

16P or 32E, no 32P

The consumer side has the hybrid still
Jan '27 before next delay.
8 Coyote Cove Performance cores, 16 Arctic Wolf Efficiency cores, and 4 Low-Power Efficiency cores
Sometime later a dual tile variant of it if it doesn't get canceled.
Though something gets truncated in the doubling due to power issues... as 2x28 is not 52...
Number of LP-E cores is not doubled due to them being in the one of the uncore tiles.
Posted on Reply
#18
enb141
Patriot4/6/8/12/16P or 4/8/16/32E

16P or 32E, no 32P

The consumer side has the hybrid still
Jan '27 before next delay.
8 Coyote Cove Performance cores, 16 Arctic Wolf Efficiency cores, and 4 Low-Power Efficiency cores
Sometime later a dual tile variant of it if it doesn't get canceled.
Though something gets truncated in the doubling due to power issues... as 2x28 is not 52...
Yes I saw that 16 P or 32 E. but as far as I know this is the first time with efficient only cores. In the past (short present) is either all performance or a mix.
kazuvikingExtremely good efficiency compared to P cores.
But this is the first time with only efficiency cores, so how will affect if you don't have the P cores anymore is the question.
AusWolfYes, it's either 16 p or 32 e-cores.
The limitations of e-cores aren't a problem for a file / web server where you don't need the extra instructions (AVX) and clock speed of p-cores, put you need high parallelisation and efficiency.
AVX is included in E cores, but what else could be the limited part, SQL?
thestryker6These are largely aimed at edge customers so it's entirely possible for a workload to need more threads and a lower power profile.
Also P only cores, but the question will be if Core i9 will be a better choice than E only cores Xeon (besides ECC, etc.).
Posted on Reply
#19
Wirko
enb141Why a E-core only Xeon?
P-core only makes sense but E-core only, specially for Xeons, what's the benefit?
One big advantage of E-cores over P-cores is, and has been since Alder Lake, more performance per mm² of silicon.

But maybe Intel just asked AI agents what kind of office they prefer to work in, and the agents said "E!"
Posted on Reply
#20
thestryker6
enb141Also P only cores, but the question will be if Core i9 will be a better choice than E only cores Xeon (besides ECC, etc.).
These are likely to be the same Compute Tiles as the Core Ultra parts (ECC is supported by Core Ultra). The whole point of these Xeon E parts existing is for customers who do not want a hybrid architecture. This effectively gives them three product segments for the edge market: P-core only, E-core only and hybrid. It's entirely possible Intel could use the exact same die as NVL-S for them like they did with the RPL Xeon E even though it seems very wasteful.
Posted on Reply
#21
jdrch
enb141P-core only makes sense but E-core only, specially for Xeons, what's the benefit?
"E" is relative. File serving, network routing, etc. are all super low power compared to frontier model rack units that consumer 2-3 kW each.
Posted on Reply
#22
AusWolf
RulumiCurrent E-cores do support AVX and AVX2, Nova Lake ones will also support AVX-512 through AVX10.2 and also will add APX support.
In that case, it's the core clock difference. Server applications (large amounts of concurrent read/write operations) aren't sensitive to clock speed, but they need to be as parallel as possible.
jdrch"E" is relative. File serving, network routing, etc. are all super low power compared to frontier model rack units that consumer 2-3 kW each.
This.
Posted on Reply
#23
MufasaV
The only limitation is AMX. E core here supports everything else including AVX 512
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 12th, 2026 04:39 CST change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

TPU on YouTube

Controversial News Posts