Intel's Next-Generation Panther Lake Laptop Chips Could Be a Return To Form (arstechnica.com)
- Reference: 0179731172
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/25/10/09/1753223/intels-next-generation-panther-lake-laptop-chips-could-be-a-return-to-form
- Source link: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/10/intels-next-generation-panther-lake-laptop-chips-could-be-a-return-to-form/
All three chips use the same Cougar Cove P-cores, Darkmont E-cores, and Xe3 GPU architecture. They share an NPU capable of 50 trillion operations per second and identical media encoding capabilities. The main differences are core counts and I/O options rather than fundamental architectural variations. The approach contrasts with Intel's current Core Ultra 200 series. Lunar Lake chips integrated RAM on-package and used the latest Battlemage GPU architecture but were mostly used in high-end thin laptops.
Arrow Lake processors offered more flexibility but paired newer CPU cores with older graphics and an NPU that did not meet Microsoft Copilot+ requirements. Intel claims Panther Lake delivers up to 10% better single-threaded performance than Lunar Lake and up to 50% faster multi-threaded performance than both previous generations. The GPU is roughly 50% quicker. Power consumption drops 10% compared to Lunar Lake and 40% versus Arrow Lake. The chips use Intel's 18A manufacturing process for the compute tile. TSMC fabricates the platform controller tile. Intel said systems with Panther Lake processors should ship by the end of 2025.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/10/intels-next-generation-panther-lake-laptop-chips-could-be-a-return-to-form/
It is always about how it could be or will be (Score:4, Insightful)
Intel talks about the future all the time, and has been for well over ten years now. Our next product will be so amazing! They even have been saying that two days after a product launch, indicating that they don't even respect the latest products enough to stop talking about how great those future products are. Those who parrot Intel are also in that mode of, "ignore how things are now, because the future will be so much better!". The only reason for doing this is to keep Intel stock prices from going back down to $20-$21 per share, so, pump and dump for Intel stock.
Sure, it's POSSIBLE for Intel to come back, AMD managed to come back from being almost bankrupt, but that was due to Lisa Su being very product focused instead of talking like a CEO, she talks like the president of the company. A good president won't hype things to the moon when times are tough, they will focus on getting the company back on track with better products, which will be better in the long term for the COMPANY. Intel is more focused on the stock price for all of their hype.
So, what's better, being honest while promoting the best characteristics of your current product offerings, or say how great everything is and will be, while clearly ignoring the failings of your products so things CAN actually get better?
Re: (Score:2)
This.
The customers of the CEO are the shareholders. Say anything to undermine the value of their property and they'll sue. Or toss you out.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if their chips do turn out to be actually good, would you trust Intel? Their security has proven to be lacking, and they use a lot of abusive tactics like artificially limiting features and having short lived sockets.
"Return to form" (Score:3)
I would argue that, for Intel, the phrase "returning to form" does not indicate a move in a positive direction.
Don't expect too much (Score:2)
Parametric yields on 18A are reportedly not great. Expect a top clockspeed of 5.1 GHz with not much in the way of IPC improvement. It will use less power than Arrow Lake per core. The real story will be the Xe3 iGPU which will be significantly better than Intel's past entries. It still won't challenge Strix Halo, but it also won't cost $1500 just for a bare board. Probably.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with those integrated graphics is if they are any good intel only ever puts them onto the really expensive chips.
It makes it completely pointless because you're getting at best the performance of a RX 2050 in a $1,200 laptop. You could easily find a laptop at the same price point with discrete graphics and a low end integrated graphic solution on die for when you want to save power.
As an example if I want an arc 140v based laptop it's going to set me back at least $1,100 and I can get an
No they literally could not be (Score:1)
Intel's "Form" that made them famous was having superior process technology and parlaying that into superior performance.
Intel no longer has superior process technology. They have roughly equivalent tech, except that their yields are trash. Or, they use someone else's process technology, in which case it's still not superior.
Intel's Next-Generation Panther Lake Laptop Chips Literally Could Not Be A Return To Form doesn't have quite the same ring to it as the headline you used here, but it wouldn't have been
How hot? (Score:2)
Intel thought it would be okay for a laptop CPU to hit 100 centigrade. Have they reconsidered the notion of boiling testicles?
Re: (Score:2)
Intel does a form of STAPM now. 100C at the die does not mean 100C at the exterior surface of the laptop and you thinking this, implies you have a poor understanding of thermodynamics.If my laptop is 99C cpu, my IR gun's hotspot on the bottom of the laptop is only 40C. Mildly warm and tolerable.
Why no PCIE on the low end? (Score:2)
Even my Raspberry Pi has PCIE now. Why would the cripple a general purpose CPU by not giving it a bus that can keep up with it?
Re: (Score:3)
Poorly worded. They all have PCIE, the middle one just has 20 vs 12.
Or they could be crap (Score:1, Flamebait)
You know, like the stuff Intel has produced fror a long, long time now.
Re: (Score:3)
Skylake was good for its time(other than Meltdown and Spectre vulnerabilities), but Intel let itself get stuck with no design improvements due to being unable to get from 14nm to 10nm. Performance cores are power hungry, but do have decent performance. The problem is, Intel waters down its chips with all of those e-cores that make machines run like crap.
Re: (Score:3)
If the addition of an e-core makes your machine run like crap, use a better OS.
I made a tool "topline" that nicely visualizes this kind of scheduling. Run it on some terminal, then run various tasks somewhere. Observe the tasks moving between p-cores and e-cores.
Re: (Score:3)
e-cores are NOT good. They have lower perf/watt than the race-to-idle optmized P-cores, they have less access to cache, they clog up the ring bus, and any task you throw at them takes longer to finish.
They sure do fluff a cinebench score though, and that is the ONLY reason Intel uses them. I disable them on my 12700K and instantly saw vastly higher 1% lows in gaming and a lower latency OS experience in general. E-cores should be illegal and whoever invented them thrown in jail.