Meteor Lake it really turned out as the pessimists predicted. Designation as second Ice Lake or the other Tiger Lake they are basically spot on. The processor itself is basically usable, but the benefit compared to the older generation is cosmetic and, according to the first reviews, it doesn’t really match the way Intel presented this generation.
model cores / threads clockL3TDP
limitMeteor Lake-HCore Ultra 9 185H*6+8+2/225,1 / ? GHz
3,8 / ? GHz24MB45W
115WCore Ultra 7 165H6+8+2/225,0 / 1,4 GHz
3,8 / 0,9 GHz24MB28W
64-115WCore Ultra 7 155H6+8+2/224,8 / 1,4 GHz
3,8 / 0,9 GHz24MB28W
64-115WCore Ultra 5 135H4+8+2/184,6 / 1,7 GHz
3,6 / 1,2 GHz18MB28W
64-115WCore Ultra 5 125H4+8+2/184,5 / 1,2 GHz
3,6 / 0,7 GHz18MB28W
64-115WMeteor Lake-U15Core Ultra 7 165U2+8+2/144,9 / 1,7 GHz
3,8 / 1,2 GHz12MB
15W
57W
Core Ultra 7 155U2+8+2/144,8 / 1,7 GHz
3,8 / 1,2 GHz12MB15W
57WCore Ultra 5 135U2+8+2/144,4 / 1,6 GHz
3,6 / 1,1 GHz12MB
15W
57W
Core Ultra 5 125U2+8+2/144,3 / 1,3 GHz
3,6 / 0,8 GHz12MB
15W
57W
Meteor Lake-U9Core Ultra 7 164U*2+8+2/14
4,8 / ? GHz
3,8 / ? GHz
12MB9W
30WCore Ultra 5 134U*2+8+2/144,4 / ? GHz
3,8 / ? GHz12MB9W
30W
*models expected to be released in the first quarter of 2024
The editors of the Notebookcheck website tested the Core Ultra 7 155H, which should be a 28W product, however both tested notebooks (Asus ZenBook 14, Acer Swift Go 14) had TDP set to higher values, 33-50 and 45-55 watts. Notebookcheck compared them with the Ryzen 7 7840U, however, considering their real consumption, it is necessary to compare them at least with the Ryzen 7 7840S in the Lenovo Yoga Slim 7 system, which has a 30W TDP set (which would correspond to about a 41W limit). A more kosher would be a comparison with some system built on a 35-45W Ryzen 7 7840HS, but that is not yet available.
Processor performance and energy efficiency
Cinebench R23 Single-Core (Notebookcheck)
The single-core CineBench score is 12.5% higher compared to the Ryzen 7 7840U, 1% higher compared to the Ryzen 7 7840S, which is quite secondary when looking at power efficiency in a single-core workload:
Energy efficiency in single-core load, Cinebench R23 Single-Core (Notebookcheck)
In that Meteor Lake Core Ultra 7 155H finished last on the chart. Compared to the Ryzen 7 7840U, it is 57% worse, compared to the Ryzen 7 7840S, it is 10% worse.
Cinebench R23 Multi-Core (Notebookcheck)
In the overall CineBench load, it achieves 21% higher performance than the Ryzen 7 7840U and catches up with the Ryzen 7 7840S.
Energy efficiency in total load, Cinebench R23 Multi-Core (Notebookcheck)
Energy efficiency is basically at the level of better models Raptor Lake. Ryzen 7 7840U achieves 2x better results, Ryzen 7 7840S 24% better results.
Regarding performance in less heavy-duty workloads, Notebookcheck offers PCMark scores, where both of the already mentioned Ryzens achieve 2-8% better results (recall that both with significantly lower power consumption):
PCMark (Notebookcheck)
Notebookcheck also tested performance at equally set energy limits:
graph-15
Let us remind you that the Ryzen 7 7840U is an eight-core processor, the Core Ultra 7 155H is a sixteen-core one, of which fourteen cores are used under load. A higher number of cores need to run at significantly lower clocks to achieve the same overall performance, which significantly improves energy efficiency. Despite this, at the same power limits, the Ryzen 7 7840U outperforms the Core Ultra 7 155H by up to 16%.
Graphics performance
graph-99
Notebookcheck tested the performance in seven games, of which the Ryzen 7 7840S wins in six, the Core Ultra 7 155H in the only one. The lead of the integrated Radeon 780M is 31% on average. The Intel slides presenting a >10% higher gaming performance were therefore not confirmed by the Notebookcheck measurement.
Even in terms of energy efficiency, Intel’s integrated graphics does not surpass the Radeon 780M:
Energy efficiency of the integrated GPU (NotebookCheck)
The first results coming from independent measurements are not for Meteor Lake not flattering. It outperforms the competition only when comparing models with significantly higher consumption. If we compare apples to apples, the situation does not turn out for Meteor Lake flattering at all and both overall performance and overall consumption are comparable or just cosmetically better compared to last year Raptor Lake. In contrast, the performance of the integrated graphics has improved significantly, but it still lacks more than three tenths of a percent of performance to reach the level of Intel’s Radeon 780M. For Intel, the situation is all the more difficult because until the release Arrow Lakewhich will happen sometime in a year, will not be able to offer anything better, while AMD is preparing an APU for half a year Strix Point equipped with more powerful cores Zen 5, which will be 50% more than the current Phoenix, not to mention more powerful integrated graphics. Therefore, Intel has the best chances for sales Meteor Lake in the first half of 2024, after which the competitive pressure will increase further.
2023-12-14 23:00:07
#Meteor #Lake #released #Disappointing #energy #efficiency #performance
