News Intel's flagship Lunar Lake Ultra 9 is slower than an Ultra 7 in the single laptop where it's currently for sale

[Admin]

We tested the new Asus Zenbook S14 with the Core Ultra 9 288V processor, and surprisingly found that the Core Ultra 9 is slower than the Ultra 7 model in threaded workloads.

Intel's flagship Lunar Lake Ultra 9 is slower than an Ultra 7 in the single laptop where it's currently for sale : Read more

 

[RosElks]

Kind of obvious what's happening; Intel did it on purpose so Cristiano can't have the so much craved 'battle of the benchmarks'

 

[JRStern]

Appreciate you guys' work on all this, but it comes out so confusing. It's apparent that Intel themselves are massively uncertain what the E-core/P-core thing is all about. I'd *thought* it was about unloading IO onto E-cores so the P-cores didn't have to get interrupted, upsetting the pipeline and clearing the cache, and all, E-cores being much cheaper to build and run, and yes, I suppose they could run at different, even faster, clock speeds being simpler and all. Yet it never occurred to me that the chip could run different cores at different speeds at the same time - though maybe phones have been doing this for twenty years, so I'm a little behind on the details of some of this stuff, LOL, so was Intel.

I also wondered just how heavy it would be for Windows to factor out what they wanted to run on an E-core versus a P-core, given different core counts of each, and base versus turbo, and yada yada. So much software development, even more than other areas of engineering, seem to consist of people, even the biggest companies, just bumbling around until they trip over something that works really well, but then six other people or projects or departments just won't accept it and keep running in other directions ...

 

[bit_user]

@PaulAlcorn , with release dates slipping and now this, perhaps 2024 is shaping up to be the year of the flubbed launch? Depends on how Arrow Lake's launch goes, but if that's also rough, then I'd say it's a bad sign for the industry.

At least with AMD, I can sort of understand. They've broadened out their product portfolio a lot, in the past couple years. I think they might be getting stretched thin. In Intel's case, I have more trouble understanding why Lunar Lake (not unlike Meteor Lake before it) seems to be having a rough launch.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

At least with AMD, I can sort of understand. They've broadened out their product portfolio a lot, in the past couple years. I think they might be getting stretched thin. In Intel's case, I have more trouble understanding why Lunar Lake (not unlike Meteor Lake before it) seems to be having a rough launch.

I think in AMD's case, it's Left-Hand not knowing what the Right-Hand is doing, and suddenly the Middle-Hand shows up and wants to do something.

There are serious internal communications issue and standardization on BenchMark testing that needs to happen within AMD.

Also, messaging to the public & reviewers needs to be adjusted to be concise, uniform, and properly tested before any information goes out.

No more gas-lighting of reviewers over 1-2%, seriously, that's shameful.

Also, no more releasing crap w/o having tested it themselves.

They need to go Slower, Dot their I's, Cross their T's.

This way they can end up going faster over-all, and not trip up on minor issues that get blown out of proportion and cause unnecessary head-aches.

 

[thestryker]

Greatly appreciate this update and look into the performance. I noticed that most of the laptops seemed to be trying to maximize performance putting lower chips into higher power modes so I'd just chalked it up to overall clock limits at the power levels. I'm curious if this is why there haven't been any releases with the 288V or if it was always to be a lower volume product/Asus got some sort of short term exclusivity.