I would not go that far, it could just be boosting that one core harder or something.
Given the smaller node you’d expect the temps to be a bit higher but a lot of that is probably also just down to the macbook style fan profile.
This very likely has some extremely smart/sophisticated throttling behaviors.
Sad the lid isn’t even listed on the store jet and everything else is on coming soon.
I can confirm P cores are 0-3 and lpe cores are 12-15.
It seems to me, at least from my s-tui, that every 4 E-cores (including LPE cores) share the same temp sensor (total 3 for 12 E cores)
One of the P cores is closer to the mem controller according to the die shot. We also know from die shot & intel’s slides that every 4 E-cores form a cluster.
I found something interesting that could be related to this 400MHz core lock bug
400MHz, but unlike intel 12th gen where all cores are locked, in the Core Ultra 3 only C0 is locked to 400MHz.
Let’s go back to the screenshot. Notice that the btopscreenshot showed “400MHz” on the upper-right corner? that’s because btop’s default setting displays the first core aka C0
have there been actual reviews yet? Not hand-picked advertisement-oriented samples? I see rtings.com haven’t even ordered it yet..
Notebookcheck has been out for a while
that came out the same day as advertisement-‘reviews’, so I assume they got special review-units too. I also usually find their numbers inflated too.
Kinda doubt they did special review units and notebookchecks testing it at the very least consistent so can be compared between different devices.
I do wish someone checked if the claim of “better wifi antennas” is actually true though.
The cooling system is special. Not a single user in this forum has ever reached 55W peak TDP. or the ‘reviewer’ set their AC of their rooms to the lowest temperature
Hard to imagine C3 is at 100C and 400MHz. Therefore maybe all of C0, C1, C2 are at 400MHz.
TBH I have not noticed 400MHz in HWInfo during testing under windows. With that, benchmark result is still low (cinebench 10% lower than XPS), so 400MHz might be an independent issue.
I do notice better throughput on SMB file copying via Wifi and have CachyOS on both my FW13Pro and PC (AM4 board) as well as a MBP2015 with Omarchy.
So the Wifi card for me is an unexpected upgrade, iPerf3 to my server also shows nice stats
I would hope the wifi card is better but I am specifically interested if the improvement is just the nic or if the antennas are really better than the frankly quite bad ones in the non pro 13. It was only something nirav blurted out during one of the assembly videos so I am not sure the antennas are actually optimized or all the gains just come from the probably better be211 I can’t use on an amd platform.
I already get quite good iperf3 numbers with my ax210 and good signal (1.4Gbit wifi6 160Mhz) but it really falls of way quicker with weaker signal than for example my x270 with an ax210 (same os same nic just different antennas/lid, huge difference).
Wait for @CJ_Elevated 's review. He is more critical than many other reviewers