Intel’s Panther Lake chip reveals built-in graphics don’t suck

Intel’s Core Extremely Collection 3 platform, Panther Lake, and its champion, the Core Extremely X9 388H microprocessor, provide one thing distinctive: highly effective, gaming-class 3D efficiency with battery life that’s nearly remarkable within the laptop computer area.

Intel positioned the Core Extremely Collection 3 (Panther Lake) as a chip with the computational energy of its Arrow Lake platform, with the low energy consumption of the Core Extremely Collection 2 (Lunar Lake). The chip maker additionally predicted that Panther Lake’s gaming efficiency is roughly equal to a laptop computer with an Nvidia GeForce 4050 laptop computer chip inside it. As I’ll present you, these are comparatively truthful claims.

As a substitute of only a battery of checks, we’ll attempt to pull out the “story” of Panther Lake, demonstrating its strengths and weaknesses as we go. Let’s simply hope you should buy one.

Intel’s Core Extremely Collection 3 chip stands alone, for now

In October, Intel initially positioned the Core Extremely Collection 3 (Panther Lake) in one in every of three fundamental configurations, combining the brand new “Cougar Cove” P-core and the “Darkmont” E-core and Low Energy E-cores. On the excessive finish was what Intel referred to then because the “16 core 12Xe” configuration, with 4 P-cores, 8 E-cores, and 4 LP E-cores, 12 Xe3 GPU cores, and 12 ray-tracing models. When it got here time for Intel to announce the Panther Lake chip lineup, that configuration included its formal title, the Core Extremely X9 388H, with the “X9” prefix added to focus on the most important Xe3 configuration.

Intel then let reviewers benchmark the Core Extremely Collection 3 chip throughout CES, however solely utilizing video games. It was our first indication that Panther Lake may very well be one thing particular.

Intel prevented reviewers from testing CPU-specific benchmarks, nevertheless, in all probability as a result of the variety of cores contained in the highest-end Panther Lake chip (16) are lower than these contained in the rival Qualcomm Snapdragon X2 Elite Excessive chip (18), which means that Intel would seemingly lose to the Snapdragon on paper in multi-threaded CPU-specific benchmarks.

The third contender would be the AMD Ryzen AI 400, an improve to the wonderful Ryzen AI 300, which AMD debuted final 12 months. The Ryzen AI 400 contains simply 12 cores, however runs them at a most clock velocity of 5.2GHz — the quickest velocity of all three chips. However laptops with both the Ryzen AI 400 or Snapdragon X2 Elite aren’t but out there.

Mark Hachman / Foundry

CPUs don’t suck any extra

Each Intel’s Core Extremely Collection 1 (Meteor Lake) and Core Extremely 2 (Lunar Lake) have been surprisingly common in CPU efficiency, each in single-core and multi-core duties. (CPU-specific purposes embrace net searching, apps like Excel, compiling software program, some video games, and decompressing recordsdata.) AMD’s Ryzen and Qualcomm’s Snapdragon used to carry the benefit. Now not — properly, at the least in contrast in opposition to its older rivals.

With Panther Lake, Intel has regained its management in CPU computations.

Intel offered us an Asus ZenBook Duo (UX8407A) with an Intel Core Extremely X9 388H chip inside as a launch laptop computer for the Panther Lake platform. It was a barely odd alternative; the ZenBook Duo is a dual-screen laptop computer, with a gaming-class 99 watt-hour battery, which drastically inflated the battery life.

Intel additionally supplied a prototype Lenovo laptop computer, which we used as a actuality examine for the estimated battery life and extra benchmarks. I left the ZenBook Duo in “clamshell” mode, solely utilizing one in every of its 2K screens to render information to supply outcomes I felt assured in evaluating to different platforms. I began utilizing the Cinebench 2024 and Geekbench artificial CPU checks.

Mark Hachman / Foundry

To handle Intel’s declare that Panther Lake affords the CPU efficiency of the cell Arrow Lake chip: sure, that’s true. Intel launched the Core 285H chip final 12 months, and in our assessment of the Core 285H, I discovered that the Cinebench 2024 rating was 1,012 (multithreaded) and 128 (single-threaded), only a hair underneath Panther Lake’s efficiency. In Geekbench (measured beneath), the older 285H produced a rating of 16,755, once more barely lower than Panther Lake’s Core Extremely X9 388H.

However in the event you’re a Home windows fanatic like we’re, you is likely to be dissatisfied by the Core Extremely X9 388H’s exhibiting. Referring to the assessment of the Apple M5 MacBook Professional, our colleagues at Macworld report that the MacBook M4 Professional reported a rating of 1,010 in Cinebench 2024 and 14,763 in Geekbench 6. However the MacBook M5 Professional scored 1,126 in Cinebench 2024 and 18,013 in Geekbench 6, besting Intel’s present mainstream laptop computer chip.

Mark Hachman / Foundry

Maybe an upcoming HX model can do higher?

Battery life is very large! However so is the battery

Intel has claimed that Core Extremely 3 laptops may have as much as 27 hours of battery life. That’s true — however, as is commonly the case, it relies upon. The 2 screens of the ZenBook Duo suck extra energy than a single show. Nevertheless, Asus put in a 99Wh battery inside. That’s a gaming-class battery, and the most important capability allowed on a aircraft by FAA guidelines. On this case, it’s like bolting a self-powered gasoline truck to a sedan.

So sure, the battery life was insane: about 22 hours on the ZenBook Duo operating on a single display and 25 to twenty-eight hours (1,704 minutes) on the Lenovo prototype laptop computer that we utilized in early checks at CES. These checks have been carried out by looping a 4K video till the battery expired. When requested to do a bit extra work (simulating workplace work through the Procyon Workplace benchmark) battery life dropped to “simply” underneath 14 hours on the ZenBook Duo — nonetheless principally the perfect outcomes we’ve ever seen. We’ll break down the battery life a bit extra on the Asus ZenBook Duo in our upcoming, devoted assessment.

Foundry / Mark Hachman

Once more, Intel desires us to imagine that the Core Extremely has the efficiency of its “Arrow Lake” chips with the ability draw of its Core Extremely Collection 2 (Lunar Lake) chips. We are able to examine that, kind of, by monitoring the ability consumption of a Lunar Lake and a Panther Lake pocket book as they bear a benchmark. In idle, the Core Extremely 3 chip attracts about 5 watts, however can drop down underneath a watt. Lunar Lake averages about three watts or much less in idle.

It’s not apples to apples, although. Intel used TSMC’s N3 course of expertise to fabricate the CPU tile within the Collection 2 Lunar Lake chip, whereas Panther Lake makes use of Intel 18A, with some tiles cut up between the 2 firms. On this case, Intel’s older Lunar Lake is a 17W TDP chip, whereas Panther Lake is 25W — extra energy to the chip sometimes means higher efficiency and worse battery life, however the bigger battery and Intel’s structure appear to offset this.

Right here’s an influence graph exhibiting the 2 chips in idle, then operating a benchmark, then dropping down into idle as soon as once more. This graph simply measures the ability going into the CPU bundle, not the whole laptop computer. That energy may differ considerably, and is finest left to the battery-life comparisons you’ll discover in our particular person laptop computer critiques. Nonetheless, Panther Lake is throwing much more energy and efficiency on the benchmark, and this graph demonstrates that if a Lunar Lake and a Panther Lake laptop computer contained the identical battery capability, the older Lunar Lake laptop computer may win.

Mark Hachman / Foundry

Nonetheless, if Intel convinces laptop computer makers so as to add bigger batteries to Panther Lake laptops, although, look out. Laptop computer battery life numbers may explode upwards!

Efficiency nonetheless drops whereas on battery

One of many attention-grabbing issues about Qualcomm’s Snapdragon chips is that they run at full energy on a regular basis. Intel’s Core Extremely chips don’t, clocking all the way down to decrease energy consumption, extending battery life.

I run all of our benchmarks on wall energy, battery energy, and at Home windows’ most allowable settings, simply to see how efficiency varies in numerous person eventualities. As you’ll discover in our Cinebench 2024 benchmarks, the single-threaded efficiency often related to OS duties stays unchanged between wall energy and battery energy, retaining Home windows as responsive in each eventualities.

However look right here: Intel’s Core Extremely Collection 3 chips appear to take care of their efficiency on battery significantly better than Intel’s Core Extremely Collection 2 or Collection 1. We’re utilizing three real-world benchmarks to check this. First, right here is Procyon Workplace, which performs numerous duties in Microsoft Workplace / 365. Efficiency drops by about 20 p.c on battery.

Mark Hachman / Foundry

Nevertheless, on our customized real-world Handbrake take a look at, the place the laptop computer is requested to transcode the open-source Tears of Metal film, efficiency dropped by simply three p.c between wall energy and battery.

Right here, you’ll be able to see how our take a look at Panther Lake laptop computer fared in comparison with the competitors. It is a customized take a look at, completely different than the one we run in as a part of our laptop computer critiques. I additionally made positive to obtain an Arm-specific model of the app, however Qualcomm’s chip fared exceptionally badly right here. It often performs fairly properly.

Foundry / Mark Hachman

Since we’re real-world benchmarks, we will see that Intel’s Core Extremely 300 / Panther Lake fares properly in PugetBench’s Photoshop take a look at. The take a look at makes use of the transport model of Photoshop. Right here, efficiency dropped nearly three p.c on my checks once I unplugged the laptop computer.

Understand that CPU-specific checks are one in every of Snapdragon’s strengths. And with the Snapdragon X2 Elite producing distinctive CPU efficiency — preliminary numbers crush Panther Lake, and the Elite X1 nonetheless ranks extremely — this is likely to be an space the place Qualcomm catches up. This race ain’t over.

Mark Hachman / Foundry

Sadly, Puget Techniques’ PugetBench benchmark hadn’t caught as much as the model of Adobe Premiere Professional (26.0) that Adobe makes out there for obtain, so I used to be unable to check that software.

Panther Lake’s GPU efficiency is unimaginable

Bear in mind, Intel’s flagship Panther Lake chip is the Core Extremely X9 388H–that is completely different. The Core 9 is now the Core X9, which implies the GPU has 12 Xe3 cores. Basically, the “X” implies that you’re getting the perfect Intel has to supply when it comes to graphics.

What does this imply? For years, built-in graphics has been capable of play video games: older, 2D sprite-based video games, and a few older 3D video games at decrease settings. They ran. And that was effective. With Panther Lake, we’re navigating a transition into built-in graphics performing nearly in addition to gaming-class discrete graphics — and once you add AI upscaling and body technology to the combo, latest top-tier titles are close to your grasp.

Some avid gamers confer with these as “faux” frames, which is why it’s useful to look first at each conventional, non-accelerated checks. Right here, we use UL’s 3DMark, particularly the Time Spy and Metal Nomad Lite benchmarks.

Mark Hachman / Foundry

A terrific improve in gaming efficiency

This was one of many massive tales of CES 2026: Intel’s claims that Panther Lake supplied the ability of a gaming laptop computer with a discrete Nvidia GeForce 4050 GPU, however inside an built-in bundle.

This, for me, was the eye-opening second. A 12 months or so in the past, I used to be testing Intel’s Core Extremely 1 (Meteor Lake) and Core Extremely 2 (Lunar Lake) with customized runs of video games like Cyberpunk: 2077 at Low settings, which we present beneath.

Mark Hachman / Foundry

However these checks prompted me to “graduate” Panther Lake into our gaming benchmarks, too, with the settings that historically extra highly effective laptops now use. Even utilizing our aggressive gaming settings, a sport like Shadow of the Tomb Raider reaches playable body charges. (Skip down to search out these outcomes.) Sure, it completely is an older sport, courting from 2018. But Shadow was a top-tier AAA title, and built-in graphics has caught up. And that’s simply pure, unadulterated, farm-to-table frames, too.

Don’t get too excited, although. Metro: Exodus was launched in 2019, however its 4A Engine stays out of attain for Panther Lake. On our take a look at laptop computer, the sport averages 24 frames per second when run at 1080p on the Highest setting — 35 fps if Home windows’ efficiency settings are cranked to their most.

AI frames make an unlimited distinction, in the event that they’re supported

It feels very unusual to check Intel’s Core Extremely Collection 2 chip utilizing dialed-down benchmarks centered round 1080p gaming at Low settings — usually a touch for a PC gamer that it’s time for a brand new machine or card. However the Core Extremely Collection 3 hit the 60 fps threshold that signaled a “playable” sport even with simply rendered frames. Panther Lake’s GPU additionally contains two completely different strategies of artificially growing body fee — 2X upscaling, or rendering a body utilizing a decrease decision after which growing the decision to the specified degree — and XeSS 3, which might interpolate three further frames utilizing AI. Naysayers name these “faux frames,” however Panther Lake permits for purists and extra aggressive avid gamers alike to search out what they need.

Our take a look at laptop computer shipped with Intel Graphics Software program, a customized Intel app that lets you management numerous elements of your show and graphics — together with forcing on XeSS body technology, or AI-generated frames that may inject as much as 4 interpolated frames for each body the GPU renders. That’s massive — or is it?

What I found is that, sure, turning on body technology could make an unlimited distinction. Merely turning on upscaling and XeSS 3 elevated the framerate to a whopping 140 frames per second! Dialing up the Home windows energy slider tacked on just a few further frames. Each are included within the “Max” consequence on the prime of the chart.

Mark Hachman / Foundry

The consequences appear to vary relying upon the picture high quality, although. When operating Cyberpunk on our conventional 1080p Extremely settings, body charges jumped from 52 to 92. Pushing the Home windows slider to most efficiency gave me body charges of 143 fps.

The distinction, although, is that Cyberpunk particularly helps XeSS modes. Metro: Exodus doesn’t — and “forcing” XeSS on utilizing the Intel Graphics Software program app didn’t work. Trendy video games appear extra forgiving of older {hardware}, and help for AI body technology actually makes these video games playable by trendy laptops. Nonetheless, I’m wondering if there can be a tier of AAA video games like Metro: highly effective sufficient that Panther Lake laptops gained’t be capable of run them, however sufficiently old that they gained’t be capable of help the body technology that may in any other case bridge the hole.

I attempted a handful of different video games. Whole Conflict: Warhammer 3 crashed when operating the “battle” benchmark, however its marketing campaign map benchmark performed again at 44 frames per second at 1080p Excessive settings. The 2014 Thief remake produced a even 60 fps when performed at 1080p on the Highest settings. Neither supported XeSS or any body technology. Forza Horizon 6 generated 62 fps on 1080p Extremely settings with body technology pressured on, however with out express help for it.

Can Panther Lake compete with a 4050 laptop computer?

This was essentially the most provocative declare that Intel made about Panther Lake at CES, proper earlier than we had an opportunity to check out the chip on a prototype Lenovo laptop computer. Utilizing purely rendered frames, it falls a bit quick. When body technology is included, it retains up.

Would a gamer with a desktop PC operating a GeForce RTX 5090 flip off AI body technology? Presumably. I feel that almost all fans, already feeling the pinch of skyrocketing RAM, SSD, and GPU costs, will activate body technology with out a lot thought. Once more, right here’s the Core Extremely X9 388H operating Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with out body technology, dealing with off in opposition to a lot of present, however older gaming laptops.

Foundry / Mark Hachman

And right here is the Core Extremely X9 388H operating Cyberpunk 2077 with body technology enabled. This appears like a scene from an Eighties TV present, the place Voltron lastly pulls out his blazing sword or Ok.I.T.T. goes into turbo mode. The episode could be loads easier if each had occurred from the get-go.

Mainly, setting apart the scorn some have for AI and “faux frames,” AI body technology is the “win” button right here.

Foundry / Mark Hachman

AMD’s Ryzen AI Max is another choice

AMD tried to work the refs (us) tougher than Indiana soccer coach Curt Cignetti complaining about private fouls throughout a halftime interview. The corporate claims that we ought to be evaluating Intel’s Panther Lake to AMD’s Ryzen AI 400 chips in addition to its Ryzen AI Max processor as an alternative.

To that, we are saying, ship us one! We’re glad to assessment the Ryzen AI 400 when laptops lastly can be found. As for the Ryzen AI Max, properly — we’ve reviewed it inside a (Framework) Desktop, and we’ve seen it in an HP ZBook Extremely G1a laptop computer, too. As our assessment benchmarks present, the Ryzen AI Max outperforms the Core Extremely X9 388H handily, although we’d in all probability put it in a tier that Intel’s eventual HX gaming processors will ultimately compete in opposition to, somewhat than a power-sipping laptop computer chip.

AI is much less vital than earlier than

However the Ryzen AI Max does have some extent, so to talk. If individuals do wish to run non-public LLMs regionally, the Ryzen AI Max (Strix Halo) does present gobs of VRAM crucial for such LLMs to run. An AMD driver allowed the Framework Desktop to assign 96GB for operating LLMs. Our Asus ZenBook Duo assessment unit, which has an Extremely X9 388H and 32GB of RAM, equipped 18GB of VRAM for video games and AI purposes. That features an NPU that may present 50 TOPS, or 122 whole TOPS with the GPU roped in.

And let’s face it — AI has struggled on the PC, leaving us questioning a bit if the early emphasis on the NPU was worthwhile. What we do know is that the graphics chip is essentially the most highly effective AI processor. UL offers a number of benchmarks; I’ve ditched the summary “Imaginative and prescient” benchmark in favor of the Procyon image-generation (AI artwork) benchmark. (The take a look at is a piece in progress, excluding Arm and offering an odd implementation for AMD’s Ryzen processor.) However UL’s take a look at can usually run on both the NPU or the GPU, with some exceptions.

Mainly, this take a look at displays the rating UL assigns to the method. In the actual world, it reveals that the ZenBook Duo with a Core Extremely 3 chip inside creates a 512×512 picture as soon as each 4.5 seconds utilizing the GPU, whereas our take a look at laptop computer with Intel’s Core Extremely 2 chip inside creates the identical picture as soon as each 9 seconds. However the Extremely X9 388H’s NPU efficiency suffers, and the AMD’s Ryzen AI NPU outperforms it, too.

Mark Hachman / Foundry

The identical goes for operating UL’s LLM benchmark. Initially, this take a look at was one of many few that evaluated the NPU, and that was helpful. However as Procyon begins including help for the GPU, it does make you surprise why we’re utilizing an NPU when a extra highly effective various is correct there.

Procyon’s take a look at masses and runs a number of fashions, then offers a sequence of prompts and generates a rating. Some checks merely don’t run on some processors (Arm, once more) and solely run on a few the others. Some checks will solely run on the NPU. This take a look at is de facto finest to match the three generations of Intel Core Extremely processors.

Once more, the take a look at doesn’t do an important job in describing real-world outcomes. On this case, the plugged-in Core Extremely 3 system operating the LLama 3.1 (8 billion parameters) on the NPU generated about 20 tokens per second, which would seem in your display at about 4 characters per token per second–a cushty studying velocity for me. Utilizing the GPU underneath the Home windows balanced settings, the token output was about 25 tokens per second for a similar mannequin. Working Llama 2 (13 billion parameters), the token output was between 13 to fifteen tokens per second, which is likely to be a little bit sluggish.

Foundry / Mark Hachman

I thought of noodling round with Intel’s AI Playground, however the app stalled out when making ready the llamaCPP-GGUF backend, so I deserted the undertaking.

2026 can be an attention-grabbing 12 months

I actually thought that 2025’s crop of laptop computer processors have been the perfect ever — you would purchase a laptop computer whose processors have been made by both AMD, Intel, or Qualcomm and go away glad. However 2026 appears to be like prefer it may very well be even higher.

Bear in mind, although, that Intel is first out of the gate with this new technology of chips. AMD will ultimately reply with the Ryzen AI 400, and Qualcomm’s Snapdragon X2 Elite Excessive is ready within the wings. On condition that Intel historically instructions about 80 p.c of the pocket book PC processor market, an early leap may very well be a robust benefit, particularly with solely older chips to match it to. However we’re not achieved but!