Endorfy Arx 700 Air chassis review
Beelink SER5 Pro (Ryzen 7 5800H) mini PC review
Crucial T700 PCIe 5.0 NVMe SSD Review - 12GB/s
Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 PULSE review
Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti GHOST review
Radeon RX 7600 review
ASUS GeForce RTX 4060 Ti TUF Gaming review
MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X TRIO review
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8GB (FE) review
Corsair 2000D RGB Airflow Mini-ITX - PC chassis review
Intel 10nm delay raises speculation of foundry business scale-down
Intel will not introduce its 10nm chips until the fourth quarter of 2019, which has raised speculation that the company may scale down its foundry business.
Intel originally planned to enter mass production of its 10nm Cannon Lake processors in 2016, but has been pushing back the schedule. The company's latest update is that its 10nm chips will not be ready for commercial production until the fourth quarter of 2019, repors digitimes:
Intel used to adopt the so-called "Tick-Tock" model under which every microarchitecture change is followed with a die shrink of the process technology, according to market observers. Nevertheless, the "Tick-Tock" production cycle started slowing down in 2014, when the chip giant was supposed to introduce its 14nm process for PC processors. The "Tick-Tock" cycle was broken for the first time when Intel released its 22nm Haswell Refresh series instead, the observers said. Intel continues to break and probably has abandoned the "Tick-Tock" cycle, with its long-delayed 10nm Cannon Lake processors, the observers noted.
Intel was supposed to volume producing its 10nm Cannon Lake processors in mid-2016 but the company released a 14nm Kaby Lake instead. With Intel confirming another 10nm chip delay, the company's ninth-generation family slated for 2019 would be built on its 14nm+++ process technology, the observers said. On the other hand, TSMC and Samsung have both made progress in their process development with the former already ramping up 7nm chip production and the latter accelerating EUV process R&D. Despite Intel's 10nm delay, the chip giant's 14nm process is still more competitive in terms of transistor density than rivals' 10nm or even 7nm processes, according to the observers. Speculation has started circulating in the chipmaking industry that Intel may scale down its foundry operations. Intel has in recent years expanded its foundry operations in order to fill its fab capacities, but it is still struggling to grab orders from the world's major fabless and system vendors, the observers said. LG Electronics, and Unigroup Spreadtrum & RDA under China's state-owned Tsinghua Unigroup, are currently the largest customers of Intel's foundry business.
BIOSTAR to Showcase Intel 100 Series Chipset Motherboards - 05/22/2015 09:04 AM
At Computex that is. Computex, Asia’s largest high-tech event, will run from June 2nd to the 6th this year in Taipei, Taiwan and BIOSTAR will be showcasing upcoming Intel 100 series chipset...
ASRock X99 WS-E10G Released has Intel 10G BASE-T LAN - 11/24/2014 07:11 PM
ASRock’s latest X99 WS-E/10G is a motherboard, workstation board hybrid that boasts Dual Intel 10G BASE-T LAN ports powered by an Intel X540 Ethernet controller chip, plus Dual Intel giga...
Intel 10-core Xeon processors inbound - 04/05/2011 03:24 AM
Intel widened up its Xeon lineup with numerous new processors, 29 of them all flavored and seasoned on the 32nm node. A couple of them have ten cores, that's 20 threads ! The rumor of a ten-core proce...
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 11808
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 11808
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5570667 Posted on: 08/03/2018 12:34 PM
If they're struggling to get clients, it's because of price and nothing else.
As long as there is someone who does it cheaper, or more efficient, you'll lose.
I've seen videos explaining how we are getting to the limit of physics with how small a transistor can be.
I'd love to know how far are we really, because in most cases 10 nm from other fabs is equivalent to the Intel 14nm.
It upsets me they measure it differently and use it as marketing.
It is no equivalent by any means. Each of those manufacturing processes result in different density, are targeting different voltage and are made to reach different clock at different leakage.
What's intel's selling point? Likely high achievable clock. But do you think they would accept reasonable dead from AMD to build Zen1? I do not think intel wanted competition of any sort to have access to top tier production.
In other words, there is damn good chance that they are selling production capacity only on older tech.
If they're struggling to get clients, it's because of price and nothing else.
As long as there is someone who does it cheaper, or more efficient, you'll lose.
I've seen videos explaining how we are getting to the limit of physics with how small a transistor can be.
I'd love to know how far are we really, because in most cases 10 nm from other fabs is equivalent to the Intel 14nm.
It upsets me they measure it differently and use it as marketing.
It is no equivalent by any means. Each of those manufacturing processes result in different density, are targeting different voltage and are made to reach different clock at different leakage.
What's intel's selling point? Likely high achievable clock. But do you think they would accept reasonable dead from AMD to build Zen1? I do not think intel wanted competition of any sort to have access to top tier production.
In other words, there is damn good chance that they are selling production capacity only on older tech.
Kaarme
Senior Member
Posts: 3405
Joined: 2013-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 3405
Joined: 2013-03-10
#5570677 Posted on: 08/03/2018 01:12 PM
Intel was caught pants down by AMD/Ryzen, so it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of Intel's problems were caused by draconian measures to cut spending in R&D in order to fill the CEO's and stock owners' pockets instead (no doubt they still reported lots of billions used in R&D to avoid paying taxes). The original 10nm Cannon Lakes would have been the same old 4-core things we had seen too many times already, with exceptionally marginal performance increases, only made using the smaller process technology to increase Intel's profit per unit. Naturally they had to abandon such thoughts, and had to make the familiar 8000 series Coffee Lake instead, using Sky/Kaby lake as a basis. Even now Intel is still satisfied with the sales numbers, it's beating AMD nicely, so they aren't going to invest anything extra in the 10nm process development, thus making their progress so slow.
Intel is a financial corporation, not a technology corporation, after all.
Intel was caught pants down by AMD/Ryzen, so it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of Intel's problems were caused by draconian measures to cut spending in R&D in order to fill the CEO's and stock owners' pockets instead (no doubt they still reported lots of billions used in R&D to avoid paying taxes). The original 10nm Cannon Lakes would have been the same old 4-core things we had seen too many times already, with exceptionally marginal performance increases, only made using the smaller process technology to increase Intel's profit per unit. Naturally they had to abandon such thoughts, and had to make the familiar 8000 series Coffee Lake instead, using Sky/Kaby lake as a basis. Even now Intel is still satisfied with the sales numbers, it's beating AMD nicely, so they aren't going to invest anything extra in the 10nm process development, thus making their progress so slow.
Intel is a financial corporation, not a technology corporation, after all.
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 14091
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 14091
Joined: 2004-05-16
#5570700 Posted on: 08/03/2018 02:52 PM
Intel was caught pants down by AMD/Ryzen, so it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of Intel's problems were caused by draconian measures to cut spending in R&D in order to fill the CEO's and stock owners' pockets instead (no doubt they still reported lots of billions used in R&D to avoid paying taxes). The original 10nm Cannon Lakes would have been the same old 4-core things we had seen too many times already, with exceptionally marginal performance increases, only made using the smaller process technology to increase Intel's profit per unit. Naturally they had to abandon such thoughts, and had to make the familiar 8000 series Coffee Lake instead, using Sky/Kaby lake as a basis. Even now Intel is still satisfied with the sales numbers, it's beating AMD nicely, so they aren't going to invest anything extra in the 10nm process development, thus making their progress so slow.
Intel is a financial corporation, not a technology corporation, after all.
Nah - Intel's problem was Brian Kreznick convincing the board to diversify away from Intel's core competency. Their R&D budget got split and it went into drones, wearables, "new devices" and other random bullshit - most of which they just closed. The problems with 10nm are something that a lot of these foundries are going to face/facing currently as they ship their similarly sized 7nm parts. Currently 14nm+++++++++*/+* goes to 5Ghz and their 10nm process probably doesn't. When there are relatively minor improvements to general IPC - how will you sell a generation of CPU's slower than the previous? They need to achieve both switching speed and yield parity with 14nm before they can move forward - something that's getting increasingly difficult at lower feature sizes.
It's pretty clear they are refocusing their engineering though with the hiring of Keller/Kadori. Keller was placed as head of Silicon Engineering and is basically overseeing all the chip teams - he's almost definitely going to have an impact on design 3-4 years from now. Which is also probably when we will start seeing discrete GPU's out of Intel... It's going to look like a much different company in 2022.
Intel was caught pants down by AMD/Ryzen, so it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of Intel's problems were caused by draconian measures to cut spending in R&D in order to fill the CEO's and stock owners' pockets instead (no doubt they still reported lots of billions used in R&D to avoid paying taxes). The original 10nm Cannon Lakes would have been the same old 4-core things we had seen too many times already, with exceptionally marginal performance increases, only made using the smaller process technology to increase Intel's profit per unit. Naturally they had to abandon such thoughts, and had to make the familiar 8000 series Coffee Lake instead, using Sky/Kaby lake as a basis. Even now Intel is still satisfied with the sales numbers, it's beating AMD nicely, so they aren't going to invest anything extra in the 10nm process development, thus making their progress so slow.
Intel is a financial corporation, not a technology corporation, after all.
Nah - Intel's problem was Brian Kreznick convincing the board to diversify away from Intel's core competency. Their R&D budget got split and it went into drones, wearables, "new devices" and other random bullshit - most of which they just closed. The problems with 10nm are something that a lot of these foundries are going to face/facing currently as they ship their similarly sized 7nm parts. Currently 14nm+++++++++*/+* goes to 5Ghz and their 10nm process probably doesn't. When there are relatively minor improvements to general IPC - how will you sell a generation of CPU's slower than the previous? They need to achieve both switching speed and yield parity with 14nm before they can move forward - something that's getting increasingly difficult at lower feature sizes.
It's pretty clear they are refocusing their engineering though with the hiring of Keller/Kadori. Keller was placed as head of Silicon Engineering and is basically overseeing all the chip teams - he's almost definitely going to have an impact on design 3-4 years from now. Which is also probably when we will start seeing discrete GPU's out of Intel... It's going to look like a much different company in 2022.
JamesSneed
Senior Member
Posts: 1677
Joined: 2017-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 1677
Joined: 2017-02-14
#5570710 Posted on: 08/03/2018 03:45 PM
I don't believe they are moving away from the foundry at all. Like the article pointed out here Intel's 14nm is closer to others 10nm, although I will not go as far to agree with the 7nm piece, that's a stretch. TSMC has 7nm going now but I suspect we won't see any really high 4Ghz+ parts from their process, basically just like we aren't seeing from Intel's 10nm. Intel isn't really behind everyone else they just are not leading the path anymore. If Intel nails 10nm in 2019 they likely will be right on the same pace as AMD/Gloflo on 7nm which from what all the experts say Intel's 10nm and Gloflos 7nm should be similar densities. They have staffed up heavy on engineers lately grabbing the superstars of the Industry. It appears they are going to do the opposite that this article implies.
My prediction is that we'll see AMD roll out Ryzen Zen 2(I guess we have to say it like that due to the EPYC on TSMC and Ryzen on Gloflo split for 7nm) on Gloflos process before Intel has a high speed desktop part out on 10nm but they will be only 6-9 months behind AMD. I also think Intel's 10nm and AMD's 7nm processes will be the only 4Ghz+ capbabe processes at this feature size.
I don't believe they are moving away from the foundry at all. Like the article pointed out here Intel's 14nm is closer to others 10nm, although I will not go as far to agree with the 7nm piece, that's a stretch. TSMC has 7nm going now but I suspect we won't see any really high 4Ghz+ parts from their process, basically just like we aren't seeing from Intel's 10nm. Intel isn't really behind everyone else they just are not leading the path anymore. If Intel nails 10nm in 2019 they likely will be right on the same pace as AMD/Gloflo on 7nm which from what all the experts say Intel's 10nm and Gloflos 7nm should be similar densities. They have staffed up heavy on engineers lately grabbing the superstars of the Industry. It appears they are going to do the opposite that this article implies.
My prediction is that we'll see AMD roll out Ryzen Zen 2(I guess we have to say it like that due to the EPYC on TSMC and Ryzen on Gloflo split for 7nm) on Gloflos process before Intel has a high speed desktop part out on 10nm but they will be only 6-9 months behind AMD. I also think Intel's 10nm and AMD's 7nm processes will be the only 4Ghz+ capbabe processes at this feature size.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1992
Joined: 2013-06-04
If they're struggling to get clients, it's because of price and nothing else.
As long as there is someone who does it cheaper, or more efficient, you'll lose.
I've seen videos explaining how we are getting to the limit of physics with how small a transistor can be.
I'd love to know how far are we really, because in most cases 10 nm from other fabs is equivalent to the Intel 14nm.
It upsets me they measure it differently and use it as marketing.