2018

That's cute, you imbecile.

>Krzanich explained that the company "bit off a little too much on this thing" by increasing 10nm density 2.7X over the 14nm node. By comparison, Intel increased density by only 2.4X when it moved to 14nm. Although the difference may be small, Krzanich pointed out that the industry average for density improvements is only 1.5-2X per node transition. Because of the production difficulties with 10nm, Intel has revised its density target back to 2.4X for the transition to the 7nm node. Intel will also lean more on heterogeneous architectures with its EMIB technology (which we covered here).

Still, they are not delivering.

What if they still can't release 10nm chips before Zen2?

According to this, they won't.

According to what?

CEO's words this ER.

10nm moved from "HVM late 2018" to "shipping to somewhere in 2019"

And that's not even the worst part, 10nm vanilla is not competitive at all, so if 10nm only comes around in 2019? Where is the 10nm+ that they need to fight off TSMC and Glofo?

Intel will probably ship their tiny die dual core mobile parts on 10nm, then start talking about how fantastic 10nm+ will be, and that will be delayed again.

It's cheaper to manufacture on a larger process, and as of right now they're already achieving somewhat competitive performance against AMD

Just because a smaller process is available doesn't mean it makes business sense to utilise it immediately. They're in the game of making money; not faster computers.

I bet their monolithic chip design is not helping them

no shit sherlock

Why don't they just mass produce one FPGA and base all future processors on that one design, changing the internal logic for future revisions.?

bump

When was the last time Intel didn't have a clear fab advantage?

A story about Intel process tech, sit down, and enjoy.

1/ Apparently, a while back, Intel hired outside consultants to benchmark their progress against the foundries. Those consultants informed Intel that they were behind the foundries in some key areas.

2/ Intel, of course, believing in its own superiority basically didn't take the outside consultants seriously, thinking they were full of shit.

3/ Later on, Intel would start to get clues from key semiconductor equipment makers. Intel would, I am told, refuse help from these equipment makers, again believing in its own superiority.

4/ Eventually, when the equipment makers started to tell Intel things like, "we're surprised you're still struggling with Problem XYZ because Competitor X/Y figured that out a while go..." did Intel finally start to become more receptive to input.

5/ This story points to a fundamental problem within Intel: They actually believe their own marketing bullshit about being way ahead of the foundries -- it's a corporate culture thing. This arrogance hurts them -- badly.

Some additional info on Intel 10nm: Intel is trying its absolute best to get things working, they are, from what I hear, sparing no expense on 10nm and they are literally trying everything, even going to far as to pull unproven experimental stuff from the research labs.

One thing is clear: Intel 10nm is the biggest process related disaster in the company's history, it really makes the 14nm struggles look like a walk in the park by comparison. It is truly a horror show for this process.

>Intel is still far ahead of everyone else in transistor density.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHHAAHAHAHAHHAHAH

Samsung and TSMC are taking a huge dump on Intel's fabs right now.

Good. We need more competition in the market.

Ok. But how can they be behind?

For the past 20 years they practically have devoted their entire business model in keeping their fab production as saturated as possible with work. They are their fabs even more than they are their CPUs, and i mean that they build their chips around the fact that they want to occupy their entire production capacity, and have high yields.

How can they be behind in node technology? Is like a Rolls Royce being behind in luxury car. It's your only job, how can you let it happen?

How much of this failure is the fault of ASML?

I for one cannot wait for AMD to launch their 3rd iteration of Ryzen. 8c/16t on 7nm node with 4.5Ghz capable clocks. All for under $400.

Intel will probably just take their existing coffee lake 8700k and slap more cores on it to try and compete.

Rumor is that it will be 12c/24t on 7nm and insiders have hinted at 4.7Ghz base clock with boost to 5.2Ghz

Literally is because of lack of true competition. AMD has always been around sure, but until Ryzen, AMD hasn't had a competitive CPU. Intel has been coasting on the success of Sandy Bridge and just kept making little tweaks here and there.

Complacency in the vicious business world is deadly. Intel is experiencing this first hand. They not only got caught with their pants down, but AMD has them over a barrel and is having their way with them.
Even fucking better. I'll gladly pay $500 for a chip like that. I really hope they stick to what they said and that X370 AM4 boards will work all the way till Ryzen gen 3.

>AMD hasn't had a competitive CPU.
Please

Athlon Thunderbird smoked the P3 also AMD64 was better.

>Rumor is that it will be 12c/24t on 7nm and insiders have hinted at 4.7Ghz base clock with boost to 5.2Ghz

Attached: 1515276493149.jpg (854x1200, 148K)

I was talking during and anything after Sandy Bridge.

I also want to believe

Attached: 1517617061277.png (618x875, 47K)

>Literally is because of lack of true competition

And phones! They didnt see how much of a goldmine tsmc was going to make with the mobile socs craze, which only recently slowed down, a market that intel is obviously cut off, since they are the only ones using their own fabs

>intel is actually going to die in your lifetime
Feels good man, we need better, non-jewish CPU companies

SHUT UP GOY

ALL THAT MATTERS IS PERFORMANCE.
look at benchmarks.

Is AMD doing sub-10nm?

cpu.userbenchmark.com/Intel-Core-i7-7700K/Rating/3647
best single cores.

Then Intel a shit besides 6% better in gayms.

Ryzen gen3 will be on 7nm

>will be
I'll believe it when I see it I guess.

looks like the decade CPU meme might come true.

cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html

TRANSISTOR SIZE DOESN'T MATTER