[AT] Intel trying to release 7 nm in 2021

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,593
1,060
136
#27

NostaSeronx

Platinum Member
Sep 18, 2011
2,359
148
126
#28
"AMD and its CEO remain very confident in the company's ability to reach 5% by the end of 2018 and then 10% sometime in 2019 with Rome."

I don't know about the first two... I can only find a Stock guy, but I swore someone at AMD said 5% in 2017 and 10% in 2018 as well. They needed 10% by 2018 or Zen straight up could be considered a failure.
5% in 2017 -> Zen failed
10% in 2018 -> Zen failed
5% by the end of 2018 -> Zen failed

Maybe, Rome will help or maybe it wont.
 
Last edited:
Jul 25, 2001
10,189
25
91
#29
Back in those days, did you hear a CEO of Intel say "I want to keep the damage down to 20% or less loss of server marketshare" (not an exact quote, but almost)

No, but this time he said it. Wake up, the king is not dead, just in trouble of loosing some significant marketshare. Stop being in denial.
That's cute and all, but you're defending someone saying "How the mighty have fallen", to a company who owns 90% of the overall market.

It's not about being in denial. It's about silly statements. The same ones that were made as I previously noted. All the fans were out in force saying Intel was going to crumble.

Do you know what the word cyclical means? The things come in waves. So AMD takes a bit of market share for the next year and half. What happens with Intel rolls out the 7nm? They are right back in the game and they have the revenue to create very attractive pricing to manufactures and vendors. AMD has a good product and road map, but saying Intel has fallen greatly is much an exaggeration. I also never implied or said they weren't going to gain some market share.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,593
1,060
136
#30
That's cute and all, but you're defending someone saying "How the mighty have fallen", to a company who owns 90% of the overall market.

It's not about being in denial. It's about silly statements. The same ones that were made as I previously noted. All the fans were out in force saying Intel was going to crumble.

Do you know what the word cyclical means? The things come in waves. So AMD takes a bit of market share for the next year and half. What happens with Intel rolls out the 7nm? They are right back in the game and they have the revenue to create very attractive pricing to manufactures and vendors. AMD has a good product and road map, but saying Intel has fallen greatly is much an exaggeration. I also never implied or said they weren't going to gain some market share.
I also never said Intel has fallen, and I am not defending anyone. I am simply saying, its not 2005, and Intel is going to have a few bad years, you even said that. But to say that in 2 years, Intel will be on top again is premature. I am looking at facts.
 
Feb 23, 2017
507
424
106
#31
All that any of us want is innovation. History shows that market dominance results in stagnation and profiteering. We should all be embracing a resurgent AMD, especially if it forces Intel to significantly up it's game too.
Now if only AMD (and Intel) were able to fire some real shots at Nvidia...
 

TheELF

Platinum Member
Dec 22, 2012
2,817
111
126
#32
I also never said Intel has fallen, and I am not defending anyone. I am simply saying, its not 2005, and Intel is going to have a few bad years, you even said that. But to say that in 2 years, Intel will be on top again is premature. I am looking at facts.
How is intel not on top right now?
Why are you all looking at meme websites instead of looking at the sources?
AMDs revenue is down by 23% q1 2019 and the net income is all but dissappeared...81 to 16 for GAAP and 121 to 62 non gaap(in milions).
Intel is also lower but nowhere near as much as amd.
We are talking about 1.3b for amd and 16b for intel in q1 2019
intel has 4b in net income amd has 62 m.
https://www.intc.com/investor-relat...t-Quarter-2019-Financial-Results/default.aspx
http://ir.amd.com/news-releases/new...-reports-first-quarter-2019-financial-results

 

BigDaveX

Senior member
Jun 12, 2014
337
48
101
#33
Intel now = GM circa 1980.
It will take some time for public perception and market share to catch up with reality, but it will happen eventually.

"The General Motors market share in the US fell from 62.6% to 19.8% between 1980 and 2009". Why? Hubris, bad management, poor execution, resting on laurels... all the same problems Intel is facing now.
I'm guessing you weren't around in 2004-2006, then? Back in those days, there were many people on this site and in the tech community at large that genuinely thought we were seeing the beginning of the end of Intel's dominance of the CPU market, and that AMD were slowly but surely rising to the top.

Not saying by any means that it's impossible for Intel to lose dominance of the market, but Intel spent most of the first half of the 2000s on the back foot - between the arrival of the first Athlon and Core 2 they only really clawed any ground back when AMD's initial 130nm process turned out a dud, and even then only for about 18 months - and the lowest their market share got was somewhere between 75% and 80%. It's simply an unfortunate fact of life that it's incredibly difficult to knock a company as established and with such a long-held dominance of the market as Intel off their perch, and that applies no matter the industry.
 

TheGiant

Senior member
Jun 12, 2017
365
46
76
#34
How is intel not on top right now?
Why are you all looking at meme websites instead of looking at the sources?
AMDs revenue is down by 23% q1 2019 and the net income is all but dissappeared...81 to 16 for GAAP and 121 to 62 non gaap(in milions).
Intel is also lower but nowhere near as much as amd.
We are talking about 1.3b for amd and 16b for intel in q1 2019
intel has 4b in net income amd has 62 m.
https://www.intc.com/investor-relat...t-Quarter-2019-Financial-Results/default.aspx
http://ir.amd.com/news-releases/new...-reports-first-quarter-2019-financial-results

this is it

Intel is making combined tech/financial/market decision
Amd is making tech decisions

the money reflects it...

yes, we all know the strategy -lower your prices to gain market share and then raise it- but the raise is much more difficult once you set up the level and no, the content doesn't sell
everyone who is an enterpreneur knows this...

AMD need to get to higher league of prices, the 2700X should cost atm 360 EUR not 300..
they are loosing money
 
Last edited:

NTMBK

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2011
8,284
248
126
#35
It gives me faith that they're talking about Foveros- even if they keep the Northbridge on 14nm and only make 7nm CPU chiplets, it should still be a big step forwards.
 
Apr 27, 2000
11,512
843
126
#36
How is intel not on top right now?
Why are you all looking at meme websites instead of looking at the sources?
We could look at the data posted by @Hans de Vries instead. Of course, that is market share data, while you are looking at profits/revenues. Not exactly the same thing. If AMD is losing less money than they did per quarter 3+ years ago and gaining market share while doing so, then they have reason to be happy.
 
May 15, 2012
173
33
116
#37
I'm guessing you weren't around in 2004-2006, then? Back in those days, there were many people on this site and in the tech community at large that genuinely thought we were seeing the beginning of the end of Intel's dominance of the CPU market, and that AMD were slowly but surely rising to the top.

Not saying by any means that it's impossible for Intel to lose dominance of the market, but Intel spent most of the first half of the 2000s on the back foot - between the arrival of the first Athlon and Core 2 they only really clawed any ground back when AMD's initial 130nm process turned out a dud, and even then only for about 18 months - and the lowest their market share got was somewhere between 75% and 80%. It's simply an unfortunate fact of life that it's incredibly difficult to knock a company as established and with such a long-held dominance of the market as Intel off their perch, and that applies no matter the industry.
Well "Intel 5G debacle vs Qualcomm 5G is very good example", or maybe very bad example how big company like Intel cant produce good product.All that money and resources, but hey absolute zero of a quality product.

7nm is usseles if the yields are bad or to low. Then you do not have a commercially viable product for a broad market."Hey Intel half-dead 10nm works good", but still only for posters and marketing slides.

People forget, Intel must feed 100 000 employees and maintain 12 FAB-s.AMD has no FAB-s, and about 9 000 employees.
 

TheGiant

Senior member
Jun 12, 2017
365
46
76
#38
AMD doesn't have that much time to gain profit...

Intel is not in the f..kup they were in early 2000s, where Athlon with hypertransport and powerful and more effiecient CPU competed with the joke of everything - pentium 4, hot, slow with FSB

intel's only disadvantage atm is power with 56C/112T cascade lake AP, but not performance or architecture

if intel really samples 10nm server CPUs (maybe they are really, we all doubt it) and ramp up 7nm (their 7nm) in 2021, AMD doesn't have that much time
I doubt they will be less effiecient with icelake/wtflake on 10nm...

anyone has a source to confirm, that Intel is indeed sampling 10nm server chips? just confirm, no more details
or maybe they do something like with skylake SP and big customers got it half year before public announcement
 

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
3,197
490
136
#39
Can we get past this "Intel is doomed" vs. "AMD won't ever succeed" crossfire?

Thread is about Intel's 7nm announcement.
 

moinmoin

Senior member
Jun 1, 2017
749
245
96
#41
To get back to the 7nm topic: Cannon Lake with its disabled iGPU as well as the whole of the 10nm debacle showed Intel was ill-prepared to handle low yields. The fact that in conjunction with the 7nm progress report they announced a Foveros based GPU as the first product using that process tells me they are now adapting to the prospect of low yield with a focus on more and more advanced MCM and chiplet designs. It will be interesting to see where and if at all Intel will keep building monolithic dies on those smaller nodes.

"Powered on at multiple customers" made me laugh for some reasons.
 

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
3,197
490
136
#43
another source than Intel and their marketing "stuff" ?
This isn't marketing "stuff", if they lie about it they open themselves to all kinds of bad juju.
 

TheGiant

Senior member
Jun 12, 2017
365
46
76
#44
This isn't marketing "stuff", if they lie about it they open themselves to all kinds of bad juju.
but they did with 10nm is ok, ramping up etc...

I mean if someone has a first person contact that can confirm Intel's words..

If they are indeed sampling 10nm server parts (carefully didnt say core count lol)

what can be used with the process naming- Intel's 7nm = TSMC 3-5nm? so the nm doesn't work anymore

Intel 7nm doesn't look well in 2021, but Intel's 3nm looks ok to me in 2021....
 

BigDaveX

Senior member
Jun 12, 2014
337
48
101
#45
To get back to the 7nm topic: Cannon Lake with its disabled iGPU as well as the whole of the 10nm debacle showed Intel was ill-prepared to handle low yields.
They were probably ready to handle a situation like they had with Broadwell, where their initial 14nm yields were low, but only to the extent where it limited their output to laptop and HEDT/Xeon-type chips. Obviously their 10nm yields turned out far, far worse than they had ever expected.
 

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
3,197
490
136
#46
but they did with 10nm is ok, ramping up etc...

I mean if someone has a first person contact that can confirm Intel's words..
This is not something that can be retracted or adjusted, it's a binary truth statement. Samples are either shipped or not, and they're currently working with more than 1 customer or not. If they lie about this in front of investors they open themselves to litigation and possibly jail recreation time.

I won't necessarily trust their marketing "stuff" regarding performance increase in their 10nm products (they have lots of wiggle room there), but I do not doubt this type of statement regarding their Xeon sample shipments. Core count is indeed a big question mark at this point.
 

moinmoin

Senior member
Jun 1, 2017
749
245
96
#47
Samples are either shipped or not, and they're currently working with more than 1 customer or not.
They do write "Powered on at multiple customers" . The cynic in me paints a picture of multiple Intel customers feverishly trying to make the samples run for some time after powering them on.
 

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
5,994
169
126
#48
Slightly different note, but it makes sense why Icelake changed from the original projection being 10nm+.

10nm+ probably changed things a bit from the original 10nm. If you are in development hell with a new architecture, you don't go and couple 10nm plus with it. That's just begging for trouble.
 

TheGiant

Senior member
Jun 12, 2017
365
46
76
#49
so what is the first real product on 7nm tech? any guesses?
 


ASK THE COMMUNITY