(Bit-Tech) Intel shelves delayed Fab 42 facility

[NTMBK]

Except there will be Broadwell on desktop.

Isn't it only "Broadwell-K" (i.e. the top end enthusiast SKUs) which will be on desktop, with the rest of the product stack made up of Haswell Refresh? Not that that is a bad thing- most desktop users aren't that fussed about 30% lower power consumption and improved iGPU.

 

[Borealis7]

all the reasons can be summed up in one reason: declining sales in the PC market globally.

 

[jpiniero]

Isn't it only "Broadwell-K" (i.e. the top end enthusiast SKUs) which will be on desktop, with the rest of the product stack made up of Haswell Refresh? Not that that is a bad thing- most desktop users aren't that fussed about 30% lower power consumption and improved iGPU.

It would make sense if they did Desktop "-R" BGA parts (ie: QC GT3e).

This could also be a sign that they are going to go ahead and push Atom up the food chain. Really, 70-80% of Intel's PC sales go to people who Cherry Trail would be more than plenty; it does make sense. And since Cherry Trail is so tiny, less wafers would be needed.

 

[Qwertilot]

Absolutely inevitable that isn't it? Core isn't getting notably faster, just more efficent but atom will definitely be picking up speed fairly fast for bits of the SoC market if nothing else.

Meanwhile a cheaper, lower power processor should let the OEMs make much better low end PCs. Badly needed vs tablets etc.

No guarantee they will of course

 

[JDG1980]

This could also be a sign that they are going to go ahead and push Atom up the food chain. Really, 70-80% of Intel's PC sales go to people who Cherry Trail would be more than plenty; it does make sense. And since Cherry Trail is so tiny, less wafers would be needed.

As I've said before, I think that Intel is eventually going to eliminate the "mainstream" socket (1156->1155->1150, etc). Cheap OEM systems (and some DIY boards) will have Atom derivatives; laptops and all-in-ones will continue to use soldered-in BGA, as they do now; and enthusiasts and servers will all be moved over to future revisions of LGA 2011 or its successor.

 

[GreenChile]

As I've said before, I think that Intel is eventually going to eliminate the "mainstream" socket (1156->1155->1150, etc). Cheap OEM systems (and some DIY boards) will have Atom derivatives; laptops and all-in-ones will continue to use soldered-in BGA, as they do now; and enthusiasts and servers will all be moved over to future revisions of LGA 2011 or its successor.

That doesn't make any sense. Why would they give up one of their most dominant and successful markets. They would in effect be saying "Here ya go AMD. The mainstream desktop market is all yours." It would be one thing if it disappeared on its own but it is still a huge and profitable market. Intel would not try to accelerate its demise.

You're coming up with some real doosies in this thread.

 

[NTMBK]

That doesn't make any sense. Why would they give up one of their most dominant and successful markets. They would in effect be saying "Here ya go AMD. The mainstream desktop market is all yours." It would be one thing if it disappeared on its own but it is still a huge and profitable market. Intel would not try to accelerate its demise.

You're coming up with some real doosies in this thread.

Does the average consumer Facebook box from Dell really need a socketed upgradeable CPU? No. Integrate the entire thing into a single SoC (chipset included), solder it onto a Thin mini-ITX motherboard, and make a tiny little desktop with lower costs. Gamers can go buy socket 2011.

 

[GreenChile]

Does the average consumer Facebook box from Dell really need a socketed upgradeable CPU? No. Integrate the entire thing into a single SoC (chipset included), solder it onto a Thin mini-ITX motherboard, and make a tiny little desktop with lower costs. Gamers can go buy socket 2011.

You are talking about a different consumer market altogether. They have their place and we have our place. Intel still makes a lot of money from our market and they are not going to kill it off and make us decide between a high cost super high performance and a low cost low performance option. AMD would win all sorts of market share if that happened.

 

[NTMBK]

You are talking about a different consumer market altogether. They have their place and we have our place. Intel still makes a lot of money from our market and they are not going to kill it off and make us decide between a high cost super high performance and a low cost low performance option. AMD would win all sorts of market share if that happened.

The Intel enthusiast line starts with the the i7-4820k- in the UK at least, that part is £15 cheaper than a 4770k. And I'm sure that Intel could release an "i5-4620k" with the hyper-threading disabled and a lower pricepoint too, if they wanted to. The bottom of the "Enthusiast" range and the top of the "Consumer" range have an overlap, and that overlap is exactly where the custom-rig-building, "hardcore" gamer market is. You'd adapt just fine.

 

[GreenChile]

The Intel enthusiast line starts with the the i7-4820k- in the UK at least, that part is £15 cheaper than a 4770k. And I'm sure that Intel could release an "i5-4620k" with the hyper-threading disabled and a lower pricepoint too, if they wanted to. The bottom of the "Enthusiast" range and the top of the "Consumer" range have an overlap, and that overlap is exactly where the custom-rig-building, "hardcore" gamer market is. You'd adapt just fine.

So you are implying the Ivy Bridge - E series is the most popular with the enthusiast crowd? Hmm, news to me. I guess I must be in a class of my own cause I find the 4770K much more to my liking (if I were in the market for a new CPU that is).

 

[NTMBK]

So you are implying the Ivy Bridge - E series is the most popular with the enthusiast crowd? Hmm, news to me. I guess I must be in a class of my own cause I find the 4770K much more to my liking (if I were in the market for a new CPU that is).

No, I'm not deluded. But what I am saying is that I think the enthusiast crowd could quite readily make do with the quad-core Ivy Bridge E platform if they needed to.

 

[JDG1980]

That doesn't make any sense. Why would they give up one of their most dominant and successful markets. They would in effect be saying "Here ya go AMD. The mainstream desktop market is all yours." It would be one thing if it disappeared on its own but it is still a huge and profitable market. Intel would not try to accelerate its demise.

You're coming up with some real doosies in this thread.

There is no inherent reason why a LGA 2011 CPU needs to have a higher price than a LGA 1150 CPU. That's just marketing. If Intel wants to package the successors to the i7-4670K and i7-4770K at the same price, but move them to LGA 2011 v3 (or whatever comes after that), then they should have no trouble doing that. The K-series are the CPUs that enthusiasts actually buy, so on that front, little would change except that Intel no longer has the overhead of maintaining 2 sockets when they only need one.

Meanwhile, OEMs, people building HTPCs, cheap boxes for non-technical users, and so forth will be fine with soldered BGA parts.

 

[Hulk]

Another reason they should take in more outside fab work.

Problem is intel expects the same margins on all chips they produce. This has allowed ARM and AMDs low power jaguar to have a much larger market share then they would have if intel could get past their wanted margin rates.

That's a big decision. Take more outside work to keep your fabs operating more efficiently but allow your competitors to thrive.

Or hurt yourself and your competitors by not doing any outside fabbing. Let them die and then you have the field to yourself.

Intel has always been a company to follow the latter approach I think.

 

[witeken]

Was 42 supposed to use 450mm or 300mm wafers? I heard of reports that 450mm is going to be delayed due to supplier issues.

450mm isn't delayed. It coming in the second half of this decade.