- Jan 8, 2001
FINALLY someone who is intelligent enough to understand.Honestly, I don't care if Intel names their process nodes '10 flying butt monkeys'. If they get competitive again, great!. If they don't, rats! Real competition is the only price control we have. If Intel were to offer 20% more performance/$ the next time I upgrade; I'd consider Intel. Same with AMD (as was the case this time, plus better perf/watt).
Gelsinger hasn't had hardly enough time to make any real changes at Intel. Though, obviously he's applying pressure since he got the process/manufacturing team to commit to this timeline. So while it is to some extent it's a 'dog and pony show', it's also a commitment that the press and investors will hold Intel to. That's not nothing.
It does look really small at the initial glance but it should be a lot larger. Looking at the picture more closely you can see that there are two distinct patterns. Likely they are different parts of the die.Anyone counted the MTL dies from the wafer picture? Looks extremely small to me.
Great technical coverage partially negated by following the stupid conventions of the industry.
In short, it is marketing move.I suspect they must be happy with ADL if they're rebranding its process. Otherwise it would make their shiny new name look like trash right out of the gate. Why rebrand if you're going to tarnish the new naming scheme immediately?
But maybe I'm reading too much into it.
It was the same deal when BK pushed through Cannonlake in a few lame 2c laptops sold only in China to fulfill his promise of 10nm in 2017.The dumb ones, yes. Of course, large investors are playing an entirely different game where they make can make money on Intel whether it's stock is up or down.
I think you need a refresh on what Intel was saying last year in March about 10nm to investors in a Morgan Stanley conference call:Somehow people are quite sarcastic here. Intel presentation this week was quite different, compared to previous ones. Now, Intel is using words like 'parity', meaning that they're behind. At least Intel accepts the truth. A year ago, their presentation was like "yeeeey, we're the best, everything's on schedule" but hiding every detail then later they say "hey look, financial numbers' all good anyway" but not this year.
Not only were they already admitting being behind, they also made public plans to achieve parity with their 7nm node and regain the lead on 5nm. Here's a quote from ComputerBase:CFO said:this isn't just going to be the best node that Intel has ever had. It's going to be less productive than 14nm, less productive than 22nm, but we're excited about the improvements that we're seeing and we expect to start the 7nm period with a much better profile of performance over that starting at the end of 2021 .
... but the fact is that I wanted to be clear what was happening during the 10nm generation. The fact is, it isn't going to be as strong a node as people would expect from 14nm or what they'll see in 7nm.
Sounds familiar?In the 7 nm production at the end of 2021, Intel wants to reach the level of parity with the competition and be significantly stronger than with 10 nm, in 5 nm the manufacturer then wants to take the lead again.
Yes, the dumb ones just said 'yes, 10nm is out!'. The smart ones said 'not' and their hedge fund managers had already figured out how to play this either way. Or, they just backed totally away from Intel and sought better prey. So, yes you are correct; I should have left off the bit about investors holding Intel accountable.It was the same deal when BK pushed through Cannonlake in a few lame 2c laptops sold only in China to fulfill his promise of 10nm in 2017.
And let's face it, the computer algos don't care about rebranding exercises that any company employs.Yes, the dumb ones just said 'yes, 10nm is out!'. The smart ones said 'not' and their hedge fund managers had already figured out how to play this either way. Or, they just backed totally away from Intel and sought better prey. So, yes you are correct; I should have left off the bit about investors holding Intel accountable.
Morris Chang said:In this forum [timestamp: 01:05:28], Morris Chang said (paraphrasing):
"TSMC has 3 main competitors - GlobalFoundries, Samsung and Intel. Samsung and Intel are 700-lb gorillas. Although Intel is an indirect competitor, the threat posed by Intel is the same and just as serious."
So they are well aware what giving most of their 3nm production to Intel would result inMorris Chang said:"Intel competes with our customers, who depend on us for manufacturing and process technology. If we fall behind or fail to enable our customers to compete with Intel, then TSMC is finished; we will have no customers. TSMC's mission is to help our customers defeat Intel."
Morris Chang is no longer the boss/ceo of TSMC iirc. So whether or not that is still what people think at TSMC is another question.A bit tangental to the topic, but still relevant as puts certain rumors very much ib doubt.
People here were claiming that TSMC will just blindly give most leading edge wafers blindly to Intel with no regard to current customers ...
Well straight from Morris Chang:
So they are well aware what giving most of their 3nm production to Intel would result in
We are talking about DIY, which K is what Intel pushes.In short, it is classic paper lounch.
95 percent of users do not need the most expensive motherboards, and especially not the most expensive CPU models.
Intel Alder Lake S Launch - Only Enthusiast CPUs and Z690 Chipset between Oct. 25 and Nov. 19 in 2021, the rest is coming later | igor´sLABDisclaimer: The following article is machine translated from the original German, and has not been edited or checked for errors. Thank you for understanding!www.igorslab.de
Intel's done this a lot. It's quicker getting the chips into the retail market than through OEMs who then have to assemble the PCs and then ship it (and they prefer by boat which takes awhile)Thats sounds like Broadwell with extra steps. (and a bad IGP)
It's not really a paper launch if they have the chips ready to meet demand on launch day, or at least can ship in volume (assuming they find demand like AMD did with Vermeer; you can't say Vermeer was a paper launch just because it was sold out). That they choose to meet the needs of a narrow segment of the market does say something about the total volume they intend to ship.In short, it is classic paper lounch.
|Thread starter||Similar threads||Forum||Replies||Date|
|U||Question I have 25 extra 200 mm Intel wafers||CPUs and Overclocking||15|
|Z||Question Intel Foundry Wins US DoD 'Foundry Eco-System' Business||CPUs and Overclocking||15|
|Question Intel i7 CPU: Engineering Sample vs. "T" model? Need to match or beat a Ryzen 3600!||CPUs and Overclocking||33|
|News Intel to fab chips for Qualcomm||CPUs and Overclocking||33|
|T||Review The rise of small cores: Intel Pentium Silver N6000 vs Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6580||CPUs and Overclocking||0|
|Question I have 25 extra 200 mm Intel wafers|
|Question Intel Foundry Wins US DoD 'Foundry Eco-System' Business|
|Question Intel i7 CPU: Engineering Sample vs. "T" model? Need to match or beat a Ryzen 3600!|
|News Intel to fab chips for Qualcomm|
|Review The rise of small cores: Intel Pentium Silver N6000 vs Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6580|