• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Intel willing to fab for competitors

They sabotage all the chips so they self destruct in 2 months?

Seriously though, kind of surprising if it is on their smallest process node. Maybe it will be on say 22nm to utilize capacity after a new node is introduced? Seems especially strange since intels own 14 nm is delayed due to yield problems.
 
frozentundra123456 said:
Seriously though, kind of surprising if it is on their smallest process node.
Click to expand...
Not really. Intel has traditionally been described as a fab company with a chip design addiction. So they'll do anything on the fab side if the money is right. The "right" money being enough to deliver 65%+ margins, as they like to have.
 
Intel's 32nm process is very, very solid. I suspect that AMD would get better results on that fab than with GloFo even at 28nm. Unfortunately, that albatross of a contract that Hector Ruiz signed pretty much rules that out.
 
Would be amazing if AMD and Nvidia could migrate GPU's over the Intel's latest and greatest fabs. It will probably never happen though.
 
I hear Admiral Ackbar is available as the Intel spokesman for this new open fab initiative.

Seriously, though, any company big enough or innovative enough to be a competitor with Intel is going to have a lot of trepidations.
 
I don't think amd has the money🙁
I could be wrong since I don't know much about how such business goes down but I don't think amd or nvidia would want their designs in the hands of their biggest competitor.
 
ShintaiDK said:
If it did, GPU prices would rise rather harshly.
Click to expand...

I think die sizes could come in way smaller on 14nm vs. current sizes on 28nm and still have many times performance increases. I don't know how much per wafer Intel would charge, nor do I know how much die area would be saved to achieve equal performance on 14nm compared to 28nm, but it could offset costs. JHH has said in the past he would like to see Intel open up their fabs, so if there is an option Nvidia and AMD would be stupid to not at least look into it.
 
tviceman said:
I think die sizes could come in way smaller on 14nm vs. current sizes on 28nm and still have many times performance increases. I don't know how much per wafer Intel would charge, nor do I know how much die area would be saved to achieve equal performance on 14nm compared to 28nm, but it could offset costs. JHH has said in the past he would like to see Intel open up their fabs, so if there is an option Nvidia and AMD would be stupid to not at least look into it.
Click to expand...

Plenty of others willing to pay much more than AMD or nVidia. And with limited supply...
 
ShintaiDK said:
Plenty of others willing to pay much more than AMD or nVidia. And with limited supply...
Click to expand...

The only ones that don't license most of their IP are Nvidia, AMD/ATi, Qualcomm and Apple.

Everyone else will have a hell of a time porting over their licensed designs tailored to TSMC fab processes.

This is shown in the fact that Intel is even fabbing externally with Sophia because of the significant importance of the TSMC validated design portion of their SoC.
 
positivedoppler said:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...actories-for-other-chipmakers.html?cmpid=yhoo

"Otellini had said Intel’s plants were closed to competitors. Earlier this year, Krzanich said he would consider changing that stance, and yesterday he confirmed the company’s willingness to make chips for companies that are beating Intel in mobile phones."

What do you guys think this means? 14nm apples?
Click to expand...

So Intel can have a good long look at what's beating them and then develop something that beats it back. Then close fabs to competitors again :awe: Good plan!
 
SiliconWars said:
Now, if you want it - http://electroiq.com/blog/2013/11/xilinx-ships-industrys-first-20nm-all-programmable-product/

This is AMD's and Nvidia's decision, and they'd presumably make the same decision on 14nm at Intel so no change.
Click to expand...

So only extremely limited chips that get sold for 1000s of $? And not even listed on their site to buy?
http://www.xilinx.com/onlinestore/index.htm

So when do we get regular consumer chips on 20nm? AMD and nVidia is due to cost. Apple and Qualcomm will get 20nm before the 2.
 
Last edited:
ShintaiDK said:
So only extremely limited chips that get sold for 1000s of $? And not even listed on their site to buy?
http://www.xilinx.com/onlinestore/index.htm
Click to expand...

You asked when we'd see 20nm TSMC, I gave you the answer.

So when do we get regular consumer chips on 20nm? AMD and nVidia is due to cost. Apple and Qualcomm will get 20nm before the 2.
Click to expand...
This would also, presumably, be the same on Intel's 14nm (if Qualcomm, Apple, AMD and Nvidia all decided to go build chips on it, Qualcomm and Apple would still be first due to cost).
 
Last edited:
erunion said:
So TSMC being a node behind and without finfets obsoletes Intel 14nm? Good try at thread crapping though.
Click to expand...

Thread crapping? The problem here is you're so fast to jump to the wrong conclusions that it blinds you to what is actually going on. I was obviously referring to tviceman's point about it being 28nm vs 14nm, nothing to do with "obsoleting" intel's 14nm or anything else.
 
Last edited:
We'll see 14nm Broadwell and Cherry Trail likely before Qualcomms A57 20nm chip, and around a similar time-frame as Apple's A8. Nvidia's Project Denver will likely be 1H2015. Samsung is less certain.

You keep trying to say Intel is going to be putting 14nm in production later than it really is, they said 1Q2014 not 2Q as you keep mentioning.

The yield problem is solved and improving, so even early 1Q is a possibility making at least an announcement at Computex possible.
 
SiliconWars said:
Thread crapping? The problem here is you're so fast to jump to the wrong conclusions that it blinds you to what is actually going on. I was obviously referring to tviceman's point about it being 28nm vs 14nm, nothing to do with "obsoleting" intel's 14nm or anything else.
Click to expand...

My apologies. I didn't see the connection to the previous post.
 
jdubs03 said:
You keep trying to say Intel is going to be putting 14nm in production later than it really is, they said 1Q2014 not 2Q as you keep mentioning.

The yield problem is solved and improving, so even early 1Q is a possibility making at least an announcement at Computex possible.
Click to expand...

The yield problems are not solved. Improving yes, solved no.

The point I'm making is that this has been a feature for them so far on 14nm. Peaks and valleys one after the other. Ask yourself how likely it is that Intel is going to go ahead full-out production on a node that has shown these characteristics? It's not safe for them to go ahead on the hope that it's fixed - they need to know for sure.

So 14nm matches 22nm once in Q1? What if it drops again? No, they will make sure it's totally fixed.

So then (assuming they have 3-4 test batches of 22nm-level yield), at the end of Q1 they have to move the process from R&D to the actual fabs in OR and AZ. That takes time as well. After that's done it's generally 6 months before general availability.

Sure they can *maybe* paper launch something in Q2, but it'll be the mother and father of all paper launches. This is absolute best case by far - detractors will say 2015 and it's likely going to be in the middle, or late 2014 before we see any kind of decent 14nm availability.
 
Last edited:
Intel doesn't do paper launches though. Once the delay happened Broadwell was pretty much going to be only the high end QC models in 2014, so even if the yield sucks they should be able to deliver enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top