Intel Mentions 10nm, Briefly

18 Comments

View All Comments

• Drumsticks - Tuesday, January 9, 2018 - link

  I wonder if we'll ever find out what happened to 10nm. It seems one of Tech's great mysteries along with Vega, at least in the modern world.

• Drumsticks - Tuesday, January 9, 2018 - link

  Modern technology world that is, i.e. the last 5ish years or so.

• HStewart - Tuesday, January 9, 2018 - link

  They realize the threat from AMD and QualComm and taking actions to make sure it not issue in the future.
  
  As for Intel / Vega thing - if you look at previous technical information from Intel on designs. This is just part of existing planned to make the mobile GPU faster connection with Mobile CPU. I believe it also part of planned to make simplified the motherboards designed with discrete GPU in mobile area. Apple was probably heavy behind this - I don't believe it is limited to just AMD GPU, likely Intel based discrete GPU and even possibly NVidia. I not sure we will see this technology in desktops - possibly but it requires major designed changes in desktop layouts.
  
  Of course like everything else on internet, this is just my opinion.

• HStewart - Tuesday, January 9, 2018 - link

  I believe it been well documented that Intel 10nm is actually more dense than other 10nm - likely closer to rumor 7nm on the other side.
  
  Intel is also not stupid - they are completely aware that that AMD was working on Zen before it was released and also likely aware of Qualcomm emulations and are likely taking extra efforts to make sure they have strong hold in the industry once release.
  
  This is of course my speculation in what I would be doing if I was Intel - larger amount of cores and lower power is what I expected. I also believe that GPU's will be enhanced with experience from Ruju - probably more in aligned with what Apple really wants in the GPU component and not what they got from AMD.

• lilmoe - Tuesday, January 9, 2018 - link

  Samsung, TSMC and GF 7nm will probably be more dense, and will probably ship around or before Intel's 10nm. Density is what matters more, not the nomenclature. Besides, unless Intel's foundry business starts fabbing in mass for others, it wouldn't really matter which is the "superior" process. What will matter is which CHIP/package offers better performance and/or efficiency for the intended task, and takes better advantage of is respective process.
  
  Time will tell. They have other security problems to worry about now, and those problems need fundamental changes to the base architecture. They all do, but it looks like Intel's problems go a bit deeper.

• HStewart - Tuesday, January 9, 2018 - link

  Time will tell, right now we honest don't know about it - what is important is not the size in nm - but how many transistors are in a give chip. I like Intel designed primary because they know how to used the denser technology for where is it is important on CPU and GPU and allow cheaper technology on other areas. I think Intel was very smart when they purchase Altera and of course Raju coming about will have impact.
  
  I not to worried about security issues, software has bugs - even CPU's which I actually found one on IBM486SLC. I think the main problem with Intel is that they are top dog in PC Market and there are some others that don't like that and will go for the Underdog. I know that there are some especially gamers that want to believe AMD is Intel primary threat, but it actually not ARM is actually it - but that is different market.

• lilmoe - Tuesday, January 9, 2018 - link

  Intel has had a monopoly for years and have been milking their customers...bad. That's why they're not everyone's favorite. They're charging an arm and a leg in terms of silicon area. They've been cashing in on the same architecture for years, and just started introducing more cores because of Zen. They've been really dependent on their process advances, doing very little in terms of innovation and creativity (as Lisa Su likes to put it, in which I agree).
  
  Any potential GPU advances is still years off. I wouldn't bet on any of that for the time being. By the time they do deliver, AMD and NVidia aren't going to stay still.
  
  Zen has proved to be great, and now, the future is all about cores and co-processing. The single threaded advantage Intel has is slowly diminishing, in terms of both hardware AND software.
  
  There's also Windows on ARM which has yet to show its full potential. I bet a dedicated 8 core (all A75 cores) platform with a competent GPU would give a quad core Intel U-series a good run for its money in performance, using less power while providing many more hardware features, and would make huge dent in Intel's high margins in the consumer business.
  
  I honestly wouldn't be as bullish as you are when it comes to Intel. I'd definitely start building shorts.

• TEAMSWITCHER - Tuesday, January 9, 2018 - link

  What monopoly is that? What "milking" are you referring to? As I remember, Intel offered 6 and 8 core CPU's years before Zen. And nearly three years before Zen shipped, Intel had a 6 core CPU for less than $400 ... the Core i7-5820k. Granted, I'm mixing the mainstream and HEDT platforms, but full-featured mainstream and HEDT motherboards were never so different in price -
  certainly not enough to claim that Intel didn't offer mainstream consumers more performance.

• Alistair - Tuesday, January 9, 2018 - link

  No that is milking. Intel offloaded the price to the platform and motherboard fees to make that CPU appear cheaper than it was.
  
  No reason they couldn't have released 6 core CPU on their main platform years ago, when the 4 core hit record low area sizes.

• HStewart - Tuesday, January 9, 2018 - link

  To AMD HEDT platforms is where they can attack Intel, but to Intel HEDT is a minor market.
  
  But the AMD fans so called false vision of Intel monopoly is good for industry - because what AMD does not have is capital, Intel has that and can crush AMD in seconds. But for the industry, this keeps Intel on it toes. But Intel primary threat is not AMD but ARM and that is why that are focusing in lower power. But the problem with ARM is that it extremely slower that Intel cores - mostly equilivent to Intel's Atom cores - and emulation has not proving itself to give performance - especially when trying to emulate CISC architecture on RISC architecture.