Intel to produce Cannonlake, Icelake, Tigerlake on 10nm node

[HEXUS]

So 10nm will become the second process node to feature three processor families.

Read more.

[Plasmastorm]

" Another interesting thing about Cannonlake is that it is expected to bring the first consumer processors that go beyond quad-core., "

If games and to be honest ANYTHING I use a PC for used more than 4 cores (most only use 2) then I would be all for this. As it stands however, forget more cores and give us more speed. We should have had 5Ghz chips outta the box ages ago, If I can clock a 3570k to 4.5ghz and it be stable for near 3 years now why on earth can't they just make them like that to start with

[SvDKILLSWITCH]

We should have had 5Ghz chips outta the box ages ago, If I can clock a 3570k to 4.5ghz and it be stable for near 3 years now why on earth can't they just make them like that to start with

Intel were racing towards higher and higher clock speeds with the NetBurst architecture. It was a terrible idea, in hindsight. The focus since then has been on efficiency - getting more done with less as opposed to getting it done by just plain old throwing more speed at it.

It's probably much easier from a manufacturing point of view to put out somewhat conservative clock speeds on chips. Sure, on a K-series processor you can push into the high 4.0 GHz range, but not every chip will do it that easily and some chips won't do it at all, so Intel can't (or won't) guarantee that kind of speed if there are going to be chips that can't handle it.

[abaxas]

I'm fully expecting lots of 8/12 core 2ghz chips instead of 4 core 3.5ghz ones.

That is the way computers are going as they ran out of the clock speed dimension.

[stoatwblr]

More cores, more efficient use of them and _faster memory_ would help.

The current memory clock nonclemature is as deceptive as cpu speeds.

Latencies (wait states) mean that higher clock speeds don't result in the delay from a memory request to data coming back being any shorter than a decade ago. DRAM may be cheap(*) but it's a major bottleneck in current architechture.

(*) Cheap being relative. The amount of effort spent making it run faster and the amount of silicon supporting those higher speeds without significant errors(**) means that the laws of diminishing returns have been in effect for quite a while.

(**) ECC is pretty much mandatory these days. I've seen more ECC events on ram in the last 5 years than the previous 2 decades.

[abaxas]

Surely the answer to latency is to increase cache on the chip. Ram can't always increase in speed as it makes PCB designer more difficult.

[3dcandy]

problem is that for most things the chips are waiting on the other subsystems or users to keep up...

[Nifl]

Right now you only need more than 4 cores if you play the newest AAA titles on highest settings and still want over 100 fps or stream live at a high quality. I think lots of streamers would invest another extra 300 bucks in the CPU over buying a dedicated streaming PC. Those are also the kind of games where AMD 8 core processors look pretty good for what they cost, but the caching issue still holds them back quite a bit. Let us up that Zen makes them competitive in the high-end field again.

[iggy]

We should have had 5Ghz chips outta the box ages ago, If I can clock a 3570k to 4.5ghz and it be stable for near 3 years now why on earth can't they just make them like that to start with

Intel were racing towards higher and higher clock speeds with the NetBurst architecture. It was a terrible idea, in hindsight. The focus since then has been on efficiency - getting more done with less as opposed to getting it done by just plain old throwing more speed at it.

It's probably much easier from a manufacturing point of view to put out somewhat conservative clock speeds on chips. Sure, on a K-series processor you can push into the high 4.0 GHz range, but not every chip will do it that easily and some chips won't do it at all, so Intel can't (or won't) guarantee that kind of speed if there are going to be chips that can't handle it.

2500k was released in 2011 and damn near every single one of them manages 4.5k, on air, just by bumping up the multi.

Youre kidding yourself if you think intel have kept the chip market like this is anything else than a complete lack of competition.

[shaithis]

2500k was released in 2011 and damn near every single one of them manages 4.5k, on air, just by bumping up the multi.

Youre kidding yourself if you think intel have kept the chip market like this is anything else than a complete lack of competition.

Everyone seems so quick to shout "lack of competition" lately. I think you'll find there are technical reasons related to power usage and process changes that are the driving factor instead!

[spacein_vader]

Right now you only need more than 4 cores if you play the newest AAA titles on highest settings and still want over 100 fps or stream live at a high quality. I think lots of streamers would invest another extra 300 bucks in the CPU over buying a dedicated streaming PC. Those are also the kind of games where AMD 8 core processors look pretty good for what they cost, but the caching issue still holds them back quite a bit. Let us up that Zen makes them competitive in the high-end field again.

That may be the main case for more cores if you're a gamer, but there are others. Video editing, transcoding, rendering and many others besides. Or you may just want to game and have other tasks happening in the background. If it's one or the other, I'll take more cores over more clock speed.

[Pleiades]

I still remember an Intel dude back in the P4 Netburst days stating that 10Ghz chips would be available 'soon'. Which may be true if you're using Geological time :-)

[Platinum]

Interesting that TSMC might beat them to 7nm, will that 7nm nobe be suitable for high performance chips though or just low power mobile parts?

[Nifl]

That may be the main case for more cores if you're a gamer, but there are others. Video editing, transcoding, rendering and many others besides. Or you may just want to game and have other tasks happening in the background. If it's one or the other, I'll take more cores over more clock speed.

Those aren't consumers though. Those are professionals
They had 12 and more core processors for a while.

[devBunny]

That may be the main case for more cores if you're a gamer, but there are others. Video editing, transcoding, rendering and many others besides. Or you may just want to game and have other tasks happening in the background. If it's one or the other, I'll take more cores over more clock speed.

Those aren't consumers though. Those are professionals
They had 12 and more core processors for a while.

There are plenty of amateurs and hobbyists beavering away in those areas.

[mtyson]

TSMC orders equipment worth NT$7 billion
"Thus far in January 2016, TSMC has disclosed seven separate equipment purchases totaling about NT$17.55 billion".