Read more.Quote:
Entry-level Atom processors and some of its chipsets are going to be made by TSMC.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Entry-level Atom processors and some of its chipsets are going to be made by TSMC.
Who cares, when TSMC already has 7nm available in full production and in two years are going to have 5nm? GloFo are also coming back and putting 7nm on the table, with the process to be ready by q3 2019.
I guess most people with an interest care, despite node sizes becoming mostly marketing hype over a decade ago, for example TSMC's 7nm is actually closer to Intel's 10nm.
Also got any further info on GloFlo reintroducing 7nm as google is letting me down.
It's quite interesting given how Intel have been a fairly self-reliant and like to insist on their lead in manufacturing technology. It's still only fairly recently they've started some contract manufacturing for other non-competing companies, though you don't really hear much about that. IIRC Altera was one of the first but they were subsequently acquired by Intel.
Am I remembering it correctly, that TSMC have produced some of these Atom cores in the past through the likes of the sofia chipsets sold with Rockchip branding? IIRC that also had something to do with those chipsets having an integrated modem - something which was more readily achievable on TSMC's process at the time.
soon all AMERICAN companies will be swallowed by ASIAN tech giants (except APPLE & MICROSOFT)....THE AMERICAN DREAM is gone. The only thing left with the west is SOFTWARE- which is the simple part the harder part: hardware has been taken by Asians so we are left to wonder if Asians begin taking the software part of things?
Why do you keep spaffing this crap? What is your objective? To prove your anti asian values to anyone who will listen?Quote:
Originally Posted by lumireleon
And even if that happened: so what? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by lumireleon
“is a full generation denser than other 10nm” parts
Yeah, great. The problem is everyone else will be 7nm see AMD all next year while you try to get 10nm fixed and out by xmas 2019 (LOL, not likely), or probably Q1 2020. AMD you have a year to price as high as you can so you can finally rid yourself of debt and save for R&D! Please don't price your 590 at $300 if it's GTX 1080 perf. It would be criminally stupid to be less than $399 if it's close to a $440 card. But then AMD management is retarded regarding pricing. Price wars with far richer companies leads to no R&D as you go broke trying to fight a war that is literally financially impossible for you to win. Quit doing stupid stuff AMD. The employees must need to head to bars after they see new product pricing for uh, what do you guys call them in UK, PINTS? :)
Every time you post about AMD and pricing you never cease to prove you don't understand what they're doing with their pricing.Quote:
Originally Posted by nobodyspecial
I'm jumping on this topic as it is quite an important one and is simular to the chinese/indian/just asia manufacturing takeover of British industrialization. The reality is, they are cheaper/faster/convenient to use as a manufacturing source as they have the resources and people to do what CEO's and Business owners want. Much like how Honda moved Motorcycle manufacture from japan to brazil, to india within the course of 30 years for the CG125. Now it may be that those who were in the western product manufacture buisness are now outsoursing but i have stated why the buisness owners do that. At the end of the day complaining is almost selfish, third world countries only want better quality of life and by having better wages and more work helps that countries economy. By improving a third world countries QOL may reduce ours, but that makes a fair(er?) planet. At the end of the day everyone wants a nice lifestyle but it can't be done. Who else want's social reform that makes the world have an internation currency with no debt and the same life choices, :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Pleiades
Yet again what you're spouting makes no sense. You reckon you're smarter than an entire company? Why not apply and show them where they're going wrong then?!?Quote:
Originally Posted by nobodyspecial
AMD actually needs to, you know, sell some of these cards. At least enough to cover development, mask costs, etc. Pricing it identically to an existing card with similar performance from a brand with better mind share? Now THAT is stupid!
In order to actually sell a decent volume, over two years after the release of the 'competing' card, for a given price point they need to offer more, or do the same for a lower price point. Processors belong to a time-sensitive market, so selling a simple alternative to a >2 year old product to what is likely already a saturated market? Yeah, good luck with that. ;)
I agree up to a point: globalised manufacturing and parts chains have helped lead to a substantial uplift in lower and mid-tier (I dislike the obsolete term '3rd World') economies: however, this wasn't done altruistically. Every party engaged in the process on both sides of the world were looking to increase production efficiency and profits. Those in the most developed countries have gained the most vis-a-vis material wealth, in that costs of many items have fallen enough that even our 'poor' can afford large TVs, cars and foreign holidays as well as all the electronic gewgaws we could possibly desire. The large corporations and their shareholders in the rich nations have received a huge boost that dwarfs the rewards the labouring nations have garnered.Quote:
Originally Posted by PC-LAD
Many of the middle-income countries are, or will, struggle to attain (what is fancifully called) 'fully-developed' status if the world reverts to beggar-thy-neighbour trade regimes, as seems likely in the near future.
It matters. As TSMC shifts towards 7nm & 5nm, it doesn't mean that they scrap their 14nm capital equipment!Quote:
Originally Posted by SlickR
If the older (more importantly fully depreciated) production lines can be redeployed towards making products for Intel, this would mean pure profits for TSMC. Fabs love nothing more than to be in full production capacity. A lot of fans are still making 28nm or 32nm silicon for low-end products you know. Even the V-NAND used in SSDs for example.
Firstly, its not even clear that Intel's 10nm is really that much better than other 10nm parts. There is no clear standard by which this is measured. What is very clear is that there is 100% a lot of Intel marketing BS mixed into it.Quote:
Originally Posted by nobodyspecial
For a company that has no money to do R&D, AMD sure has come up with a lot of Zen, Zen 2 and Navi! Tsk tsk!
NAND uses different production lines/fabs altogether compared to logic chips, and AFAIK TSMC produce none of it. For that, look to WD/Toshiba, Micron/Intel, SK Hynix and Samsung, and a few smaller manufacturers besides. V-NAND also uses vastly different production lines to planar NAND.Quote:
Originally Posted by preter_s
But other than that, yeah, especially nowadays older nodes don't just vanish - they may reduce in volume (not always) but you still get stuff produced on 130nm+ nodes today, you just don't get much marketing about manufacturing on things like microcontrollers, SIM cards, debit cards, etc. Modern nodes are prohibitively expensive for many applications where for example the production volumes are relatively low and/or the benefits aren't worth the added development costs. I imagine there's also some realistic minimum size of silicon dies where continuing to move to smaller nodes becomes a problem in itself with regard to actually cutting the wafer and connecting the thing! In fact I've often wondered what that limit might be, but haven't managed to find out much about it when I've looked in the past.
Or it could be a product that does exactly what is needed, doesn't need any new features and it would be a waste of money moving to a new node just for the sake of it. I imagine lots of jellybean devices you can buy for pennies on Farnell fall into one or more of those catagories.
I know a lot of the original marketing material Intel released referred to the original version of their 10nm node. As I understand it, quite a bit has changed since then, including a relaxation of the density, rendering those original claims invalid if so. But either way, it's still nowhere to be seen so these competing '10nm' nodes they're comparing too - well they might not end up competing with those anyway!Quote:
Originally Posted by preter_s