Re: Intel considering nanometer numerals adjustment
JayN you still haven't answered that question about whether you work for, are paid to promote, have shares in, or otherwise receive monetary or similar benefit from Intel. It's really simple to answer. Until then we'll just give you the label of Intel fanboy and treat everything you say with a healthy dose of salt due to its seemingly blinkered bias.
Re: Intel considering nanometer numerals adjustment
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JayN
, so on what are you judging Intel's 10nm desktop performance?
If Intel could make 10nm desktop chips then they would. Like they planned to originally. Yet years on, they still don't.
If they could make just a handful of chips at 10nm to paper launch to the press even though the public had no chance of actually buying them, then they would and we would have impressive 10nm benchmarks.
Or am I supposed to believe that Intel have the ability, but are giving AMD a head start out of the kindness of their hearts? For a convicted monopolist that would be an interesting turnaround to say the least :D
Oh, and Tiger Lake are laptop chips that top out at about 30W. Now, Intel are finally launching their 10nm Ice Lake Xeon server chips, that's taken way longer than it should have done with low power ARM chips breathing down Intel's neck. So there is clearly progress, but by now there should be zero new releases on 14nm.
Re: Intel considering nanometer numerals adjustment
Quote:
Intel clearly isn't going to be renaming its 10nm SuperFin process
Why not? The rest of the industry certainly has no problem improving a process somewhat and renaming it (10nm to 8nm, etc.). Intel had 10nm and now 10nm SuperFin. It could have been called 8nm or 7nm, like other fabs do it. Perhaps Intel won't go for a rename with this specific process, but it could improve 10nm a bit more and then rename it.
Intel has said before that 7nm is on track. If it can get a pseudo-7nm process based on 10nm, would anyone call it a liar to its face? :)
Anyway, at least Intel seems to finally have 10nm ready for desktop, which is nice.
Re: Intel considering nanometer numerals adjustment
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ET3D
Anyway, at least Intel seems to finally have 10nm ready for desktop, which is nice.
It does? Where? Last I heard they were back-porting it to 14nm
Re: Intel considering nanometer numerals adjustment
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JayN
If chiplets are superior, then why is AMD making monolithic laptop and game console chips?
Because they are superior in some ways (scalability, mixing process nodes), but not in others (they're more complex and add overhead), and because AMD doesn't yet have chiplets working on the GPU side, and both consoles and mobile have integrated GPUs.