Intel considering nanometer numerals adjustment

[HEXUS]

Insiders say Intel will update numbering convention to "match the industry standard."

Read more.

[Tabbykatze]

Great, so when are they going to change their TDP measurements?

[kalniel]

So we can look forward to 70 and 60nm products can we? Hmm I don't think so.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

It will mean the Intel process nodes might get moved down a few numbers. For example Intel 14NM is actually closer to 10NM/12NM nodes from other companies in certain aspects,and their 10NM process node is closer to TSMC 7NM in certain aspects.

[ultrasbm]

If they made decent products that didn't single handedly cause global warming, then people wouldn't give two poops about their transistor density.

[DanceswithUnix]

,and their 10NM process node is closer to TSMC 7NM in certain aspects.

Some aspects yes, but the "good yields" vs "barely usable" is probably the key metric here. That and Intel's 10nm sucking for desktop performance (to be fair, TSMC 10nm was mobile only as well, you can't win them all).

But hey, the computer industry has always had a fair dose of carefully chosen benchmarks

[bae85]

If they made decent products that didn't single handedly cause global warming, then people wouldn't give two poops about their transistor density.

This genuinely made me laugh!

[[GSV]Trig]

I'm pretty sure AMD tried this back in the day, where their products weren't as fast as the Intel ones, and Intel ripped into them for it, naming things based on their perceived performance rather than what they actually were....

Ho hum...

[philehidiot]

If they made decent products that didn't single handedly cause global warming, then people wouldn't give two poops about their transistor density.

This genuinely made me laugh!

Hmm, this gives me an idea for my response to this press release:

You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words.... how DARE you.

[3dcandy]

Timing is everything

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Some aspects yes, but the "good yields" vs "barely usable" is probably the key metric here. That and Intel's 10nm sucking for desktop performance (to be fair, TSMC 10nm was mobile only as well, you can't win them all).

But hey, the computer industry has always had a fair dose of carefully chosen benchmarks

The problem here is Intel is having to make relatively large chips on 10NM - if they had a "glued" design like AMD has,it would most likely be useable. I am kind of surprised with Intel having access to EMIB,etc they haven't moved to chiplets yet.

[mers]

Fishlets maybe , everything Intel does of late is fishy.

[Corky34]

The problem here is Intel is having to make relatively large chips on 10NM - if they had a "glued" design like AMD has,it would most likely be useable. I am kind of surprised with Intel having access to EMIB,etc they haven't moved to chiplets yet.

Haven't they announced they're planning to do that, is it called foverous or something, not sure if that relates to desktop, mobile, or server though. I sort of lost interest in what Intel was doing a decade or so ago when they just kept churning out the same basic 'Core' design from 2006.

[bae85]

Great, so when are they going to change their TDP measurements?

Why would they do that when they can keep milking their fanboys?

[3dcandy]

Haven't they announced they're planning to do that, is it called foverous or something, not sure if that relates to desktop, mobile, or server though. I sort of lost interest in what Intel was doing a decade or so ago when they just kept churning out the same basic 'Core' design from 2006.

Foveros tile is a 3d packaging form. Problem is with them still being kinda stuck on 14nm it doesn't help that much...
Throwing transistors at an issue is a common way of doing it and Intel has continued that for at least a decade. But when you throw transistors at it on a poor node then packaging really doesn't mitigate the power draw and heat that ensues

[ik9000]

Haven't they announced they're planning to do that, is it called foverous or something, not sure if that relates to desktop, mobile, or server though. I sort of lost interest in what Intel was doing a decade or so ago when they just kept churning out the same basic 'Core' design from 2006.

Wasn't the original core architecture a spin off from the pentium M line, or have I garbled that Baldric-fashion?