Overclock.net banner

21 - 36 of 36 Posts

·
Politically incorrect
Joined
·
9,464 Posts
Hahaha, a 7nm from Intel? We've been hearing about that mysterious 10nm chip for years that we've never gotten. I'll believe it when I see it, but 7nm from Intel in 2023 is looking like yet another meme to me.
They are licensing TSMC's 7nm, they aren't producing their own chips. By the time they start producing 7nm AMD, QC and Samsung will be on 5nm.

To think that Intel were downplaying AMD's advances with Zen 1 as not a great achievement. But by the time Zen 2 was released (3xxx series) Intel were in full panic mode and now they have no idea where to go or what to do other than license from their biggest competitor. How the tables have turned, quite funny.

However, even if Intel aren't able to produce something competitive AMD can't sit on their laurels because they are facing incredibly stiff competition from ARM and ARM derivatives (Apple are irrelevant as their chips can only be used within their own ecosystem), especially in the server space where ARM is now a serious competitor to AMD's Zen chips.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,959 Posts
They are licensing TSMC's 7nm, they aren't producing their own chips. By the time they start producing 7nm AMD, QC and Samsung will be on 5nm.

To think that Intel were downplaying AMD's advances with Zen 1 as not a great achievement. But by the time Zen 2 was released (3xxx series) Intel were in full panic mode and now they have no idea where to go or what to do other than license from their biggest competitor. How the tables have turned, quite funny.

However, even if Intel aren't able to produce something competitive AMD can't sit on their laurels because they are facing incredibly stiff competition from ARM and ARM derivatives (Apple are irrelevant as their chips can only be used within their own ecosystem), especially in the server space where ARM is now a serious competitor to AMD's Zen chips.
didn't tsmc reply to intel's claim they'd be using their foundries to make chips something along the lines of "we're booked out for the next few years, they'll need to get in line"?
 

·
sudo apt install sl
Joined
·
8,485 Posts
They are licensing TSMC's 7nm, they aren't producing their own chips. By the time they start producing 7nm AMD, QC and Samsung will be on 5nm.

To think that Intel were downplaying AMD's advances with Zen 1 as not a great achievement. But by the time Zen 2 was released (3xxx series) Intel were in full panic mode and now they have no idea where to go or what to do other than license from their biggest competitor. How the tables have turned, quite funny.

However, even if Intel aren't able to produce something competitive AMD can't sit on their laurels because they are facing incredibly stiff competition from ARM and ARM derivatives (Apple are irrelevant as their chips can only be used within their own ecosystem), especially in the server space where ARM is now a serious competitor to AMD's Zen chips.
Meteor Lake will be made using their 7nm EUV fabrication in house along side TSMC 7nm processors. What Intel needs to do is rename their fabrication process to match TSMC/Samsung naming. From all the engineering articles I've read Intels 7nm matches TSMCs 5nm process which Apple and Qualcomm are already using.

we will also leverage our relationship with TSMC to deliver additional leadership CPU products for our client and data center customers. This is the power of our new IDM 2.0 model combined with a modular approach to design and Intel’s industry leading packaging technologies.”
 

·
Politically incorrect
Joined
·
9,464 Posts
Meteor Lake will be made using their 7nm EUV fabrication in house along side TSMC 7nm processors. What Intel needs to do is rename their fabrication process to match TSMC/Samsung naming. From all the engineering articles I've read Intels 7nm matches TSMCs 5nm process which Apple and Qualcomm are already using.
This is no different than lowering crime with statistics.
 

·
sudo apt install sl
Joined
·
8,485 Posts
This is no different than lowering crime with statistics.
These numbers are now just gimmicks from fabs. Math proves the actual density.


These nanometer values don’t actually represent the size of the transistor, but rather the fabrication technology used to manufacture them. A long time ago, the gate pitch of a Transistor was same as the Fabrication Technology (nm value), but this is not the case anymore. In fact, this has now become just a marketing gimmick that holds no physical significance.
 

·
Politically incorrect
Joined
·
9,464 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,138 Posts
These numbers are now just gimmicks from fabs. Math proves the actual density.

Isnt the 2.7x density they attempted for their 10nm one of the biggest issues they had rolling it out. They tried to do too much. Everything I read showed Intel doing significantly more density gains per shrink then competition. I mean Intels 14nm chips still can compete with AMDs. Sure AMDs 7nm is the better but its not like it just leaves intel behind where they can't compete at all.
 

·
Robotic Chemist
Joined
·
3,599 Posts
Sure AMDs 7nm is the better but its not like it just leaves intel behind where they can't compete at all.
Have you seen the SEM imagery de8aur did of 7nm v.s. 14nm (AMD v.s. Intel)?

The actual feature size between the two was almost identical, TSMC's 7nm was a tiny bit tighter and the features looked cleaner or more regular but they were VERY similar. Comparing the nm numbers really is not helpful.

If Intel could have gotten 10nm working as originally envisioned I think it would have been noticeably better than TSMC's 7nm, but they couldn't so that is a moot point now. :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,138 Posts
Have you seen the SEM imagery de8aur did of 7nm v.s. 14nm (AMD v.s. Intel)?

The actual feature size between the two was almost identical, TSMC's 7nm was a tiny bit tighter and the features looked cleaner or more regular but they were VERY similar. Comparing the nm numbers really is not helpful.

If Intel could have gotten 10nm working as originally envisioned I think it would have been noticeably better than TSMC's 7nm, but they couldn't so that is a moot point now. :p
Thats what I was saying. AMDs 7nm is better then intels 14nm but the density and performance they squeezed out of 14nm was unreal. I also believe I read their 10nm process was supposed to be 2.7 times more dense then 14nm. So if they managed to pull that off properly it would have been fantastic. But alas here we are, competition is good, hopefully it wakes the giant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,936 Posts
I am more interested in lunarlake at this point. That and dg3. I really want to see want pat gelsinger can do to right the ship. He seems to be the ideal ceo for intel.

I am very open to going intel if dg3 is any good. I hope intel continues to be price aggressive on cpu and there gpu strategy of planned affordable prices for (dg2 top sku of 3070 at 300-400usd is very reasonable).
 

·
Politically incorrect
Joined
·
9,464 Posts
Have you seen the SEM imagery de8aur did of 7nm v.s. 14nm (AMD v.s. Intel)?

The actual feature size between the two was almost identical, TSMC's 7nm was a tiny bit tighter and the features looked cleaner or more regular but they were VERY similar. Comparing the nm numbers really is not helpful.

If Intel could have gotten 10nm working as originally envisioned I think it would have been noticeably better than TSMC's 7nm, but they couldn't so that is a moot point now. :p
Thats what I was saying. AMDs 7nm is better then intels 14nm but the density and performance they squeezed out of 14nm was unreal. I also believe I read their 10nm process was supposed to be 2.7 times more dense then 14nm. So if they managed to pull that off properly it would have been fantastic. But alas here we are, competition is good, hopefully it wakes the giant.
If Netburst had been able to hit 10GHz and higher, as hoped, Intel wouldn't have had to resort to dirty tricks to defeat AMD.
If BD had been able to hit 10GHz and higher, they would have ruled.
If the sun doesn't rise tomorrow...

If is an interesting hypothetical word, which has no bearing on their architectural success. Intel's design may be more dense but that hasn't resulted in higher performance, AMD are totally crushing Intel with higher IPC, more cores, more threads and lower power consumption.Ergo, if density was all that mattered then Intel's design would be better, but it's not for a multitude of reasons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,936 Posts
If Netburst had been able to hit 10GHz and higher, as hoped, Intel wouldn't have had to resort to dirty tricks to defeat AMD.
If BD had been able to hit 10GHz and higher, they would have ruled.
If the sun doesn't rise tomorrow...

If is an interesting hypothetical word, which has no bearing on their architectural success. Intel's design may be more dense but that hasn't resulted in higher performance, AMD are totally crushing Intel with higher IPC, more cores, more threads and lower power consumption.Ergo, if density was all that mattered then Intel's design would be better, but it's not for a multitude of reasons.
Also every high tech/automobile/etc is making there own cpu's now. So there's lot of competition coming at this point.
 

·
Politically incorrect
Joined
·
9,464 Posts
Also every high tech/automobile/etc is making there own cpu's now. So there's lot of competition coming at this point.
To me the most important thing about this is that they run Linux and not Windows.
 

·
sudo apt install sl
Joined
·
8,485 Posts
Also every high tech/automobile/etc is making there own cpu's now. So there's lot of competition coming at this point.
Most automobile companies are using Nvidia. There's that one company who claims their AI chip is better but they can't even attach body panels on a car properly.

To me the most important thing about this is that they run Linux and not Windows.
Majority of them are using Automotive Grade Linux.
 

·
- Insanity Beckons -
Joined
·
4,752 Posts
Majority of them are using Automotive Grade Linux.
Still a far better choice than Windows. Would have liked seeing Major Car Companies use BSD in some way, if they are truly concerned about safety and non-hacking of their equipment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,936 Posts
Still a far better choice than Windows. Would have liked seeing Major Car Companies use BSD in some way, if they are truly concerned about safety and non-hacking of their equipment.
Whole bunch of them also are baking in there controls into Apple Airplay/Android Auto. That's one of my concerns with the Level 5 Self-Driving Cars that run solely on touch screens controls. Right now, its an option that only is available in menu if your phone directly connected. Cars also are easily hackable items as its just matter of physical or getting ahold of one of the devices that more or less allows to bypass car security (they exist on the market and are in hand of some thiefs).

I am starting to look into new cars and nothing catches my eye so far. Then the issue with installing an electric car charger in the house garage.
 
21 - 36 of 36 Posts
Top