7 ms·

Given Intel's struggles around their process shrink, AMD may have come up with the perfect product at the perfect time. You can already see their effect with In

Given Intel's struggles around their process shrink, AMD may have come up with the perfect product at the perfect time. You can already see their effect with Intel finally adding more cores to their chips to try and stay competitive. I do think that Intel will manage to get silicon out a bit earlier then their current end of CY19, but if they don't, TR and Ryzen may be the default go-to for manufacturers.

agumonkey 8y ago
There's also Samsung hurting intel image a lot. They became the most profitable silicon~ company (due to loads of memory) and they are head to head with intel in transistor process (near EUV ready).
florakel 8y ago
It is time to give AMD a chance. Intel is plagued by problems with the 10nm process technology resulting in no significant innovation on their CPUs' performance or power consumption for over two years now. And just recently they pushed their 10nm products even further back to the second half of 2019. AMD might have the first 7nm CPUs out by then. Of course process technologies are not easily comparable between fabs but it is still crazy to see Intel starting to fall behind in process technology - a game they dominated for decades.
- mbell 8y ago
  > It is time to give AMD a chance. Intel is plagued by problems with the 10nm process technology resulting in no significant innovation on their CPUs' performance or power consumption for over two years now. The difference between 14nm and 14nm+++ is pretty close to a full node step... > And just recently they pushed their 10nm products even further back to the second half of 2019. AMD might have the first 7nm CPUs out by then. Of course process technologies are not easily comparable between fabs but it is still crazy to see Intel starting to fall behind in process technology - a game they dominated for decades. The numbers used for process 'sizes' don't really hold any meaning anymore and can't be directly compared. Intel's 14nm is 'better' in almost every metric than other fabs 10nm process. Intel's 10nm process is expected to be similarly comparable to other fabs 7nm. Intel isn't really behind on process tech, but the competition has closed the gap considerably.
  - sandworm101 8y ago
    If they arent behind on process tech, then they arent using it properly. The numbers are there. All techs aside, AMD is building competative chips at lower pricepoints. Intel has to pull the rabbit from the hat if it wants to stay in the spotlight.
    - sigi45 8y ago
      Yes but only because Intel hit the wall first. The still have tons of money and spend more time breaking that wall. Good for us anyway. Don't mind getting my Intel CPUs cheaper.
      - geezerjay 8y ago
        > Yes but only because Intel hit the wall first. I fail to see how that's relevant. What matters is what products are available in the market and how much they cost, and AMD's offering is both cheaper and more performant than anything Intel managed to put together.
        deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
  - deaddodo 8y ago
    > Intel's 10nm process is expected to be similarly comparable to other fabs 7nm No, Intel's 10nm is worse than TSMC's 7nm in every metric. Not significantly so, but it is so. It also seems to be viable whereas Intel's hasn't been proven yet (the only released product is a mobile chip with the iGPU disabled due to defects and low yields).
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
chx 8y ago
> Given Intel's struggles around their process shrink, AMD may have come up with the perfect product at the perfect time. Yes -- AMD got lucky, this time. I sincerely doubt they (or anyone else) had any idea how Intel will struggle with their 10nm when they started on Zen in 2012. Back in 2013 Intel said they will have Cannon Lake out in 2015 (!) https://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/16/intel_10nm_14nm_plans/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/16/intel_10nm_14nm_pla... and today, mid 2018, the only released Cannon Lake CPU is a sad little dual core with the graphics chip disabled ( i3-8121U) selling in "very limited quantities". 65nm: 2006 45nm: 2007 32nm: 2010 22nm: 2012 14nm: 2014 10nm: 2019 (?)

agumonkey 8y ago

There's also Samsung hurting intel image a lot. They became the most profitable silicon~ company (due to loads of memory) and they are head to head with intel in transistor process (near EUV ready).

florakel 8y ago

It is time to give AMD a chance. Intel is plagued by problems with the 10nm process technology resulting in no significant innovation on their CPUs' performance or power consumption for over two years now. And just recently they pushed their 10nm products even further back to the second half of 2019. AMD might have the first 7nm CPUs out by then. Of course process technologies are not easily comparable between fabs but it is still crazy to see Intel starting to fall behind in process technology - a game they dominated for decades.

mbell 8y ago
> It is time to give AMD a chance. Intel is plagued by problems with the 10nm process technology resulting in no significant innovation on their CPUs' performance or power consumption for over two years now. The difference between 14nm and 14nm+++ is pretty close to a full node step... > And just recently they pushed their 10nm products even further back to the second half of 2019. AMD might have the first 7nm CPUs out by then. Of course process technologies are not easily comparable between fabs but it is still crazy to see Intel starting to fall behind in process technology - a game they dominated for decades. The numbers used for process 'sizes' don't really hold any meaning anymore and can't be directly compared. Intel's 14nm is 'better' in almost every metric than other fabs 10nm process. Intel's 10nm process is expected to be similarly comparable to other fabs 7nm. Intel isn't really behind on process tech, but the competition has closed the gap considerably.
- sandworm101 8y ago
  If they arent behind on process tech, then they arent using it properly. The numbers are there. All techs aside, AMD is building competative chips at lower pricepoints. Intel has to pull the rabbit from the hat if it wants to stay in the spotlight.
  - sigi45 8y ago
    Yes but only because Intel hit the wall first. The still have tons of money and spend more time breaking that wall. Good for us anyway. Don't mind getting my Intel CPUs cheaper.
    - geezerjay 8y ago
      > Yes but only because Intel hit the wall first. I fail to see how that's relevant. What matters is what products are available in the market and how much they cost, and AMD's offering is both cheaper and more performant than anything Intel managed to put together.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
- deaddodo 8y ago
  > Intel's 10nm process is expected to be similarly comparable to other fabs 7nm No, Intel's 10nm is worse than TSMC's 7nm in every metric. Not significantly so, but it is so. It also seems to be viable whereas Intel's hasn't been proven yet (the only released product is a mobile chip with the iGPU disabled due to defects and low yields).
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

chx 8y ago

> Given Intel's struggles around their process shrink, AMD may have come up with the perfect product at the perfect time. Yes -- AMD got lucky, this time. I sincerely doubt they (or anyone else) had any idea how Intel will struggle with their 10nm when they started on Zen in 2012. Back in 2013 Intel said they will have Cannon Lake out in 2015 (!) https://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/16/intel_10nm_14nm_plans/ https://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/16/intel_10nm_14nm_pla... and today, mid 2018, the only released Cannon Lake CPU is a sad little dual core with the graphics chip disabled ( i3-8121U) selling in "very limited quantities". 65nm: 2006 45nm: 2007 32nm: 2010 22nm: 2012 14nm: 2014 10nm: 2019 (?)