6 ms·
It’s amazing to see the implications lay out first hand of a single manufacturing defect. Intel was the undisputed king until 10nm and now they are gasping for
by stirlo 8y ago
It’s amazing to see the implications lay out first hand of a single manufacturing defect. Intel was the undisputed king until 10nm and now they are gasping for breath in the competitive environment. The stockholders must be extremely discounted that a single process change could remove such a massive competitive moat around their business
- rbanffy 8y agoIt looks like the 10nm process problems caught Intel very unprepared, which suggests bad news were not traveling as quickly and as far as they should. This is an issue with companies above a certain size.
- barry0079 8y agoNobody wants to be frank with the people above them.
- bdamm 8y agoThere’s another mechanism which is too much optimism. Everyone is susceptible, not just the folks at the top.
- Retric 8y agoAlternatively, people get to the top in part because they where lucky, which makes them more optimistic than they should be.
- rbanffy 8y agoThat doesn't work out very well.
- quantumhobbit 8y agoBruce Webster calls this the Thermocline of Truth. Which I think is a great metaphor. http://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/15/the-wetware-crisis-the-themocline-of-truth/ http://brucefwebster.com/2008/04/15/the-wetware-crisis-the-t...
- bloomer 8y agoIt appears that the 10 nm problems caught Intel by surprise because they fell into the unknown category. I’m confused why you think that some communication issue follows from that. Intel has a multi year roadmap and long lead times so I don’t think they were unprepared for this. This is the exact response you would expect to a delay on the latest technology node.
- stcredzero 8y agoIt appears that the 10 nm problems caught Intel by surprise because they fell into the unknown category. Are you sure the problem couldn't be interpreted as, "We've set the die sizes too large?" Because that's how AMD is approaching it, and they're winning.
- blihp 8y agoThe Pentium 4 problems over 15 years ago caught Intel very unprepared. The problems since have been increasingly less forgivable. 14nm wasn't exactly a smooth rollout either. The fact that Intel management decided that the physics problems they were encountering with increasing regularity could be countered by bold management proclamations suggests a hearing problem on their part rather than an issue of those further down the org chart communicating the issues far and wide.
- mbell 8y ago> now they are gasping for breath in the competitive environment That statement is beyond hyperbolic...
- maccio92 8y agoIt's not, they've fallen all the way back to 22nm while AMD is at 7nm, while maintaining healthy production capabilities of current process nodes. And that's not even taking into account the fact that AMD architected an objectively better processor
- alexhutcheson 8y agoThe article is about chipsets[1], not processors. Intel is only falling back to 22nm for the chipset, which is a less performance-sensitive component than the processor. They are still making 14nm processors. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chipset https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chipset
- ZiiS 8y agoAMD (or rather TSMC) are not (yet) producing 7nm X86 processors for sale. Though you can buy 7nm ARM chips made by TSMC for Apple and Huawei.
- rbanffy 8y agoIt'd seem they are doing that because they never moved CPUs to 10nm facilities, thus not freeing 14nm capacity for the chipsets and now they want to increase production of 14nm CPUs and they can only move chipsets to 22nm. If the chipsets are simpler, less critical and easier to design than CPUs, shouldn't they start new processes with the least critical stuff?
- bloomer 8y agoThere is much less value in producing chipsets on the more advanced process line, which would basically waste the investment in the new process. Also depending on the issue it is likely to affect chipsets and cpus similarly so there may not even be a manufacturing advantage.
- pjc50 8y agoHardly a "single manufacturing defect", more the failure of an expected miracle to arrive. Getting the process shrink to work has always required a whole load of minor innovations to line up, and we were always wondering when Moore's Law would fail to deliver them on schedule. Now it seems to be happening.
- earenndil 8y agoNow? It started back in 2015.
- tedunangst 8y agoStock down over negative 3% today.
- stcredzero 8y agoIt’s amazing to see the implications lay out first hand of a single manufacturing defect. Big tech is in the kind of business where the 3rd, 4th, or 5th item in the chain of Toyota's "Five Whys" can have such far reaching effects. In a way, this is nothing new. The auto industry has been in that kind of business for a very long time now. This is why Toyota's "Five Whys" exists. I don't think the root of the problem here is technical, however. I suspect it's ultimately cultural. Didn't Andrew Grove say, "Only the paranoid survive?" How hard would it be to maintain a culture of paranoia at an industry leading company with huge margins? That's the kind of position that fosters overconfidence, not paranoia. AMD's Epyc Master plan: (Or how AMD let Intel paint itself into a corner) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucMQermB9wQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucMQermB9wQ