4 ms·

Are they doing worse? Or are they still ahead, just not as far ahead as they used to be? I wouldn't expect any massive leads in any industry to last for long.

• vbezhenar 7y ago
  They are behind. I think they have a chance to catch up with their 7nm which is supposed to be better than TSMC 7nm. But it won’t be soon.
  • jjeaff 7y ago
    But what does that really mean? They still seem to be producing the fastest processors available for desktop and server. It doesnt matter if someone else is making even a 3nm chip if the chip still can't outperform the current offerings.
    • dodobirdlord 7y ago
      The sizing numbers are also just nonsense marketing. They stopped meaning anything in particular a long time ago. Intel's '10nm' and TSMC's '7nm' are about the same size.
      • Filligree 7y ago
        The size numbers do measure something, but what they're measuring differs between manufacturers. They aren't comparable between AMD and Intel. They absolutely are comparable between Intel and Intel.
    • shaklee3 7y ago
      I wouldn't say that. Why are Epycs worse than Skylake xeons?
• robdachshund 7y ago
  The reason they are having problems is that they just continued doing die shrinks and speculation hacks to increase performance. They've essentially had the same core since sandy bridge. They didn't see zen coming, didn't have to compete with bulldozer, and thought they could just keep shrinking rather than building a new core design. Once they hit 10nm, they failed, and their old core got some healthy competition from zen. Now AMD is looking to take a serious lead with zen 2, aka ryzen 3000 series. I don't think Moore's law is dead, Intel just gave up on real r&d because it was cheaper. I can't wait for arm and risc v to enter the playing field.