6 ms·

I'm curious, since I don't follow hardware that closely: Is the current battle really best framed as a fight between Intel and AMD, or between Intel and TSMC? I

I'm curious, since I don't follow hardware that closely: Is the current battle really best framed as a fight between Intel and AMD, or between Intel and TSMC? I.e. is AMD's recent resurgence due to better chip design, or because Intel's fabrication is struggling, whereas TMSC isn't?

ahartmetz 7y ago
Most of AMD's improvement is due to better chip design. The last 10% or so are from fabrication process.
- gnode 7y ago
  There's also fabrication cost and yield which factors into the pricing and profitability of Intel and AMD products. In this respect Intel is competing against TSMC and GlobalFoundries (for the IO die).
neogodless 7y ago
Both. AMD made a good decision to divest from Global Foundries. They have also made some great strides in chip design which improve instructions per clock (IPC) as well as increasing cache size and improving the various interconnects. The switch from a monolithic die design to chiplets which puts I/O at the center is an important change as well. But then TMSC enabling AMD to make a successful switch to 7nm adds to the efficiency equation and is likely key for clock speed targets.
- sanxiyn 7y ago
  As I understand, AMD pretty much couldn't divest from GlobalFoundries due to a contract, WSA(Wafer Supply Agreement), which is not public. In 2019 AMD announced that WSA got amended to allow AMD to use TSMC.
  - fireattack 7y ago
    What did they use before?
    - MrRadar 7y ago
      Originally AMD owned their own fabrication plants. In the late 2000s they were forced to spin them off (as GlobalFoundaries) for a quick injection of cash after their merger with ATI went badly. Part of that spin-off was the Wafer Supply Agreement (WSA) contract which obligated AMD to buy a certain amount of silicon from GlobalFoundaries, effectively requiring them to manufacture the majority of their products with GF or pay GF for the privilege of manufacturing their products elsewhere. If GF had kept up with the competition that wouldn't necessarily be a problem but for the past 10 years GF has struggled to deliver new nodes on time making the WSA a millstone around AMD's neck. With 14nm GlobalFoundaries ended up licensing Samsung's 14nm process and with 7nm they gave up altogether. While the details are confidential the latest amendment to the WSA presumably gives AMD much more freedom to manufacture their newest products elsewhere as GF literally can't.
AsyncAwait 7y ago
It's both. TSMC's 7nm process seems way more stable than Intel's 10m, but a simple die shrink wouldn't help a poorly designed chip that much. Zen is much, much improved over Bulldozer and their Infinity Fabric design could theoretically allow AMD to just add more cores and together with arch and node improvements could keep them competitive for a long time.
666lumberjack 7y ago
AMD is using a kind of modular processor architecture which, as I understand it, makes the chips easier / less expensive to fab than an Intel design of comparable size, so it seems like the two factors are intertwined. I don't know enough about the specifics of Intel's 10nm issues to say whether it would have helped them though.
- gameswithgo 7y ago
  the modular design adds some memory access latency but i think it also lets them add larger l3 cache more easily which can mitigate that. For instance the new ryzen cpus crush intel on gcc compile time benchmarks due to the large l3.
- hitpointdrew 7y ago
  >AMD is using a kind of modular processor architecture which, as I understand it, makes the chips easier / less expensive to fab than an Intel design of comparable size You pretty much got it. It all basically comes down to the yield you get on waffer. The larger the die, the less you can fit on a waffer, the more chance there is a defect in the die. Using a few smaller dies is a smart way to get high yields out of your waffers.
jcranmer 7y ago
To add a touch more information to the chorus of "both" replies: Intel's development process is such that a lot of the components of the chips were expected to be introduced on 10nm. With 10nm in such production trouble, these components mostly weren't backported to 14nm design. As a result, Intel's chip design has mostly stagnated as a result of its 10nm fabrication issues.
ksec 7y ago
It isn't just both, it is all four area of them. That is Intel's Design and Fabrication and AMD's Design and Fabrication. It was basically a perfect storm that is unthinkable few years ago. ( To me it is still very much unreal even with today's announcement. ) Intel 10nm cant be fixed in time ( In fact for 24 months, they just keep lying both publicly and in investor's meeting ) , that is Intel's Fab problem. And Icelake couldn't arrive on time because of 10nm, their Design could not adopt to 14nm or other node, it was stuck with 10nm, compare to Apple and AMD which has adopted the train development method where their Design were less fixated on a Node Schedule. And AMD managed to execute in perfection. Naples set the tone to the industry, Rome ( Zen 2 ) were a huge leap in performance, the Chiplet design gave AMD the advantage in cost ( Smaller Die, Higher Yield, Mass manufacture in volume ), so while it had a lower price than Intel, they are not hurting their margin to fight this battle. Very important for the long term survival of AMD. Along with TSMC 7nm were running in perfect harmony. Not to mention TSMC were willing to fight and get 7nm capacity for AMD. Along with risking more CapeX and building more Fab. And to add a fifth thing to all these, Intel had major securities problem just months before AMD's Zen 2 launch. As if the whole thing were scripted to play the perfect Counter Attack by AMD and TSMC. But No, it is the Hard work and dedication of AMD and TSMC, the will to fight and deliver against all odds, compare this to Intel in the past 4 - 5 years. So if you loathe Intel, now AMD is not only an alternative, but also possibly the best option on Server. And if you love Intel, you should buy AMD to teach them a lesson for milking and sitting on their butt not Innovating.
- Symmetry 7y ago
  Intel has always had their design and fabrication teams work much more closely together than their competitors. That's often been an advantage as it's allowed fab to sometimes impose unusually restrictive design rules, but only in ways that the design team could handle and thereby give the fabs scope to reach a node faster or improve its performance.
- hajile 7y ago
  Don't forget that the IO die (which is actually much larger than the CPU die) is still on Global Foundries 14nm, so more of most of these chips is 14nm than is 7nm. This increases the number of 7nm chips AMD can get which definitely helps keep up with the (seemingly) massive demand.

ahartmetz 7y ago

Most of AMD's improvement is due to better chip design. The last 10% or so are from fabrication process.

gnode 7y ago
There's also fabrication cost and yield which factors into the pricing and profitability of Intel and AMD products. In this respect Intel is competing against TSMC and GlobalFoundries (for the IO die).

neogodless 7y ago

Both. AMD made a good decision to divest from Global Foundries. They have also made some great strides in chip design which improve instructions per clock (IPC) as well as increasing cache size and improving the various interconnects. The switch from a monolithic die design to chiplets which puts I/O at the center is an important change as well. But then TMSC enabling AMD to make a successful switch to 7nm adds to the efficiency equation and is likely key for clock speed targets.

sanxiyn 7y ago
As I understand, AMD pretty much couldn't divest from GlobalFoundries due to a contract, WSA(Wafer Supply Agreement), which is not public. In 2019 AMD announced that WSA got amended to allow AMD to use TSMC.
- fireattack 7y ago
  What did they use before?
  - MrRadar 7y ago
    Originally AMD owned their own fabrication plants. In the late 2000s they were forced to spin them off (as GlobalFoundaries) for a quick injection of cash after their merger with ATI went badly. Part of that spin-off was the Wafer Supply Agreement (WSA) contract which obligated AMD to buy a certain amount of silicon from GlobalFoundaries, effectively requiring them to manufacture the majority of their products with GF or pay GF for the privilege of manufacturing their products elsewhere. If GF had kept up with the competition that wouldn't necessarily be a problem but for the past 10 years GF has struggled to deliver new nodes on time making the WSA a millstone around AMD's neck. With 14nm GlobalFoundaries ended up licensing Samsung's 14nm process and with 7nm they gave up altogether. While the details are confidential the latest amendment to the WSA presumably gives AMD much more freedom to manufacture their newest products elsewhere as GF literally can't.

AsyncAwait 7y ago

It's both. TSMC's 7nm process seems way more stable than Intel's 10m, but a simple die shrink wouldn't help a poorly designed chip that much. Zen is much, much improved over Bulldozer and their Infinity Fabric design could theoretically allow AMD to just add more cores and together with arch and node improvements could keep them competitive for a long time.

666lumberjack 7y ago

AMD is using a kind of modular processor architecture which, as I understand it, makes the chips easier / less expensive to fab than an Intel design of comparable size, so it seems like the two factors are intertwined. I don't know enough about the specifics of Intel's 10nm issues to say whether it would have helped them though.

gameswithgo 7y ago
the modular design adds some memory access latency but i think it also lets them add larger l3 cache more easily which can mitigate that. For instance the new ryzen cpus crush intel on gcc compile time benchmarks due to the large l3.
hitpointdrew 7y ago
>AMD is using a kind of modular processor architecture which, as I understand it, makes the chips easier / less expensive to fab than an Intel design of comparable size You pretty much got it. It all basically comes down to the yield you get on waffer. The larger the die, the less you can fit on a waffer, the more chance there is a defect in the die. Using a few smaller dies is a smart way to get high yields out of your waffers.

jcranmer 7y ago

To add a touch more information to the chorus of "both" replies: Intel's development process is such that a lot of the components of the chips were expected to be introduced on 10nm. With 10nm in such production trouble, these components mostly weren't backported to 14nm design. As a result, Intel's chip design has mostly stagnated as a result of its 10nm fabrication issues.

ksec 7y ago

It isn't just both, it is all four area of them. That is Intel's Design and Fabrication and AMD's Design and Fabrication. It was basically a perfect storm that is unthinkable few years ago. ( To me it is still very much unreal even with today's announcement. ) Intel 10nm cant be fixed in time ( In fact for 24 months, they just keep lying both publicly and in investor's meeting ) , that is Intel's Fab problem. And Icelake couldn't arrive on time because of 10nm, their Design could not adopt to 14nm or other node, it was stuck with 10nm, compare to Apple and AMD which has adopted the train development method where their Design were less fixated on a Node Schedule. And AMD managed to execute in perfection. Naples set the tone to the industry, Rome ( Zen 2 ) were a huge leap in performance, the Chiplet design gave AMD the advantage in cost ( Smaller Die, Higher Yield, Mass manufacture in volume ), so while it had a lower price than Intel, they are not hurting their margin to fight this battle. Very important for the long term survival of AMD. Along with TSMC 7nm were running in perfect harmony. Not to mention TSMC were willing to fight and get 7nm capacity for AMD. Along with risking more CapeX and building more Fab. And to add a fifth thing to all these, Intel had major securities problem just months before AMD's Zen 2 launch. As if the whole thing were scripted to play the perfect Counter Attack by AMD and TSMC. But No, it is the Hard work and dedication of AMD and TSMC, the will to fight and deliver against all odds, compare this to Intel in the past 4 - 5 years. So if you loathe Intel, now AMD is not only an alternative, but also possibly the best option on Server. And if you love Intel, you should buy AMD to teach them a lesson for milking and sitting on their butt not Innovating.

Symmetry 7y ago
Intel has always had their design and fabrication teams work much more closely together than their competitors. That's often been an advantage as it's allowed fab to sometimes impose unusually restrictive design rules, but only in ways that the design team could handle and thereby give the fabs scope to reach a node faster or improve its performance.
hajile 7y ago
Don't forget that the IO die (which is actually much larger than the CPU die) is still on Global Foundries 14nm, so more of most of these chips is 14nm than is 7nm. This increases the number of 7nm chips AMD can get which definitely helps keep up with the (seemingly) massive demand.