7 ms·

> That's my understanding, anyway -- correct me if I'm wrong. Since these are mobile processors your understanding is incorrect. What you've described is what

> That's my understanding, anyway -- correct me if I'm wrong. Since these are mobile processors your understanding is incorrect. What you've described is what AMD did on the server & desktop side. But on mobile, to hit the power efficiency targets, AMD stuck with the single monolithic die. And it's a decently large one, at that: https://www.anandtech.com/show/15381/amd-ryzen-mobile-4000-measuring-renoirs-die-size https://www.anandtech.com/show/15381/amd-ryzen-mobile-4000-m... So no AMD wouldn't yield better on Intel's 10NM+, not in this case. In the desktop usage they would, as their desktop CPU dies are way smaller than their mobile CPU dies. But the mobile die sizes are fairly equivalent between AMD & Intel.

celrod 6y ago
If I understood lend000 correctly: > The fact that Intel's only new releases on 10nm are <=6 core low power products suggests their yields are still poor. Their argument was that, had they followed AMD's approach, they would be able to produce desktop and server chips despite being yield-limited to "<= 6 core" per chiplet.