3 ms·

From what I've heard, using 50% as much power for the same performance as the previous generation still will not be sufficient to bring Intel's Atom performance

From what I've heard, using 50% as much power for the same performance as the previous generation still will not be sufficient to bring Intel's Atom performance/energy consumption ratio to that offered by ARM chips. However, it's a huge leap in the right direction. Add better-designed power-saving features on the next generation of Atom chips, and future process shrinkages, and it's easy to see ARM's lead getting chipped away until it's gone.

nextparadigms 15y ago
Atom is 2 generations behind in the manufacturing process compared to this. They'll barely start making them at 32 nm next year, and that will last for another 2 years.
- wmf 15y ago
  Intel recently announced that they're going to catch up Atom (semi-misleadingly marketed as "faster than Moore's Law") so they're at 45 nm now, they'll release 32 nm Atom later this year and 22 nm Atom in early 2012.
  - nextparadigms 15y ago
    That's not what they meant. They meant that instead of doubling Atom in performance every 18-24 months(have they even done that so far?), they'll try to double it every 12 months, just like the ARM chips are currently doing. They can't switch the manufacturing process every year.
ajross 15y ago
This is orthogonal. An ARM Cortex (or GPU, or whatever) on this process would see similar gains. It's also worth pointing out that current Atoms in the market are still 45nm parts, not even 32nm. Intel, for obvious reasons, tends to prioritize production of high-margin desktop and server CPUs over low-margin embedded parts. Really, this announcement isn't about ARM-based vs. Intel-based SoC designs. I think it's clear that Intel has some catching up to do there. This is about Intel cementing and extending its complete and total dominance of high end digital logic fabrication. At this point they look to be about a full two years ahead of everyone else. AMD, IBM, Samsung, TI, TSMC and the rest of that crew have to be more than a little worried. Objectivity disclaimer: my wife is at Intel working on precisely this 22nm process. So I'm about as biased a source as you can find.
- sliverstorm 15y ago
  Indeed. ARM chips are not better made, they are better designed- at least in regards to low power. It's an architectural thing. This is very much like the old software rule; a good algorithm on slow hardware will often outperform a bad algorithm on fast hardware.
- Palomides 15y ago
  but surely it is patented to a crazy extent, and therefore we won't be seeing it hit ARM stuff unless Intel lets it? so I doubt we will see orthogonal gains immediately from it.
  - glhaynes 15y ago
    Saw a rumor recently that Apple would be getting Intel to fab ARMs for them. Seems unlikely, but could potentially give Apple a lead (for a while) in one more area of their vertical integration play.
- tesseract 15y ago
  > This is about Intel cementing and extending its complete and total dominance of high end digital logic fabrication. Given that, (and given that Intel has been dominant in process technology for some time now) I've always wondered why Intel doesn't do fabrication for third party, high-performance/high-margin/high-power-budget products that don't directly compete with Intel's main CPU product line. Networking/telecom processors, top-end FPGAs, DSPs, and so forth. Is it just that they are at capacity making CPUs and don't see any need to get into that business? Or do they do it already and I'm just not aware?
  - nitrogen 15y ago
    They are going to fab some FPGAs for a company called Achronix: http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4210263/Intel-to-fab-FPGAs-for-startup-Achronix http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4210263/Intel-to-fab... http://www.achronix.com/ http://www.achronix.com/ I've worked with audio equipment that uses FPGAs, CPLDs, and DSPs for various purposes, and being stuck on relatively-ancient processes makes that equipment generate a lot more heat and fan noise than would be necessary with DSPs and FPGAs on a modern process.
SlipperySlope 15y ago
Interesting that Intel is seeking to fabricate ARM chips for Apple. I presume that Intel is pitching their best lithography process tech, i.e. 22nm. If Intel wrests Apples ARM CPU fabrication business away from Samsung - who competes with Apple on smartphones - then Intel would become a world leader in ARM CPU fabrication and pay ARM plenty of licensing fees! Hardly the end of the world for ARM.
- sliverstorm 15y ago
  The risk would be once Intel is the world's source of ARM CPU's, suddenly ARM's biggest competitor has a chokehold on the market's access to their silicon. It would basically come down to whether Intel chose to embrace ARM, or tried to use the new position to quietly strangle it.
  - SlipperySlope 15y ago
    A large number of foundries currently make ARM CPUs, and a number of companies make ARM CPUs for in-house manufacturing. Intel could not get an absolute monopoly but rather a technical superiority advantage such as it currently has over other x86 vendors. It has been speculated in the financial press that Intel might try to offset its huge annual capital expenditures by offering as much as 20% of its fab capacity as foundry services.
  - thebandrews 15y ago
    Intel did ARM a while back and got out. Not sure what kind of license they still have.
    - ephemient 15y ago
      Wikipedia says "Intel still holds an ARM license even after the sale of XScale." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XScale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XScale I don't know if it's true five years later now, though.

nextparadigms 15y ago

Atom is 2 generations behind in the manufacturing process compared to this. They'll barely start making them at 32 nm next year, and that will last for another 2 years.

wmf 15y ago
Intel recently announced that they're going to catch up Atom (semi-misleadingly marketed as "faster than Moore's Law") so they're at 45 nm now, they'll release 32 nm Atom later this year and 22 nm Atom in early 2012.
- nextparadigms 15y ago
  That's not what they meant. They meant that instead of doubling Atom in performance every 18-24 months(have they even done that so far?), they'll try to double it every 12 months, just like the ARM chips are currently doing. They can't switch the manufacturing process every year.

ajross 15y ago

This is orthogonal. An ARM Cortex (or GPU, or whatever) on this process would see similar gains. It's also worth pointing out that current Atoms in the market are still 45nm parts, not even 32nm. Intel, for obvious reasons, tends to prioritize production of high-margin desktop and server CPUs over low-margin embedded parts. Really, this announcement isn't about ARM-based vs. Intel-based SoC designs. I think it's clear that Intel has some catching up to do there. This is about Intel cementing and extending its complete and total dominance of high end digital logic fabrication. At this point they look to be about a full two years ahead of everyone else. AMD, IBM, Samsung, TI, TSMC and the rest of that crew have to be more than a little worried. Objectivity disclaimer: my wife is at Intel working on precisely this 22nm process. So I'm about as biased a source as you can find.

sliverstorm 15y ago
Indeed. ARM chips are not better made, they are better designed- at least in regards to low power. It's an architectural thing. This is very much like the old software rule; a good algorithm on slow hardware will often outperform a bad algorithm on fast hardware.
Palomides 15y ago
but surely it is patented to a crazy extent, and therefore we won't be seeing it hit ARM stuff unless Intel lets it? so I doubt we will see orthogonal gains immediately from it.
- glhaynes 15y ago
  Saw a rumor recently that Apple would be getting Intel to fab ARMs for them. Seems unlikely, but could potentially give Apple a lead (for a while) in one more area of their vertical integration play.
tesseract 15y ago
> This is about Intel cementing and extending its complete and total dominance of high end digital logic fabrication. Given that, (and given that Intel has been dominant in process technology for some time now) I've always wondered why Intel doesn't do fabrication for third party, high-performance/high-margin/high-power-budget products that don't directly compete with Intel's main CPU product line. Networking/telecom processors, top-end FPGAs, DSPs, and so forth. Is it just that they are at capacity making CPUs and don't see any need to get into that business? Or do they do it already and I'm just not aware?
- nitrogen 15y ago
  They are going to fab some FPGAs for a company called Achronix: http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4210263/Intel-to-fab-FPGAs-for-startup-Achronix http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4210263/Intel-to-fab... http://www.achronix.com/ http://www.achronix.com/ I've worked with audio equipment that uses FPGAs, CPLDs, and DSPs for various purposes, and being stuck on relatively-ancient processes makes that equipment generate a lot more heat and fan noise than would be necessary with DSPs and FPGAs on a modern process.

SlipperySlope 15y ago

Interesting that Intel is seeking to fabricate ARM chips for Apple. I presume that Intel is pitching their best lithography process tech, i.e. 22nm. If Intel wrests Apples ARM CPU fabrication business away from Samsung - who competes with Apple on smartphones - then Intel would become a world leader in ARM CPU fabrication and pay ARM plenty of licensing fees! Hardly the end of the world for ARM.

sliverstorm 15y ago
The risk would be once Intel is the world's source of ARM CPU's, suddenly ARM's biggest competitor has a chokehold on the market's access to their silicon. It would basically come down to whether Intel chose to embrace ARM, or tried to use the new position to quietly strangle it.
- SlipperySlope 15y ago
  A large number of foundries currently make ARM CPUs, and a number of companies make ARM CPUs for in-house manufacturing. Intel could not get an absolute monopoly but rather a technical superiority advantage such as it currently has over other x86 vendors. It has been speculated in the financial press that Intel might try to offset its huge annual capital expenditures by offering as much as 20% of its fab capacity as foundry services.
- thebandrews 15y ago
  Intel did ARM a while back and got out. Not sure what kind of license they still have.
  - ephemient 15y ago
    Wikipedia says "Intel still holds an ARM license even after the sale of XScale." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XScale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XScale I don't know if it's true five years later now, though.