4 ms·

It will take a while for Intel to move Atom to 22nm. They are just moving it to 32nm next year. Normally, that means they would switch to 22nm in 2014, but if t

It will take a while for Intel to move Atom to 22nm. They are just moving it to 32nm next year. Normally, that means they would switch to 22nm in 2014, but if they are in a real hurry they'll do it in 2013. But I'm not seeing them doing it any faster than that. Two years is quite a lot of time in the mobile industry. It might be way too late for Intel, then. Plus, they'll only be able to get close with something like a single core Atom, like they are trying this year. We'll have quad core Cortex A15 chips by then, which means even if Atom catches up in energy efficiency, the ARM chips will be significantly more powerful by then - all at the same price or cheaper than Intel's Atom. So I don't see much incentive for manufacturers to use it.

microarchitect 16y ago
Don't forget the A15 is also at least a year away. I'm not sure what you mean by this: "Plus, they'll only be able to get close with something like a single core Atom, like they are trying this year." > We'll have quad core Cortex A15 chips by then. I don't think this is a big deal. Intel already have dual-core Atoms which actually have 4 threads, which are going to be quite competitive out of the box with a quad core ARM chip. > all at the same price or cheaper than Intel's Atom. I don't buy this. Intel's fabs can blow the pants off everyone else in terms of yield and cost. The big pile of cash they're sitting will also help. > Two years is quite a lot of time in the mobile industry This might be true, but my points were specifically made for laptops and not mobile phone chips.
- nextparadigms 16y ago
  Intel's dual core chips have a 10W power draw. If they moved it today to the 22nm Ivy Bridge. it would still use like 5W. My point was that while ARM only has to double in performance every year and keep the same level of energy efficiency (which seems every ARM chip maker can do), Intel will have to double the performance of Atom every year, while also making the power draw of the chip much smaller than the previous generation. So Intel has to do twice as much in the same time as ARM chip makers.

microarchitect 16y ago

Don't forget the A15 is also at least a year away. I'm not sure what you mean by this: "Plus, they'll only be able to get close with something like a single core Atom, like they are trying this year." > We'll have quad core Cortex A15 chips by then. I don't think this is a big deal. Intel already have dual-core Atoms which actually have 4 threads, which are going to be quite competitive out of the box with a quad core ARM chip. > all at the same price or cheaper than Intel's Atom. I don't buy this. Intel's fabs can blow the pants off everyone else in terms of yield and cost. The big pile of cash they're sitting will also help. > Two years is quite a lot of time in the mobile industry This might be true, but my points were specifically made for laptops and not mobile phone chips.

nextparadigms 16y ago
Intel's dual core chips have a 10W power draw. If they moved it today to the 22nm Ivy Bridge. it would still use like 5W. My point was that while ARM only has to double in performance every year and keep the same level of energy efficiency (which seems every ARM chip maker can do), Intel will have to double the performance of Atom every year, while also making the power draw of the chip much smaller than the previous generation. So Intel has to do twice as much in the same time as ARM chip makers.