Intel killed the longstanding "tick tock" model in 2016 because of failures with 10nm yield and the higher-than-expected costs of 14nm. Intel got too aggressive

Intel killed the longstanding "tick tock" model in 2016 because of failures with 10nm yield and the higher-than-expected costs of 14nm. Intel got too aggressive with the timeline of the die shrink, which led to them trying to do 10nm on DUV rather than waiting for EUV technology where the light is about an order of magnitude shorter in wavelength than that of DUV (and thus able to resolve today's nano-scale features without all the RETs needed for DUV). From the 2015 10-K [0]: "We expect to lengthen the amount of time we will utilize our 14nm and our next-generation 10nm process technologies, further optimizing our products and process technologies while meeting the yearly market cadence for product introductions." Spoiler alert: In the five years after shelving the tick-tock model, Intel also missed the yearly market cadence for product introductions. [0] https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/50863/000005086316000105/a10kdocument12262015q4.htm https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/50863/00000508631600...