4 ms·
If that is the case shouldn't you call it "Intel 10nm" since that is what it was called when Intel was still using the same units as everyone else (even if thos
by SahAssar 5y ago
If that is the case shouldn't you call it "Intel 10nm" since that is what it was called when Intel was still using the same units as everyone else (even if those units are becoming meaningless)?
Not even Intel itself says that "Intel 7" means "7nm", right?
- SirMittens 5y agoEven if Intel was using "nm" like everyone else, Intel's naming was closer to reality then the rest of the industry. TSMC and Samsung's "nm" is more of a marketing term. Intel's 10nm is relatively close to TSMC's 7nm in term of density. That's why Intel renamed it to "Intel 7". Technically, even TSMC calls it N7, and not 7nm. But as you said, those units are more or less meaningless. Its just marketing.
- phire 5y agoIntel have a different process that used to documetned and marketed as 7nm. That process since has been renamed to Intel 4. Regardless of discussions about actual density and the meaningless, it's important to make the discussions between Intel 7 and 7nm (now Intel 4) to prevent confusion. Otherwise people might mistakenly think Alder Lake is on the process previously known as Intel 7nm. Fortunately, once we get to Intel 4, it becomes unambitious again.