I think they would and will be better with Apple silicon. I'd hate to think of apple building an iPhone or iPad with an Atom SoC LOL!
how about them apples in your signature? didn't it hurt deep inside to know they were essentially flawed by using intel silicon?
Intel didn't start heavily investing in mobile since about 2010. It can take 4 years to design a new architecture so you can do the math.Last time I checked my Galaxy S4 isn't using intel silicon, neither is any iPhone or android phone i've considered buying ever.
An Intel engineer disagrees with you:It's pretty apparent from the fact that intel kept recycling it's awful netburst architecture (because they suck at designing) for some 4 years past the time when it was obsolete. Last time I checked, qualcomm doesn't sit on 10 year old designs while it loses marketshare to AMD or whomever. It couldn't, mobile is too competitive. If intel didn't have those fabs and a gargantuan budget, it wouldn't exist.
In my mind, Netburst, much as it's maligned, brought some very good things internally for Intel design teams. First, unbelievable circuit expertise (the FP logic was running at 8GHz in Prescott stock!). Next, the trace cache which you can see reimplemented in Sandy and Ivy Bridge. Also, SMT. Building a validation team that could validate the beast pre- and post-silicon. The power-perf thinking i.e. frequency through power savings. Finally, the development of tools and project management required to do that kind of extreme design. All of these learning continue to this day and it's a very large contributor to why in client and server CPUs Intel can sustain the roadmap we have.
I think they would and will be better with Apple silicon. I'd hate to think of apple building an iPhone or iPad with an Atom SoC LOL!
Intel stopping as IDM would be the most stupid they could do. At the current rate, Intel could make every other foundry obsolete as serious manufacturing choice within ~6 years. That is their business model.
Not unless they plan on making their own litho machines. Their R&D keeps them a little ahead, but they are dependent on ASML for their equipment. Just like every other foundry.
http://www.asml.com/asml/show.do?ctx=427
Well, while ASML's capabilities are probably a limiting factor for Intel's node development progress, they are not for other fabs. I wish IDC was here, he'd likely have some better insight on this. People underestimate the depth and breadth of Intel's process development R&D team.
Well, while ASML's capabilities are probably a limiting factor for Intel's node development progress, they are not for other fabs. I wish IDC was here, he'd likely have some better insight on this. People underestimate the depth and breadth of Intel's process development R&D team.
Not unless they plan on making their own litho machines. Their R&D keeps them a little ahead, but they are dependent on ASML for their equipment. Just like every other foundry.
http://www.asml.com/asml/show.do?ctx=427
If ASML is able to keep up with Intel's 2 year cycle, there won't be a lot of problems. TSMC will gradually fall behind because their leading process isn't their biggest source of income, so the cycles will take longer as the costs keep getting higher.
Maybe if they can use Intel as a foundry. Else it would be funny to see the process node going from 22nm Tri-Gate to 28nm instead of 14nm.
I'm just seeing that lead getting more costly and time consuming.
Apple has already designed an SoC that outperforms intels Atom by a huge margin on 28nm. So I guess that's exactly what you're seeing right now?
Idk where you got 14nm from, last time I checked intel hasn't even released Haswell- E on 20nm LOL
I continue to be of the opinion that the largest risk to TSMC and really all of Intel's competition is Intel venturing into the foundry space. If Intel's actually successful with their 14nm customers and gets more on board for 10nm, well, every foundry customer that Intel wins is one that someone else loses. And losing leading-edge process technology customers makes it that much more difficult to finance the next node at the same pace.
For your information, Intel acquired Infineon in 2011. That's also the reason that AMD won't compete in mobile, even though they have Jaguar.Intel is great at manufacturing, the best even. But they suck at designing new products. They had to be dragged, kicking and screaming, into 64 bit by AMD64 and it's pretty sad that with 100 billion dollars in assets they still can't compete with the likes of qualcomm on SoC design.
The first iteration of Atom, the Saltwell architecture was already competitive in performance/watt. But it suffered from issues like being built on an n-1 process node. Silvermont now it without doubt at the top in term of performance/watt and second behind Apple in term of IPC.intel better be scared, because Apple has the money to build better fabs and the talent to make better chips. How many iterations has the Atom gone through without being competitive? Apple designs one chip, and they're at the top of the mobile game.
For your information, Intel acquired Infineon in 2011. That's also the reason that AMD won't compete in mobile, even though they have Jaguar.
The first iteration of Atom, the Saltwell architecture was already competitive in performance/watt. But it suffered from issues like being built on an n-1 process node. Silvermont now it without doubt at the top in term of performance/watt and second behind Apple in term of IPC.
This is true, but Intel at this point hasn't been willing to fab an actual legitimate competitor to their x86 processors yet. There's probably not that much business the foundry can do without doing that.
LOL
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/2307544?baseline=2395855
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/507271?baseline=497549
excuse me, what did you say? cause I dont see A7 outperforming bay trail by a huge margin ..
I like apple's approach of using 2 stronger cores for mobile but BT still wins on MT and likely uses less power..
intel has 22nm chips since 2012 and they will launch 14nm chips later this year, while apple will be stuck with 20nm TSCM for their A8
Silvermont is by no means "without a doubt" anything whatsoever. It can't even compete with the Adreno320 in graphics. It's a joke, and that's why nobody is using it.
To this day AMD still produces a better SoC in terms of all around performance
I didn't claim anything about the GPU. Cherry Trail will be the SoC to take GPU performance lead (BT is between Adreno 320 and 330, and CT will have a major redesigned gen8 GPU with 4x as much EUs). BTW, is there any Android game BT can't run?Silvermont is by no means "without a doubt" anything whatsoever. It can't even compete with the Adreno320 in graphics. It's a joke, and that's why nobody is using it.
So 14nm magically makes intel the leader in mobile SoC? I'm pretty sure they have to design a decent chip first, which bay trail isn't. Bay trail is already on a process node advantage and still gets it's a$$ kicked by the A7 (apple's FIRST EVER chip). What makes you think that an A8 on 20nm is going to magically force apple to lose to intel?
Process node advantage gets less and less with each node, so intels fabs mean less and less every generation.
Intel can be depended on to disappoint on graphics. I pretty much guarantee you cherry trail isn't gonna touch the A8 in that arena.I didn't claim anything about the GPU. Cherry Trail will be the SoC to take GPU performance lead (BT is between Adreno 320 and 330, and CT will have a major redesigned gen8 GPU with 4x as much EUs). BTW, is there any Android game BT can't run?
Calculations show that Silvermont has the highest performance/watt, which Homeles already explained very simple: it has a process node advantage + Tri-Gate.
Why do you think Bay Trail isn't a decent chip? Apple will lose to Intel because it is 1 process node behind. Process node advantages are indeed not so high because of leakage, but that's why Intel's got Tri-Gate. You can't beat a 14nm Tri-Gate with 20nm planar...
You know Apple's got somewhere around 10x what Intel does at least, right?I think Bay Trail is a decent chip, but I expect more from a company that has nearly infinite R&D funds, the best fabs in the world, and 30 years experience to make the best chip. Bay trail is not the best mobile chip by a long shot.