This roadmap (from AT) from last summer indicates that Ice-Lake and Cooper-Lake are both due in 2020, though Intel roadmaps have been confusing lately:
Last edited:
This roadmap (from AT) from last summer indicates that Ice-Lake and Cooper-Lake are both due in 2020, though Intel roadmaps have been confusing lately:It would make a ton of sense if the public availability of Cooper Lake was a year from now, and 7 nm Granite Rapids two years from now. I don't know if that's realistic.
Well, Intel 10nm is going fall shy of that number, and , from what I've read, Intel is planning on being less aggressive on density with 7nm EUV than they were at 10nm. That may not matter as much in the x86 CPU space, where xtor performance is also very important.https://fuse.wikichip.org/news/2207/tsmc-starts-5-nanometer-risk-production/
Wikichip estimates that TSMC's 5 nm node has a logic density of 171.3 Mtr/mm2; compared to 96.27 for their 7 nm. Intel's marketing had put their 10 nm node at 100.8.
This roadmap (from AT) from last summer indicates that Ice-Lake and Cooper-Lake are both due in 2020, though Intel roadmaps have been confusing lately:
I guess I still have problems with that, as in, why is Intel even bothering with 10nm at all. If it’s that bad? Why the farce? Why the waste of resources for so little return?Intel's roadmap would make more sense if you realize the 10 nm products aren't going to be in any kind of volume compared to the 14 nm products. Icelake Server especially is going to be nothing more than a distraction, corps if they aren't buying Rome will be buying Cooper Lake.
I guess I still have problems with that, as in, why is Intel even bothering with 10nm at all. If it’s that bad? Why the farce? Why the waste of resources for so little return?
Presenting nothing new at all due to canceling everything 10nm would be a very bad look, so they do the opposite extreme and are drowning everybody in a whole slew of new product announcements which, if one looks closer, still amount to essentially nothing new at all. As long as the stock markets play along this will allow Intel to sufficiently bridge the gap until 7nm is up and running.I guess I still have problems with that, as in, why is Intel even bothering with 10nm at all. If it’s that bad? Why the farce? Why the waste of resources for so little return?
If AMD sticks to a two year cadence on servers, then Intel has a chance to intercept with 7nm CPUs (and EMIB). It’s weird, wondering if Intel will get 7nm done in time - things sure have changed.The scary thing for Intel that it's not out of the question that AMD could have 5 nm server parts out and they could still be peddling 14 nm products more or less.
Presenting nothing new at all due to canceling everything 10nm would be a very bad look, so they do the opposite extreme and are drowning everybody in a whole slew of new product announcements which, if one looks closer, still amount to essentially nothing new at all. As long as the stock markets play along this will allow Intel to sufficiently bridge the gap until 7nm is up and running.
So far not only investors but the whole market buys the ongoing story. Just imagine how Intel's range of products would look like today if they weren't doing any of the continuous refreshes of refreshes on 14nm, all of which would not exist were 10nm realized on time as in the initial plans. Now TSMC caught up, allowing for unprecedented competition, while EUV is potentially delayed yet again (an issue for both Intel and Samsung since they skipped the non-EUV 7nm step).That makes sense, if investors buy the 'story', Intel doesn’t face a massive shakeup and can keep pursuing their current plans. Otherwise, the sh*t hits the fan.
My google-fu has failed me, what is this potential delay in EUV?Now TSMC caught up, allowing for unprecedented competition, while EUV is potentially delayed yet again (an issue for both Intel and Samsung since they skipped the non-EUV 7nm step).
Nothing concrete, it's just a fact that EUV still hasn't been used to mass produce a whole chip by anybody yet. Apple supposedly started mass production on A13 on TSMC's N7+ (7nm with EUV only used for up to four uncritical layers, mainly transistors, not yet interconnects) in March. TSMC's first complete EUV node will be called N5 planned to start mass production next year (again with Apple as primary customer, for its A14 chip). Samsung started risk production on its EUV based 7LPP late last year, no news since, they may actually be first with full EUV chips depending on progress this year. Intel's 7nm is even more up in the air so far. Regarding supply with EUV tools that potentially affect production, an ASML supplier suffered a fire late last year.My google-fu has failed me, what is this potential delay in EUV?
Apple isn't using 7+ for the 2019 iPhone, it's just the regular TSMC 7.
Is the 2019 iPhone using A13?
I would think so. It's just not using 7+, just regular 7.
A13 Processor
TSMC will be the sole supplier of the next-generation "A13" ships that will be used in the 2019 iPhone lineup, and iPhones coming in the future. The A13 is expected to be built on TSMC's 7nm+ package with extreme ultraviolet lithography.
The A13, like all chip upgrades, should bring performance and efficiency improvements.
Mass shipments of EUV-based 7nm chips are expected to kick off in the second half of the year as well.
Thanks. So I guess there will be no EUV products at all (? pending the meaning of "meaningful revenue") in 2019, unless Samsung surprises us.Oh they are wrong. TSMC said in an earnings conference call they don't expect any meaningful revenue for 7+ in 2019; not until 2020.
If this is true, then surely 5nm EUV for TSMC is pushed back as well. Seems kind of strange to announce risk production for a lithography process that is now likely two years out (unless their big foundry customers are all skipping 7nm+.
Oh they are wrong. TSMC said in an earnings conference call they don't expect any meaningful revenue for 7+ in 2019; not until 2020.
How long ago was that? It seems like major publications didn't pick up on that story (and shame on them for not doing so).
And making it worse, EUV will be as good as the Intel chips on that manufacturing dimensions (5nm). EUV is the real deal in fact.A13 2019 h2 on 7+ then? A14 2020 h2 on 5nm?
Amd x86 half a year later than Apple.
Tock tock tock tock. Relentlessly.
It's perfectly clear Intel business model is not working today. In no way can they compete with the rest of the world sharing process cost.
They need to change something radical now or they will be stuck on a half mature complex 10nm while the rest of the leader pack is on 5nm euv. It's not viable.
How do you know this? Is there data on dimensions and performance for Intel 7nm and TSMC 5nm??And making it worse, EUV will be as good as the Intel chips on that manufacturing dimensions (5nm). EUV is the real deal in fact.
7 nm EUV would be similar to 7 nm Intel chip.T
Intel actually is on real trouble. They are great but they are also slow.