First and foremost consensus isn't needed to achieve what you want, plus if you are admiting by yourself that the technologies under the same marketing name aren't the same, what's the point in comparing them? Better to ask "when will manufacturer XYZ release a node with the following parameters" than using a meaningless marketing moniker.
Sure, fair enough. But do you think TSMC/Samsung 10 nm at least will be better than Intel 14 nm in general?
No, I don't. So far Samsung 14nm isn't exactly high volume (and that doesn't bode well for that incompetent partner of them) so whatever they are achieving in terms of TTM they are losing in terms of commercial viability. It's too early to talk about Samsung 10nm when their 14nm isn't exactly shining.
I'm just saying that if Samsung is having trouble mastering their 14nm process 10nm won't be any easier (same for Intel)What evidence do you have to back up your statement that TSMC and Samsung 10 nm is worse than Intel 14 nm?
Samsung/GloFo 14nm is so bad they now need TSMC to carry 30% of A9 as well.
3 foundries to supply 1 consumer with what, 100-200 million 100m2 chips a year. Depending how many will be lastest model.
This thread is about 10 nm, not 14 nm.
And what is your official source for that statement anyway? Or is it just rumors?
I'm just saying that if Samsung is having trouble mastering their 14nm process 10nm won't be any easier (same for Intel)
If you followed the thread I posted 2 independent sources.
What evidence do you have to back up your statement that TSMC and Samsung 10 nm is worse than Intel 14 nm?
You mean rumors? None were official as far as I could tell.
When was the last time you saw an official Apple annoucement what foundry they use for what products and nodes?
Considering how for example TSMC outright calls a 20nm FF node for 16nm. And we already seen that transistor wise is quite bigger for both on 14/16nm vs Intels 14nm. Whats your edvidence that they wont do a PR stunt again and actually beat or at least equal Intel?
When was the last time you saw an official Apple annoucement what foundry they use for what products and nodes?
Well, Intel 22 nm was similar when they stepped over to FinFET. The transistor density did not increase as much then either compared to 32 nm.
What evidence do you have to back up your statement that TSMC and Samsung 10 nm is worse than Intel 14 nm?
You mean rumors? None were official as far as I could tell.
It would be much easier if you actually did some research first.
Intel 32nm 0.171um2 SRAM cell size.
Intel 22nm 0.092um2 SRAM cell size.
http://download.intel.com/pressroom/kits/advancedtech/pdfs/Natarajan_iedm_2008_32nm_foils.pdf
http://www.intel.com/content/dam/ww...ilicon-technology-leadership-presentation.pdf
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4313/...nm-3d-trigate-transistors-shipping-in-2h-2011
This entire thread is based upon a rumor. Stop being two faced.
Problem is the statement was presented as fact and not rumor in this case.
If Intel goes BGA that would be a WORSE movement than AMD Bulldozer... People wants upgradeable and replacablle chips, not crap that iis soldered. If the MoBo dies, we can move the processor on LGA,PGA while BGA is an automatic death sentence.
Only the extreme fanboy would like that suicidal movement.
I just had my Z97 motherboard die with an electric snap. Got another, swapped the CPU and I'm good to go. If it were soldered in, I would have lost both.If Intel goes BGA that would be a WORSE movement than AMD Bulldozer... People wants upgradeable and replacablle chips, not crap that iis soldered. If the MoBo dies, we can move the processor on LGA,PGA while BGA is an automatic death sentence.
Only the extreme fanboy would like that suicidal movement.