Even ignoring the question of how the atom modules would scaling in such a config, that wouldn't work for mobile. They're hemmed in on the y dimension.
Even ignoring the question of how the atom modules would scaling in such a config, that wouldn't work for mobile. They're hemmed in on the y dimension.Another way is an octo-core config for the E cores.
As far as I am aware 12900K Alder Lake has 12 LCC/Ring Stops, one Stop for each P core and a total of 4 for the pair quad e cluster for a total of 12, Rocket Lake will be adding four more stops.Alderlake's high latency might be related to having too many cores on the ring bus. I doubt Raptorlake is better. That's 12 ring stops. Raptorlake needs to do way better just to keep it same as Alderlake.
Even ignoring the question of how the atom modules would scaling in such a config, that wouldn't work for mobile. They're hemmed in on the y dimension.
As far as I am aware 12900K Alder Lake has 12 LCC/Ring Stops, one Stop for each P core and a total of 4 for the pair quad e cluster for a total of 12, Rocket Lake will be adding four more stops.
PSA: Rocket Lake is in the past. Raptor Lake is the soon-to-be-released one.
So Intel's issues are not due to poor leadership decisions? Who's to blame for this?
Actually what I think most folks are missing out on is how far behind TSMC is on their original N3 roadmap.
TSMC was supposed to be in full ramp N3 production late 2021. We should have 3nm iPhones coming out in two months, but we don't. And when they do come out in 2023, only the most expensive iPhones will be 3nm. So maybe half of what was originally thought.
Anyway, I think they are in a very slow, slower than originally planned for 2021, late 2022 production run for Apple and Intel, and won't ramp like their original projections until late 2023.
Now this gives Intel and Samsung a reprieve. I don't care for Samsung and its node name hijinx though, their "3nm" node is about like TSMCs enhanced N5 aka N4.
Intel's 4 node is reportedly superior to TSMC N4, so if Intel ships functioning 'Intel 4' node chips in 1H2023 - reality will be that they will have the best x86 node with a shipping product in the consumer space at that time. Might not last long, but it'll be the first time they could say that in over 5 years.
I still think Raptor Lake, being the last monolithic die CPU for consumers, is likely to become a long-living legend and will be top dog in certain workloads for a very very long time.
Actually what I think most folks are missing out on is how far behind TSMC is on their original N3 roadmap.
TSMC was supposed to be in full ramp N3 production late 2021. We should have 3nm iPhones coming out in two months, but we don't. And when they do come out in 2023, only the most expensive iPhones will be 3nm. So maybe half of what was originally thought.
Eh, I don't know. Rocket Lake got particularly poor feedback because it was a regression from Comet Lake in some ways. Raptor Lake won't get quite that degree of mockery.@Exist50 Rocketlake is not a bad analogy in that it'll be perceived that bad in the market before a big jump occurs which claws back most of the deficit.
Nope, it's one stop per each P-core or 4 E-core cluster. So 10 for Alder Lake, and 12 for Raptor Lake. And as jpiniero remind me, +1 for the GPU on those products as well, though it looks like MTL is moving it off the ring.As far as I am aware 12900K Alder Lake has 12 LCC/Ring Stops, one Stop for each P core and a total of 4 for the pair quad e cluster for a total of 12, Rocket Lake will be adding four more stops.
Bigger package => bigger motherboard => smaller battery. That's really not a tradeoff you want to force in mobile.Make the package size bigger?
Let me reference myself a few weeks ago.On topic, https://wccftech.com/intel-14th-gen...e-for-tgpu-used-in-14th-gen-arrow-lake-rumor/
why would they do this, if there weren’t issues with N3?
It seems like some are trying to get in early. How cute.N3 was never the plan for MTL, but I look forward to the rumor mongers attempting to claim otherwise when it launches. To cover their failed predictions, if nothing else.
None of those "articles" reference TSMC's actual statements. At most, they reference the reasonable expectation (and probably internal roadmap) that N3 would reach mass production ~Q2, but TSMC never officially claimed that. They've done a very good job of providing accurate info to the public.
Eh, I don't know. Rocket Lake got particularly poor feedback because it was a regression from Comet Lake in some ways. Raptor Lake won't get quite that degree of mockery.
Oh, yeah. Well, same thing. Emerald Rapids isn't going to get actively derided like Rocket Lake; people just won't care about it when Genoa exists.I was quoting you talking about Emerald Rapids not client.
None of those "articles" reference TSMC's actual statements. At most, they reference the reasonable expectation (and probably internal roadmap) that N3 would reach mass production ~Q2, but TSMC never officially claimed that. They've done a very good job of providing accurate info to the public.
Oh, yeah. Well, same thing. Emerald Rapids isn't going to get actively derided like Rocket Lake; people just won't care about it when Genoa exists.
i would work to understand the bias of the person you are quoting. If you actually look and try and trace back to TMSC statements you can see the dishonest extrapolation Arne has made. And if you know who Arne is that isn't at all surprising.
People have trouble with reading and thinking, PSAs are needed sometimes.
On topic, https://wccftech.com/intel-14th-gen...e-for-tgpu-used-in-14th-gen-arrow-lake-rumor/
why would they do this, if there weren’t issues with N3?
However, Intel is flatly denying those rumors today, with spokesperson Thomas Hannaford clarifying to The Verge that not only are they untrue, but that Meteor Lake will actually ship, launch, and be available to consumers in 2023.
Okay. My first question is regarding 3-nanometer ramp-up for second half, starting from second half next year. I recall the 7-nanometer ramp-up in year 2018 second quarter with some revenue contribution and the 5-nanometer in second quarter last year, year 2020. But it seems like 3-nanometers clearly some delay for second half next year. So I want to ask, is that because the technology difficulty, we cannot ramp up in second quarter or we don't have a big customer to use 3-nanometer at the beginning stage that's why we push back the ramp-up in second half next year?
Andrew, you have a very good observation and you calculate that, yes, about 3 to 4 months is a delay as compared with 5-nanometer.
None of those "articles" reference TSMC's actual statements. At most, they reference the reasonable expectation (and probably internal roadmap) that N3 would reach mass production ~Q2, but TSMC never officially claimed that. They've done a very good job of providing accurate info to the public.
i would work to understand the bias of the person you are quoting. If you actually look and try and trace back to TMSC statements you can see the dishonest extrapolation Arne has made. And if you know who Arne is that isn't at all surprising.
You can even see it clear as day in the words you have quoted. "As compared with 5-nanometer".
So they said "it was a delay as compared with 5 nanometer" but not they did not say it was a delay from their previous statements. Because they had never made any official statements that N3 would be in mass production in H1 2022. It was only a "delay" from the point of view of outside beliefs/expectations.
Even then they say "3 to 4 months" which hardly matches your "how far behind" language where you compare it to Intel - which had a delay of 3 to 4 YEARS from their original roadmap for 10nm!
I say again, post a link where TSMC is stating N3 will enter mass production in late 2021 which is what you claimed. Or even where they state it will enter mass production in H1 2022. You will not, because the first official communication about its timeline said it would be H2 2022.
When they said that, people were talking about a delay but it was only a delay based on outside expectation. That quote you reference was confirming the "delay" of 3 to 4 months from the outside expectation, which would be late Q2 or early Q3 to sync up with Apple's iPhone schedule.
I'm clearly wasting my time responding, but as covered here several times over, TSMC never once publicly promised that N3 would be on the same schedule as N5, and the current timeline is perfect in keeping with what they have said.Let's directly refer to what TSMC said:
Since N5 entered HVM in April 2020, the statement directly, unambiguously implies that TSMC intended to put N3 in HVM in July-August 2022. However, since TSMC is only expecting N3 revenue in Q1'23, this has been further postponed to (late) Q4 2022. This has been further confirmed by reports that N3 only started risk production in (late?) November 2021.
Conclusion: TSMC claimed N3 HVM would start in July-August, and clearly this isn't happening. N3 is both delayed compared to N5 as well as compared to TSMC's prior expectations.
Anantech speculated that it had 12 LLC/Ring Stops because when Intel Disabled one of the quad cluster in the 12700k the CPU lost 5 MiB of L2 Capacity instead of losing just 3Nope, it's one stop per each P-core or 4 E-core cluster. So 10 for Alder Lake, and 12 for Raptor Lake. And as jpiniero remind me, +1 for the GPU on those products as well, though it looks like MTL is moving it off the ring.