Was a good dog and only show as some would say 🤔
https://www.semiwiki.com/forum/f293/intels-manufacturing-day-materials-9145.html
5 replies (most recent on top)
Out of all the fancy pictures and plots in the foils about how great and ahead intel was, to prove they are still in the lead would be a plot showing 10nm yields compared to their 22nm and 14nm. Is 10nm adjusted for intro ahead or behind 14nm is all they have to show. The very lack of any discussion about yield I find most worrisome for Intel!
https://www.semiwiki.com/forum/content/2976-intel-comes-clean-14nm-yield.html
No matter what they say about their wording, the results provides before the public do matter for the people; from that perspective Intel failed to prove it by not providing details of 10nm/7nm(or whatever) technologies w.r.t. TSMC's "technology." Or they went into "underground" mode like back when they DID copy AMD64? Leadership is supposed to provide new findings(issues as well), and contribute to the industry. So much of bragging from them now.
Seems like Intel is highlighting its 22/14nm more and ignoring competition's 7nm. They can't reveal yields but a mention about 10nm yields would have been helpful.
Even in the graph it looked like competition will have 7nm by the time Intel launches 10nm.
Considering how well/decent enough Apple and AMD processors perform on TSMC/Samsung/GloFo, all this presentation hype doesn't sound compelling.
Last thought, people don't give a hoot about Moore but whether your new PC or phone is worth spending money on.
Frankly the continued decline of PC/ laptop and continued dominance of phones says it all. We all would rather buy a new Samsung Galaxy8 or iPhone8 vesus any "Lake" platform, Intel has far bigger problems than convincing anyone they are still leaders in Moore.
They missed the phone and frankly AI, cars etc. ain't going to get their mojo back
Daniel Nenni has a good line. I sum it up as if intel is so good and foundry is open and they are serious and have a 3 year lead.
Why would anyone not come to them: Apple, Nvidia, Google, Amazon, Qualcomm etc. etc. nobody except poor a$$ company they bought and forced to use their process
"Obfuscation. Here's the thing, this was nothing more than a dog and pony show for people who do not know any better. Semiconductor professionals already know the difference between processes. Before committing to a new process we use the PDKs to properly evaluate the differences. We do not use Power Point slides or clever charts.
Intel is an IDM not a foundry. Companies all over the world, including Apple, have evaluated Intel's PDKs at 22nm and 14nm and have rejected them. Why do you think 10nm will be any different?Intel's 14nm FPGAs are supposed to be out now. Where is the reverse engineering report comparing Intel/Altera and Xilinx? Wouldn't that be the best way to compare Intel 14nm and TSMC 16nm? Better than Power Point obfuscation certainly."