Slashdot Mirror
Intel Has Killed off the 10nm Process, Report Says (semiaccurate.com)
Charlie Demerjian, reporting for SemiAccurate: SemiAccurate has learned that Intel just pulled the plug on their struggling 10nm process. Before you jump to conclusions, we think this is both the right thing to do and a good thing for the company. For several years now SemiAccurate has been saying the the 10nm process as proposed by Intel would never be financially viable. Now we are hearing from trusted moles that the process is indeed dead and that is a good thing for Intel, if they had continued along their current path the disaster would have been untenable. Our moles are saying the deed has finally been done.
This isn't to say the road to this point has been easy or straightforward, and the road ahead is even less solid. Intel has continually moved the public bar on 10nm back, incrementally, while singing a different song internally. In their Q1/2018 earnings call they moved the timetables and spun it in a curious way but were telling partners a different story. UPDATE: Intel tweeted on Monday morning: "Media reports published today that Intel is ending work on the 10nm process are untrue. We are making good progress on 10nm. Yields are improving consistent with the timeline we shared during our last earnings report."
This isn't to say the road to this point has been easy or straightforward, and the road ahead is even less solid. Intel has continually moved the public bar on 10nm back, incrementally, while singing a different song internally. In their Q1/2018 earnings call they moved the timetables and spun it in a curious way but were telling partners a different story. UPDATE: Intel tweeted on Monday morning: "Media reports published today that Intel is ending work on the 10nm process are untrue. We are making good progress on 10nm. Yields are improving consistent with the timeline we shared during our last earnings report."
Ummm.... You people do know that Semiaccurate is a kind of notorious for being run by an insanely zealous AMD fanboy? We're talking about the same person who made some absolutely crazy misreading of a number of documents to arrive at a conclusion that Nvidia's Fermi architecture had sub 5% yields as devices based on that architecture were shipping in good numbers.
A reliable source this is not, particularly when it comes to AMD's or it's direct competitors, so wait for some more trustworthy sources before making your mind up on this subject.
"Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
The secret to the speedup is to place memory and arithmetic units on the same chip.
Wikipedia has a good overview: Computational RAM. I know some of the people who worked on this with Dave Patterson's group at UCB. Very smart people, and a very interesting project.
We are in the post-Moore world. The future is massive parallelism.
a majority of games are now written for tablets/phones that have little more processing power than a 486
*cough* Bullshit *cough*
All ARMv8 cores are between high 4's and mid 6's in DMIP/MHz and run at speeds from 1.5 to 2.5GHz, that puts them at 6750 to 16,000 DMIPs. The 486 DX4 100 was 70 MIPS and 0.7 MIPS/MHz. The modern ARM chips performance puts them in the range of an Athlon64 to an Athlon64 x2 chip.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.