Slashdot Mirror
Intel Says They Aren't Abandoning 10nm Chips, Despite Report Saying They're Canceled (pcmag.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from PC Magazine: Intel is denying a new report that claims the chipmaker is abandoning its 10 nanometer manufacturing process following years of delays. "Media reports published today that Intel is ending work on the 10nm process are untrue," the company tweeted on Monday. Hours prior to the tweet, semiconductor news site SemiAccurate claimed that Intel was pulling the plug on the chip-making technology over the company's ongoing struggles to bring it to full production. Chips built with the 10nm process were originally slated to arrive in 2016, but the company has repeatedly pushed that launch date back. During Intel's last earnings call, executives said they now expect 10nm chips to officially drop during the 2019 holiday season.
In response to SemiAccurate's report, Intel said it continues to make "good progress" on the 10nm technology. "Yields are improving consistent with the timeline we shared during our last earnings report," the chipmaker added in its tweet. The next-generation silicon will supposedly offer a 25 percent performance increase over 14nm-manufactured technology. The 10nm chips will also be able to run on 50 percent less power when clocked at the same performance of a 14nm processor. Intel will hold an earnings call on Thursday, so expect company executives to elaborate on 10nm's progress then.
In response to SemiAccurate's report, Intel said it continues to make "good progress" on the 10nm technology. "Yields are improving consistent with the timeline we shared during our last earnings report," the chipmaker added in its tweet. The next-generation silicon will supposedly offer a 25 percent performance increase over 14nm-manufactured technology. The 10nm chips will also be able to run on 50 percent less power when clocked at the same performance of a 14nm processor. Intel will hold an earnings call on Thursday, so expect company executives to elaborate on 10nm's progress then.
Fuck if anyone can keep a straight line at Intel. We'll find out 9 months after the CEO sells off their shares what the truth was.
already on 4nm.
Yes, it seems molecules migrating from one location to another represent a real problem when it comes to miniaturising electronics, once you get below a certain size (molecules mutually reinforcing their or is that your preferred location). High clock speeds and high operating temperatures also do not help.
So shorter travel distances are going to become the next big thing, computers on a chip. Less flexibility in design but the more in can pack in the closest possible space, the higher the speed without extra energy. So multiple co-processing computers on chips or silicon has to go.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Intel has effectively missed it's 10nm die shrink when Samsung and TSMC are on 7nm. Intel better have 5nm in it's back pocket because it's pointless building any 10nm CPU's now (maybe other chips instead.)
Great job "forecasting" there grandpa, lol? Why don't you give unsolicited micro-lessons on a subject you know something about or actually work in instead? Who knows, someone might even listen slightly or care in the least. K thx bai
a GAY NIIGER
Canceled some production but not all .. so I guess the report, from SemiAccurate, was only half right.
Thank you. Try the fish.
TSMC and Global Foundries are already moving to the 7nm node.
So far all Intel has managed with their 10nm process is delays. It was supposed to be out in 16 and now they are talking about holiday 19
2 stories talking about Intel, instead of 0. Result: +cancel -cancel 10nm = 0, +ad +ad = 2.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Migrant molecules invaders blamed for Intel's failure to deliver 10nm.... this crude attempt to deceive viewers on Fox 'News'. "Build a wall FAST" says Trump yet again.... "Make Intel Great Again"! MIGA!
Multiple processors on a chip long took over the supercomputer market, which tried both plans. Shrinking chips vs dividing tasks across more processors.
It's not whether Intel can make 10nm or 7nm, its whether they can keep their performance advantage as the clock speed of ARM is ramped up to compete with Intel on the desktop.
And do you know what! There is life outside Intel!
Here is a delightful little video of me re-enacting my behavior on my last days at Intel. A real wonderful dance!
And Arthur Rosenau' love splashed down from the heavens! and made me almost completely forget Intel until I saw this article.
Thank you to the folks at SemiAccurate for the story!
Most Respectfully Yours Mark Allyn Bellingham, Washington
Plan for it now.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You generally don't just retire fab plants anyway. Just have them produce less bleeding edge parts until they stop selling.
You also don't typically repurpose existing plants. It's hard enough to get them up clean and working with decent yields without moving old stuff out and the new in.
So, Intel probably think they can make a $ or two of 10nm still, but odds are they are praying 5nm in a new plant comes in with less grief for the cutting edge stuff.
Pulling the plug on their advancement would be tantamount to calling the entire industry quits. With TSMC already shipping nigh equivalent chips and Samsung reportedly following early next year cancelling 10nm would put Intel so far behind as to be the same as giving up entirely. Considering their recent quarterly reports of giant profits, the rumor itself was fantastically stupid to begin with.
Intel is a publicly traded company and bad news like you are abandoning the hopes you pinned on a new fabrication tech would severely damage their stock price. If you recall, during the aftermath of Meltdown, Intel made it sound like AMD chips had the same issue by conflating Meltdown and Spectre issues. Oh and the patch to the Linux kernel would have slowed down AMD chips as well which was an "accident" for sure.
Intel cannot compete but they can lie and cheat with the best of them.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Oh yeah, thanks for your stupid useless opinion, you cunt.
And nice try with the "k thx bai" thing at the end. Normally that's preceded by a well-founded take-down of whatever it was said in response to, except yours wasn't. See ya, shitheel.
SemiAccurate hasn't been worthy of its own name for over 5 years, IMHO. Releasing this rumor under the guise of news on the same day the press embargo for Coffee Lake refresh benchmarks is lifted reeks of a ham-fisted attempt at stock price manipulation. Get a life, Chuck.
Go read the original post. He's doing a comedy mashup of Fox news immigrant invasion scare vs molecules invading scare. Which I built on for comedic effect.
Stopping 7nm molecule invasion just NEEDS A DAMN WALL! MIGA!
"Can you be more retarded?"
Let me guess, you're a non-ironic Fox News viewer?
There there Fox News viewer, they're not lying to *you*. They're lying to the *other* Fox News viewers. You're too smart for that.
MAKE INTEL GREAT AGAIN!
MIGA MIGA MIGA!
Two days before AMD reports, three days before Intel reports, Semiaccurate floats this rumor with pretty much nothing to back it up. Here's the meat of their argument Note: The following is analysis for professional level subscribers only. So this is about signing up subscribers? Or an attempt at illegal stock manipulation? Both? It is certainly not about quality journalism.
I am definitely an AMD fanboy, full disclosure there. But that doesn't make me an Intel hater, at least not when they lay off the dirty tricks, which appears to pretty much the situation at the moment. So... balanced assessment: no reason to doubt Intel's revised 10nm production schedule. This is all about yields as Semiaccurate is fond of pointing out.
You can see from this that Intel's 10nm fin pitch is a bit more aggressive than TSMC's 7nm, 6% smaller. Intel's minimum metal pitch is a lot more aggressive, 22%. This is all right at the limit of what deep UV alone can do, so that might be Intel's bridge too far right there. I have a whole lot of difficultly believing that Intel did not learn enough from their aborted ramp up last spring to know exactly what they need to do to hit their yields, most probably including respinning their masks to a density nearly identical to TSMC.
Buried in there somewhere I did find one credible little nugget... Semiaccurate pointed out that last spring's 8121U Cannon Lake part, produced in limited quantities and only ever seen in the hands of a few reviewers, is specced without a GPU. Not because it doesn't have one, but because does have one but it doesn't work. I find that credible. Debugging both a processor and a GPU is much more work that just a processor or GPU alone. In contrast, AMD doesn't try to fab APUs until both the processor and GPU have been successfully fabbed separately. Excellent strategy, a big risk reduction.
Another huge thing AMD did to cut the 7nm risk was, jumping into bed with the phone industry. Intel convinced themselves it was a good idea to go it alone as usual, and were proved colossally wrong. Though I am not going to claim any special inside information, I think that Intel is going to bring up its Cannon Lake production successfully, 3 or 4 years behind schedule as they say, and that this is the end of the line for Intel as an independent fab. It's simple: the days of always being a node ahead are over, today they are half a node behind. From here on, there are no advantages to running an independent fab, only disadvantages. When Intel finally does ramp up Cannon Lake they will be in an excellent position to negotiate a new, cooperative deal with the rest of the industry, but if they persist in marching to their own drumbeat they will pay an enormous cost in market share and operating income over the next few years.
I am going to take a wild guess here: Intel plays around with EUV a bit, gets some first hand data on what horribly nasty stuff that is, then makes a deal with TSMC. Intel is going to do just fine as a pure Engineering/IP player like AMD but they risk everything by running their own vanity fab.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
They found their mole.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
Unlike TSMC which can leverage the demands from their wide range of clienteles to continually finance their progress beyond 7nm, into 5nm (and 3nm), Samsung Electronics has to report back to the Samsung HQ for things that might cost them tens, or even hundreds of billions
Their product range are mainly on memory (flash / DRAM) with a few logic chip sprinkled here and there
DRAM can't go beyond 1z nm (reportedly 15nm), and flash won't go beyond 7nm, or the cross-talk noise would be way too disabling.
Methinks we see the beginning of the end of global chip shrinking --- TSMC might be the last one still holding the torch ... unless of course, the mainland Chinese are courageously stupid enough to venture on, and on, and on, and on ....
Great job "forecasting" there grandpa, lol? Why don't you give unsolicited micro-lessons on a subject you know something about or actually work in instead? Who knows, someone might even listen slightly or care in the least. K thx bai
Somebody modded it up, and you down, sigh. OTOH, it wasn't necessary to be quite that abrasive. OTOOH, you were responding to possibly the worst post in the entire universe. The only sorrier thing I can think of is, somebody modded it up.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
For real, semi accurate. I guess they warned us...
Intel's manufacturing process is out-dated and irrelevant, even with them over-charging customers for their CPUs for a whole decade because AMD could not compete in the top segment. Tens of billions of dollars in net profits, and they still haven't been able to reach 10nm.
What is Intel doing with all the revenue and profits? What's going on? Not sure, but if anything, these news are a good indicator it's time to sell your Intel stocks.
I just want ECC ram available on all desktops... that is all (for now).
you were responding to possibly the worst post in the entire universe
Is this your first day on /. ?
I can see the Slashdot headline now: "Are Computers on a Chip a money-grabbing attempt to bypass right to repair laws?"
They have to have the 10nm plant to maintain their 10nm penises.
No one said it would be easy.
It is no different than returning a rocket booster for reuse. They said it couldn't be done. Not easy but they found a way.
There is more to fabrication than just the size process. Though some companies do come to the chip production companies with a fully laid out internal chip design, this is very rare for tightly packed layouts. Many times the fabs work with companies to adress overheating in specific parts of the IC. One of Intel's secret sauces is how this is done. If they were to use a 3rd party fab, parts, or all of their process could be leaked to competitors.
Microsoft, Apple, Google, Amazon what's the difference? All steal money from devs and control with walled gardens.
I predict that Intel will do like Howard Hughes did with the Spruce Goose. Not abandoned, no, but they will never produce any significant amount of parts at 10 nm (by Intel's own definition of 10 nm too BTW).
So officially they will have 10 nm support, but unofficially 10 nm will become an orphan within Intel. Soon Intel will begin selling the 7 nm story and 7nm will become the Future, the Best, the Only Thing Worth Talking About. You know, EUV, Electron Beam, Moore's Law, Particle Accelerators, Graphene, CNT, cold fusion, ...