Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
O
It's important to remember that when companies are competing, they're not necessarily "enemies." One division of a company can be competing with another company's similar division, and yet two different divisions of both companies are working together tightly.

Another big example is Samsung; Samsung definitely competes with Apple when it comes to the phones themselves, yet Apple buys a crapton of display panels and other parts from Samsung to make their phones!

Companies work together and compete at the same time constantly, it's not weird and it's rare that they "hate each other" for lack of a better term.
Sort of correct. But you also need to remember that Samsung manufacturing has basically nothing to do with the consumer mobile arm. They’re owned by the same parent companies and share “Samsung” in the name and it stops there.

The same will likely be the same or similar for any pure manufacturing arm Intel comes up with, though they’re going to have to go some way to prove they can make a 3nm wafer like TSMC.
 
I hope Intel does get into the foundry business. If they dropped out, the US would have no native chipmakers and would be totally dependent on the volatile region of Asia-Pacific.

I also think doubling down on manufacturing makes more sense for Intel than going fabless. The fabs are the most valuable assets they have. With every tech company getting into chip design lately, they are going to need a partner to produce it. Why not have Intel fill that niche? They could get a lot of business, even if they don't quite catch up to TSMC. Look at the chip shortage we have now. The demand is clearly there.
 
But Intel’s process stagnated, they couldn’t keep designing “new” uarchs for 14nm, and the rest is history.
What I heard from Intel engineers is that they were overly ambitious around 2013, when the original 10nm process was conceived. Then a few things that they had counted on (like EUV technology) were delayed industry-wide for years, which disrupted their roadmaps. But as mentioned earlier, it's not like they are behind everyone else. TSMC made the right decisions at the right time and executed perfectly, and came out ahead of everyone else. Only Intel and (in a narrower niche) Samsung are still in striking distance. All the other foundries are making their money at the backend (i.e. older processes which are still good for many applications). But things can change. The technical challenges for chip scaling are enormous at this point, and any setback costs billions of dollars.
 
Regarding Justin Long, didn't like him then and certainly don't like him now. He is very offensive with his comedy. However, I do support fully Intel in its campaign against M1 because as always, just like PowerPC back in the days, Apple lies about its true performance. I stand with Intel on this one, but vehemently hate Justin Long.
 
What I heard from Intel engineers is that they were overly ambitious around 2013, when the original 10nm process was conceived. Then a few things that they had counted on (like EUV technology) were delayed industry-wide for years, which disrupted their roadmaps. But as mentioned earlier, it's not like they are behind everyone else. TSMC made the right decisions at the right time and executed perfectly, and came out ahead of everyone else. Only Intel and (in a narrower niche) Samsung are still in striking distance. All the other foundries are making their money at the backend (i.e. older processes which are still good for many applications). But things can change. The technical challenges for chip scaling are enormous at this point, and any setback costs billions of dollars.
Sure I'm not going to claim Intel can never regain its process advantage. But according to their own and TSMC's roadmaps (provided each actually execute on them which as you have said is not a given for *anyone* as the next tech steps are going to continue to get harder), it's going to take awhile - like near the end of the decade for parity. Something like 2028 or thereabouts.

Edit: I should also state that given current trends packaging technology may become as if not more important an area of competition between fabs than pure process. And Intel, TSMC, Samsung all have different tech here to compete with one another.
 
Last edited:
intel-go-pc-justin-long.jpg

How much did Justin Long sell himself out for?

Truth be told in real life, he can't even turn on a computer.
 
I hope Apple hires a really cool actor like Tom Holland and make a new series of Mac & PC ads...

Mac: Hello, I'm a new Mac...

PC: And I'm a... Wait a second, who are you? Where's the other guy???

Mac: I'm the new Mac with the M1 Processor... Old Mac is spending some quality time with his buddies at Intel...

PC: So are you supposed to be better than him?

Mac: Yeap...

PC: Finally, someone better than him! Oh wait, that means I'm number three now!!!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: adib and KeithBN
I hope Apple hires a really cool actor like Tom Holland and make a new series of Mac & PC ads...

Mac: Hello, I'm a new Mac...

PC: And I'm a... Wait a second, who are you? Where's the other guy???

Mac: I'm the new Mac with the M1 Processor... Old Mac is spending some quality time with his buddies at Intel...

PC: So are you supposed to be better than him?

Mac: Yeap...

PC: Finally, someone better than him! Oh wait, that means I'm number three now!!!
Nah. They’ve been there and done that.
It almost would’ve been funny to see Intel nab Justin Long had Sprint not already nabbed the Verizon guy. This is unoriginal.
I really don’t blame him either; they are actors; they’ll do or say anything for money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adib and KeithBN
Regarding Justin Long, didn't like him then and certainly don't like him now. He is very offensive with his comedy. However, I do support fully Intel in its campaign against M1 because as always, just like PowerPC back in the days, Apple lies about its true performance. I stand with Intel on this one, but vehemently hate Justin Long.
Source please?

Regarding ASi/M1 performance Apple has been accused of being extremely vague and using unlabeled, “Bezos graphs”, but from what I’ve seen so far their claims have been confirmed by most reviewers.

Also, during the PowerPC days, my understanding – and experience! – was that they were at times right, with their “MHz Myth”, and other times would just ignore raw performance altogether, as PowerPC/IBM/Motorola and x86/Intel/AMD kept leapfrogging each other constantly.

I foresee that if Intel does manage to get itself out of the gutter and AMD doesn’t lose out to ARM chip designers/manufacturers as well in case those ever match Apple’s designs, we will eventually reach such a point againin the future (say, 5-10 years from now), but for now it’s safe to assume that much like they did with the OG iPhone before, Apple has just secured a 5-year technological advantage.

What Apple critics seem to forget is that the M1, a chip barely beefier than those found on *iPads*, is being favourably compared to desktop- and server-grade hardware. I know that performance doesn’t scale linearly, but it’s patently obvious that if you stick a serious cooling block to an ASi chip and power it with a regular desktop PSU (and not that ridiculous thing found inside the Mac Mini, which, incidentally and funnily enough, is indeed overkill for the M1 itself and was just kept to ensure that said new SKU and the parts inside were as similar to the Intel ones as possible), you will get insane levels of performance at an absurdly low price.

What’s more: Apple could likely get away with overclocking – or just regularly clocking it, what do I know? – the crap out of an M1, but we all know that is *not* what they will be doing. An M1X/M2 in an iMac or mini Mac Pro will likely put any Threadripper or reheated Intel 14 nm+++++++++++++++++++ CPU to shame in the real world, professional market, even if you can theoretically eke out more performance out of the latter by liquid cooling them and/or selling your firstborn just to be able to afford them.
 
Last edited:
Chip making needs to rely much less on Taiwan. Who cares about the anti-M1 ads. Intel making chips for Apple can be good news.
Except it hasn't been good for Apple (nor anyone else) for the past 5 years. Intel has continually missed deadlines and fallen behind the pace of the industry. Apple has pushed ahead thanks to more reliable partners like TSMC. And on top of that, Intel shows a failure to get die sizes down to where they should be, much less than the 3nm that Apple is looking for. Why should Apple trust that Intel will deliver on long term promises?
 
  • Like
Reactions: KeithBN
I hope Intel does get into the foundry business. If they dropped out, the US would have no native chipmakers and would be totally dependent on the volatile region of Asia-Pacific.

That is not true at all. There are many US native chipmakers, or chipmakers with plants in the U.S. Infineon, ON, Rohm, Cree, Skywater, Skyworks, Sensera, IMT, Analog Devices, GlobalFoundries (formerly the fab divisions of IBM and AMD), Micron, Texas Instruments, NXP (formerly Motorola’s fabs), etc.
 
That is not true at all. There are many US native chipmakers, or chipmakers with plants in the U.S. Infineon, ON, Rohm, Cree, Skywater, Skyworks, Sensera, IMT, Analog Devices, GlobalFoundries (formerly the fab divisions of IBM and AMD), Micron, Texas Instruments, NXP (formerly Motorola’s fabs), etc.
That’s all well and good but are they on the same level of – dare I say it, considering the tone of this thread – Intel? Whether in scale or in process nodes?
 
That’s all well and good but are they on the same level of – dare I say it, considering the tone of this thread – Intel? Whether in scale or in process nodes?
Nobody is. But globalfoundries is a very big deal. Process node-wise, they are in the neighborhood of Intel. And they have a lot of talent, IP, and history.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mainyehc
Typical of a large corporation. Intel’s left hand doesn’t know what’s its right hand is doing.
Or, they are disorganized and don’t have a good perspective of their future. Those ads could be a desperate move on their part. Specially when the ads make little sense.
 
Not necessarily bad news if true, but hasn’t TSMC surpassed Intel on die sizes? IIRC, Intel has been having trouble with shrinking each new architecture, which has been causing delays which is the large reason why Apple decided to move to their own silicon. They probably see the move to ARM in the consumer market and don’t have anything to compete with in that space, so they are looking at ways to stay relevant and relatively profitable.
 
It's important to remember that when companies are competing, they're not necessarily "enemies." One division of a company can be competing with another company's similar division, and yet two different divisions of both companies are working together tightly.

Another big example is Samsung; Samsung definitely competes with Apple when it comes to the phones themselves, yet Apple buys a crapton of display panels and other parts from Samsung to make their phones!

Companies work together and compete at the same time constantly, it's not weird and it's rare that they "hate each other" for lack of a better term.
Finally... a person that understands business.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.