I don't follow the industry, so no, but you are saying that Intel cannot buy the components to build a 5nm fab and then make Apple 5nm SoCs using plans provided to them by Apple?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Intel CEO Expands on Desire to Make Apple Silicon Chips, Touts 'Competitive Fun' With Apple
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't follow the industry, so no, but you are saying that Intel cannot buy the components to build a 5nm fab and then make Apple 5nm SoCs using plans provided to them by Apple?
I dunno. I feel like that's what American capitalism is all about. If competitors make better stuff for more money, then that's where to go
Last edited:
The failure of Intel is not because they no longer can design great chips. It’s because they can no longer catch up on manufacturing chips on more and more advanced lithography. That’s exactly what a foundry need to succeed, and they don’t have it.
This would be interesting if Intel actually was competing with Apple, but this is like Goodyear saying they enjoy competing with Toyota. Goodyear makes a part, Toyota makes cars. Apple doesn't sell the part that Intel makes. Intel is trying to pretend their competition isn't AMD who is destroying them currently.
From what I understand, frequency scaling is a function of the CPU micro-architecture.
Isn't it that with smaller nodes, it is easier to go to higher frequency with the same or lower power consumptions compared to larger nodes, since less power is needed to push the electrons?
It's quite simple. Regular people have heard of Intel but they haven't heard of M1 or Apple Silicone or whatever and it will take a lot of time for Apple to bring people up to speed. So Intel acting quick by using it's flagship brand name in CPU game to paint Apple's transition to in-house chip design as something inferior. They can try. Intel fears Apple because Apple is great at marketing and knows how to get the message across unlike AMD. That's why Intel doesn't care about competing with AMD cause only place where AMD is eating Intel's pie are desktop PCs. AMD is nowhere near close to snatch laptop or server cakes but Apple could expand it's market share in laptop market if things go right with their chips and more importantly operating system. Intel has responded to M1 by introducing the fastest (and hottest) single core performance to date in a laptop. That's good enough for apps that like to rely on single core punch such as Photoshop, Office and many other vanilla apps.
How about intel making sure that their own roadmap is on track? I mean intel's problem is that they themselves are behind in their own roadmap. How can they "offer" their foundries, which are behind, to others demanding more advance processes?
Intel may be more than a bit worried that other manufacturers — Microsoft comes to mind — will see the big success of the M1 computers, and do the same thing themselves.
The "Rocket Lake" is actually kind of cool for gamers, where power consumption doesn't matter so much and single core performance is important. That thing clocks up to 5.3 GHz, whereas the latest Zen 3 Ryzens on TSMC 7nm top out at 4.x. 14nm's hot last hurray.
TSMC 5nm is currently used for low-power CPUs for mobile devices, and has limited frequency scaling. Not Intel's primary market.
It makes no sense to say a process node has “limited frequency scaling.” That’s not a thing.
Using my first MacRumors comment to just say...
“I get to understand you been livin' in [14nm++++++++],
But walk right in, [Intel], sit right down.
I will keep on lovin' you; I play the clown.
But bend down low, [Intel], let me tell you what I know;
Let me tell you, baby! Let me tell ya -
Knock on [Intel]! Just won’t let ya in!”
Tell me you have a golden parachute without telling me you have a golden parachute.
Yep. Smaller nodes allow smaller transistors (which have less gate capacitance which makes them easier to charge and discharge), and less distance between transistors (which decreases wire capacitance and resistance).
Clock frequency is determined by how many transistors (and how much wire) you need in the longest path between any two state elements.
Last edited:
I'm sure in 2000 Sony was feeling very well about their music player offerings before the iPod came out, and Nokia was kicking butt in 2006, a year before the iPhone. It won't be the case in this situation, but there are plenty of examples of dominate companies reacting too slowly and quickly losing the lead.Is it normal for sinking ships to increase YoY revenue and generate billions in profits and free cash flow?
- Full-year revenue set an all-time Intel record of $77.9 billion, up 8 percent YoY.
- In 2020, Intel generated a record $35.4 billion cash from operations and $21.1 billion of free cash flow (FCF) and returned $19.8 billion to shareholders.
Right now, this is just Apple. But, Microsoft is also playing around with ARM and I'm pretty sure the ads were more to try and keep Microsoft from throwing more money at Qualcomm and others in the ARM ecosystem.
The biggest backpedal ever. Now that they've realized they could potentially benefit from Apple Silicon they're changing their tune. Suck it Intel, your reign is over.
Thats is not how the Foundry Market works, read the reply cmaier gave you.
You may also be glad ( or not ) to know China sinked $120+ Billion already and hasn't got anywhere with Foundries. The moat around leading edge manufacturing is much bigger than most people understand.
Last edited:
Translation: We want to manufacture their M1 chips so we can learn what kind of voodoo magic they are doing.
When your response to CPU competition is that you’ll produce the chips from your competitor, it means that you don’t have anything better than them. And I’m not a fan of nowadays’ Apple (I hate iOS almost the same as Android), but I never liked it when CISC Intel CPUs seemed to win the CISC-RISC battle while being inferior. Time is showing that RISC is better.
I think Intel is not afraid of MacOS, but of Windows ARM becoming successful. That would be the problem for them (Imagine all PC laptop vendors realize Windows ARM offers more performance per watt... think what consequences this could have for Intel...)
