Intel Delays 7-Nanometer Chips Until Late 2022 or Early 2023

[beanbaguk]

I'm not exactly happy with Apple switching to ARM entirely as it'll limit what can be done on my future MacBook, but this is exactly why Apple have taken this approach and I understand it.

Intel have shot themselves in the foot a thousand times as a result of this.

I am however curious why AMD was not considered. Their Ryzen platform is phenomenal! I've just set up a Plex server with a Ryzen 5 3600 and it rips through multiple 4K encoding streams with ease.

 

[Azrael9]

Apple could see where this was going with Intel.

And paved the road to AS.

Azrael.
[automerge]1595584289[/automerge]

I'm not exactly happy with Apple switching to ARM entirely as it'll limit what can be done on my future MacBook, but this is exactly why Apple have taken this approach and I understand it.

Intel have shot themselves in the foot a thousand times as a result of this.

I am however curious why AMD was not considered. Their Ryzen platform is phenomenal! I've just set up a Plex server with a Ryzen 5 3600 and it rips through multiple 4K encoding streams with ease.

Apple want control over their own destiny.

AMD had similar problems with delivering with GPUs. We still haven't got that high end gpu from them yet. (See Sep: and possibly the fall release of RDNA2.)

They're recent caught up with Intel and passed them in some ways. It's good if you're on the pc side and want choice.

But I'm sure Apple want more performance and thermal efficiency.

On both counts, Apple has demonstrated that with phones and pads.

We'll see what AS brings to Apple Mac computers.

Azrael.

 

[M3gatron]

It will be much sooner than end of 2021. I'm designing an extremely large (reticle sized) high performance CPU on TSMC 5nm now so the defect density has to production ready or we won't yield.

I'm not talking about when TSMC will launch their 5nm high performance node but when we will see products using processors build on 5nm high performance node.
I mean, I'm sure AMD's 5nm CPUs are way past the design phase by now.
[automerge]1595585051[/automerge]

Apple want control over their own destiny.

Yeah and in control of their own fail.

AMD had similar problems with delivering with GPUs. We still haven't got that high end gpu from them yet. (See Sep: and possibly the fall release of RDNA2.)

I mean is Apple obligated to use AMD GPUs? In the end it's CPUs we are talking here and AMD has delivered beautifully on this front in the last few years. Their execution has been impeccable.

They're recent caught up with Intel and passed them in some ways. It's good if you're on the pc side and want choice.

They caught up with Intel in the most important performance metrics and surpassed them on a few fronts.
The newly announced 64 Core Thredripper Pro is leagues above the 28 core Xeon Apple uses in their Mac pro.
Also looking at the next gen Consoles, AMD can without a doubt also design very fast SOCs. We are taking about high desktop performance.

But I'm sure Apple want more performance and thermal efficiency.

AMD's CPUs are now both faster and way more efficient than Intel's.
The 8 core 25W Renoir APU is as fast or faster than Intel's 54W i9, in case you missed it.
AMD's iGPUs are also way faster in general.

 

[Massimo1926]

You know what Intel? Don’t bother anymore...

 

[clive27]

I'm not talking about when TSMC will launch their 5nm high performance node but when we will see products using processors build on 5nm high performance node.
I mean, I'm sure AMD's 5nm CPUs are way past the design phase by now.
[automerge]1595585051[/automerge]


Yeah and in control of their own fail.



I mean is Apple obligated to use AMD GPUs? In the end it's CPUs we are talking here and AMD has delivered beautifully on this front in the last few years. Their execution has been impeccable.



They caught up with Intel in the most important performance metrics and surpassed them on a few fronts.
The newly announced 64 Core Thredripper Pro is leagues above the 28 core Xeon Apple uses in their Mac pro.
Also looking at the next gen Consoles, AMD can without a doubt also design very fast SOCs. We are taking about high desktop performance.


AMD's CPUs are now both faster and way more efficient than Intel's.
The 8 core 25W Renoir APU is as fast or faster than Intel's 54W i9, in case you missed it.
AMD's iGPUs are also way faster in general.

Since when was Apple famous for its own failures? I know they failed to develop a few hardware, but they have been doing amazing with their processor developments. Why wouldn't they utilize their successes on that part?

I agree AMD has been doing great. They came up with a couple of amazing processors, but that doesn't mean they will continuously do that for the next decades. For the most part of the last decade, they didn't. They don't have the track records.

For Apple, you can't just switch the processor to another company and plug it into the board. They need to build their board around the processor and develop kernel and OS to it. It' whole billion-dollar company effort. Other than Apple, it's a whole industry effort to support new processors. Former Intel engineer said the Apple found more processor bugs than the Intel itself did. That shows how deep down they go to integrate the processors. You wouldn't want to start using the AMD just because it's now faster than Intel. Every processor is different and switching a processor may introduce bugs down the line.

If I were to build a desktop now, I'd choose 3950x, but I think Apple made a right decision to switch to their own processors instead of AMD. They have something exciting in their sleeves. It's something I didn't think Mr. Cook had enough guts to do.

 

[Serrafemme]

This IS bad for Intel but remember the hundred of trillions of Windows users that will continue to support them inside their business hardware and won’t really blink at Apple Silicon because they’re inside a *gasp* Mac. BUT! When the benchmarks come in and the throngs are screaming out for Boot Camp support, Tim will just look down upon them in disdain and say, “No...” It will be a beautiful Day of Reckoning!

 

[bernstein]

Apple looks smart switching to ARM

Short term, yes. Long term RISC-V would have been a far better play.

Almost no-one will believe this, but in a decade (or two) RISC-V will be everywhere and ARM as dead as MIPS. If intel get's it's manufacturing **** together, they will still have a huge play in servers, workstations and maybe thinclients & laptops.

 

[KPOM]

I'm not exactly happy with Apple switching to ARM entirely as it'll limit what can be done on my future MacBook, but this is exactly why Apple have taken this approach and I understand it.

Intel have shot themselves in the foot a thousand times as a result of this.

I am however curious why AMD was not considered. Their Ryzen platform is phenomenal! I've just set up a Plex server with a Ryzen 5 3600 and it rips through multiple 4K encoding streams with ease.

Apple wants tighter integration and wouldn’t be able to produce a system ok a chip if it used an AMD CPU. AMD can’t license x86_64 to Apple to let them design their own SoC because of the cross license restrictions with Intel (nor can Intel for the same reasons).

 

[MevetS]

oh that's ok, there's 1000 picometers down there under that last nanometer.

You beat me to it!

 

[wood1208]

Now you know why Apple makes right decision to move away from Intel and control it's own destiny. Don't ever question Apple why it does anything unless you are super smart than Apple but you are not.

 

[Falhófnir]

Assuming TSMC's 5 nm is roughly equivalent to Intel's 7 nm, that means TSMC will be a full 2 years ahead of them by 2022, assuming Intel actually hits that claimed target date.

Is that rule of thumb even true any more? I seem to remember, though can't find it again now, by one account Cannon Lake (and presumably Ice Lake too) is basically Kaby Lake shrunk to a ~10nm process, with little if any density increase over 14nm at all. Intel just wanted to get something out there they could brand as 10nm, but it bears very little resemblance to their original plans.

 

[leman]

I am however curious why AMD was not considered. Their Ryzen platform is phenomenal! I've just set up a Plex server with a Ryzen 5 3600 and it rips through multiple 4K encoding streams with ease.

AMD CPUs are currently more efficient (most likely because of process improvements). So they don't have to burn a hole in your mainboard to deliver good performance, unlike Intel. In terms of absolute per-core performance however, AMD is not any better than Intel. In fact, Zen 2 is highly praised because it is the first time in years where AMD managed to catch up to Intel.

Apple on the other has an architecture that beats anything AMD or Intel has to offer in terms of instruction throughput. Their mobile phone chips, consuming few watts of power, match the per-core performance of state-of-the art desktop CPUs. I suppose this is one of the reasons why Apple didn't want to use AMD CPUs — because Apple CPUs are simply better.
[automerge]1595592369[/automerge]

Is that rule of thumb even true any more? I seem to remember, though can't find it again now, by one account Cannon Lake (and presumably Ice Lake too) is basically Kaby Lake shrunk to a ~10nm process, with little if any density increase over 14nm at all. Intel just wanted to get something out there they could brand as 10nm, but it bears very little resemblance to their original plans.

Ice Lake is a tweaked micro-architecture (wider back-end, more cache etc.). At the same time, it barely offers any IPC improvement over Coffee Lake and it doesn't really seem to run any cooler. Something about Intel's 10nm process simply isn't working.

 

[macduke]

I just hope this doesn’t make AMD complacent. They need to keep pounding away because they’ve been killing it. AMD is going to be the driving force now behind the PC competition with Apple and will help push them to new heights as Apple strives to keep a healthy lead like they have on mobile.

 

[DoM-i-NiC]

LOL! I can’t even count the plank lengths there would be in a picometer...

When you do count the Planck lengths, you will have "Max"xed out!!!😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣

 

[ct2k7]

Good grief there are a lot of tech illiterate people here.

 

[hagjohn]

Intel got caught with their pants down after coasting for years without any real competition and now when they need to push it, they can't.
[automerge]1595594727[/automerge]

Their architecture is top notch. The only reason that AMD has been able to catch up (and overtake in some areas) is TSMC's superior process node. I bet the upcoming Intel 10nm Cores will clobber AMD 7nm in per-core performance.

I can't disagree more. AMD is certainly on the right track. They highly competitive in gaming and blowing it out of the water in multi-threaded situations. AMD just need to kick it up a notch for drivers/software.

 

[EugW]

I just hope this doesn’t make AMD complacent. They need to keep pounding away because they’ve been killing it. AMD is going to be the driving force now behind the PC competition with Apple and will help push them to new heights as Apple strives to keep a healthy lead like they have on mobile.

I can't disagree more. AMD is certainly on the right track. They highly competitive in gaming and blowing it out of the water in multi-threaded situations. AMD just need to kick it up a notch for drivers/software.

AMD still has a significant problem in mobile chips, and most computer sales these days are mobile. And yes, their drivers etc. need work.

So, AMD still has a long ways to go IMO.

 

[Manzanito]

This IS bad for Intel but remember the hundred of trillions of Windows users that will continue to support them inside their business hardware and won’t really blink at Apple Silicon because they’re inside a *gasp* Mac. BUT! When the benchmarks come in and the throngs are screaming out for Boot Camp support, Tim will just look down upon them in disdain and say, “No...” It will be a beautiful Day of Reckoning!

It would be beyond idiotic not offering bootcamp support if possible. And I’ve never bothered to install windows on any of my macs.

 

[leman]

Their architecture is top notch. The only reason that AMD has been able to catch up (and overtake in some areas) is

Their architecture is largely unchanged in the last 14 years and is still basically an evolution of a CPU developed in 1995. The P6 microarchitecture is indeed amazing, as it has gained Intel an uncontested first place in performance-oriented consumer CPUs for over twenty years. But it seems that is has reached it's limit. For the last couple of years, Intel has been re-releasing the same chip with various tweaks to its turbo boost profile. Which is why we now have a nominal 45W TDP Cpus that only show performance improvements when run at 60TDP, and that will happily consume over 100W for modest gains if you let them.

I agree with you that AMD — in contrast to the current public perception — is not doing that much better. They only now managed to catch up with the per-core performance to Intel, and they are doing better in multi-core setups mainly because of better process.

Apple currently has a better architecture than either Intel or AMD. The question is for how long and how well it scales.

 

[EugW]

It would be beyond idiotic not offering bootcamp support if possible. And I’ve never bothered to install windows on any of my macs.

I'd be surprised if more than 1% of Mac users used Boot Camp on a regular basis. Personally I think this is almost a non-issue in the greater scheme of Apple things.

 

[Glideslope]

It would be beyond idiotic not offering bootcamp support if possible. And I’ve never bothered to install windows on any of my macs.

My understanding from Craig's interview was that BootCamp will not exist in Apple Silicon Machines. Full stop. Period. All Windows needs will be met through emulation software. He was cagey as to what was coming. Be it a new design or modified existing emulation software.
[automerge]1595596830[/automerge]

I'd be surprised if more than 1% of Mac users used Boot Camp on a regular basis. Personally I think this is almost a non-issue in the greater scheme of Apple things.

I'll up you a full percent to 2%.

 

[EugW]

My understanding from Craig's interview was that BootCamp will not exist in Apple Silicon Machines. Full stop. Period. All Windows needs will be met through emulation software. He was cagey as to what was coming. Be it a new design or modified existing emulation software.

Yes, there will be no Boot Camp for obvious reasons.

Also, current emulation software will not work through Rosetta 2 either.

The emulation software will have to be updated. I am not a programmer, but my expectation is that is a non-trivial task and thus will probably take a while.

 

[BaltimoreMediaBlog]

I'd be surprised if more than 1% of Mac users used Boot Camp on a regular basis. Personally I think this is almost a non-issue in the greater scheme of Apple things.

Companies make decisions based on compatibility, flexibility and adaptability often. Whether you need Boot Camp or not, having it is a tremendous plus to those customers. Steve Jobs certainly did not think it was a non-issue. He knew it could be a sales booster even if he didn't make it Job One.

 

[XNorth]

Buh-bye Intel. Can't wait for that cool, silent and fast MacBook Pro with silicon.

 

[Ursadorable]

Tiny 7nm die, with security holes big enough to drive a mac truck through. Nice!