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.
TSMC Ramps Up Production of 7nm Chips Ahead of 2018 iPhones, Invests $25 Billion to Move to 5nm by 2020
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
5nm? slightly faster (though probably not noticeable in most tasks) with slightly more energy efficiency (though probably packaged with less battery to deliver "the same great battery life" in the name of "thinner").
And one step closer to the theoretical minimum, at which point this game of a smaller nm number can no longer be played and CPU spin will have to become about something else. The literature on the topic implies 4nm or maybe 3nm is the cap, with bias toward 4nm.
One supplier?
- Hype of parts shortages at launch to feed the annual frenzy of trying to be "first"... and then just trying to get one as if they will remain scarce for 6 months (but not really 6- that's just implied, as everyone who wants one should be able to give Apple money before Santa comes down the chimney).
- A variety of "all eggs in one basket" scenarios.
Last edited:
And Intel is still struggling with 10nm.
Intels 10nm chips are large high performance chips for different instructions with a more complicated architecture. ARM is not large and most certainly not difficult to make for chip makers
Lol. They’ve been saying since 90nm that we are near the quantum limit.
[doublepost=1529677223][/doublepost]
One can get much smaller than 4nm by changing the geometry of the device. Years ago I worked on HBT devices, where the effective length is the laminar thickness of the base, not the lateral width. Minimal quantum effects so long as the base area is large enough. The problem, of course, is that these devices are much bigger than fets, even though they have a much faster Ft.
I'm curious as to why TSMC hasn't been acquired by Apple. Seems like a great way to bring everything in house, reduce costs and protect the technology from competitors.
All great but why have batteries not much improved? I hope when my godson is a teen he will be laugh about three things: mobile data caps, bulky VR devices and half days of battery life
And less and less desire for the socket, too, as time marches on and wireless becomes the norm.7nm chips but no space for a headphone jack socket...!?
7nm TSMC, Samsung, or GlobalFoundries are more or less what Intel calls 10nm.
I guess 5nm TSMC would be more or less what Intel would call 7nm.
GlobalFoundries 22FDX would compete against 14nm FinFET (with different applications), so I guess 12FDX will similarly go against 7nm FinFET (non-Intel).
I guess 5nm TSMC would be more or less what Intel would call 7nm.
GlobalFoundries 22FDX would compete against 14nm FinFET (with different applications), so I guess 12FDX will similarly go against 7nm FinFET (non-Intel).
Meanwhile Doritos Ramps Up Production of Emulsified Nacho Chips Ahead of 2018 , Invests $25 Billion to Move to Prosthetic Cool Ranch by 2020
Intels 10nm chips are large high performance chips for different instructions with a more complicated architecture. ARM is not large and most certainly not difficult to make for chip makers
Yes, that is why the "full scale scale and power" part. Intel is supposed to be way ahead.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I am not an expert here (and did not stay in a Holiday Inn last night) but the literature on this topic almost universally talks to about 4nm being the ceiling (floor?) for this race. It does not offer changing geometry as a solution to this problem. As my limited knowledge of this particular topic perceived, below about 4nm and there is "bleed" where binary states are lost and/or flowing electrons jump lanes, either of which results in states that will make accurate computing fail.
My (perhaps poor analogy) would be worrying about the size of on and off light switches, so companies keep shrinking and shrinking them. What used to work with a finger tip flipping a plastic "handle" becomes too small for fingers anymore. At some point, we're bending paper clips to insert a point into a hole like we may do to pop a sim card holder out of a phone. And then it gets smaller than that and we're needing something thinner than a paper clip to toggle a light on and off. And then smaller. And then smaller still. Eventually, the size is reduced down so small, you no longer have a reliable way to turn that light on (binary 1) or off (0) without accidentally turning other lights on and off.
Again, perhaps very poor analogy- but the concept remains the same (as perceived by me). The literature on the topic says that size shrinks to this maximum (minimum) such that reliability of state is in jeopardy. Anyone who knows anything about programming knows that if some rouge program flips some 0s to 1s in some other program's code, that other program is going to probably crash/fail/exhibit wonky behaviors. I read the literature on this topic like below about 4nm and this kind of thing is expected... though I thought I saw something about 3nm possibly being the max (min) instead of 4nm. I've seen nothing in support of anything below 3nm being possible.
Based on all that I've seen on this topic, I have zero expectations for 2nm, 1nm and then fractions of 1nm being possible. For example, I don't foresee rumors of the A18 chip in the iPhone XVs being spun as using the new 0.032nm process. Instead- from what I think I read on this topic- the peak at about 3-4nm is followed by "more cores" as the one way forward. However, just as it is with desktops/laptops, there quickly comes a point where more cores somewhat peaks out too (in short, I'm doubting the iPhone XVs rolls out with the new 24-core A18). As with desktop/laptop cores, eventually you have the proposition of more cores vs. most of them sitting around with nothing to do- thus long after dual cores become a common thing, we're still not seeing 50-core or 500-core PCs.
But one more time: I'm no expert on this topic- just trying to share what I think I make out from reading up on this particular topic. I could be entirely misunderstanding the collective sources and/or maybe Pym particles are around the corner so that 4nm can be shrunk to .4nm to be shrunk to .04nm and so on (with full support of electrons perhaps shrunk to some kind of on/off quarks or similar to be shrunk to some kind of undiscovered fractional quark (or magic) or similar).
Last edited:
Intel's 10 nm process is will probably be roughly on par (in terms of density) with other manufacture's 7 nm processes. That said mass production on Intel's 10 nm process won't be coming until at least 2019 now. Also, not sure I understand the question about the GPU. Intel has integrated the GPU on the same chip since their sandy bridge chips in 2011 which was made on a 32 nm process. Apple A series chips (and their predecessors) have always had integrated graphics (all the way back to the original iPhone, which had a chip made using a 90 nm process).
Apple will be crippling any A12 gains by giving the iPhone the least amount of system RAM of all rival flagship Android smartphones. iPhone 3GB to many other smartphones sporting 6GB to 8GB of RAM. That's totally messed up on Apple's part. Almost no one will see the A12's edge over Qualcomm and Samsung processors in everyday use. Nowadays, social apps are being valued much higher than any hardware Apple can ever hope to offer. Qualcomm will never give in to Apple in terms of processor power, so it will be a very costly war costing Apple huge amounts of money for marginal gains.
The iPhone chips don't really need to get all that faster. It's the bloated OS code that needs improvement.
There will come a time in the not too distant future, certainly within many of our lifetimes (the younger of us) that worthwhile and significant CPU improvements will stop. It'll be all about the software then.
There will come a time in the not too distant future, certainly within many of our lifetimes (the younger of us) that worthwhile and significant CPU improvements will stop. It'll be all about the software then.
RE: "which is expected to be found in all three upcoming 2018 iPhones."
If AAPL we're to offer a 4th new iPhone in Sept, a 5" iPhone 8s Plus @ $699, that would be, IMO, their best-selling new iPhone, & it alone could trigger a new wave of enthusiasm in ALL of mobile.
Specifically, I'm saying the Dual Camera 5.5" iPhone Plus shrunk down to 5".
But just like BMW & Porsche, who decided a decade plus ago to transition away from Hydraulic-assist power steering to Electronic-assist power steering, it appears AAPL may be making almost as BIG of a Blunder.
Touch ID & the Hardware Home Button are excellent product attributes, & are strongly preferred by some ... AAPL would be wise NOT to throw ALL who desire them under the bus ... just look what has happened to BMW's once-loved 3-series sedan !
Does Tim Cook even get it ???
If AAPL we're to offer a 4th new iPhone in Sept, a 5" iPhone 8s Plus @ $699, that would be, IMO, their best-selling new iPhone, & it alone could trigger a new wave of enthusiasm in ALL of mobile.
Specifically, I'm saying the Dual Camera 5.5" iPhone Plus shrunk down to 5".
But just like BMW & Porsche, who decided a decade plus ago to transition away from Hydraulic-assist power steering to Electronic-assist power steering, it appears AAPL may be making almost as BIG of a Blunder.
Touch ID & the Hardware Home Button are excellent product attributes, & are strongly preferred by some ... AAPL would be wise NOT to throw ALL who desire them under the bus ... just look what has happened to BMW's once-loved 3-series sedan !
Does Tim Cook even get it ???
