1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Ice Lake for Mainstream Delayed to 2020

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Sep 25, 2018.

  1. tunejunky

    tunejunky Master Guru

    Messages:
    881
    Likes Received:
    314
    GPU:
    RadeonVII gtx1080ti
    for all of the people hung up on ipc, Ryzen 2 will unquestionably be higher than anything Intel will be able to provide in the next two years.
    just the facts from revised earnings and outlook from Intel itself.

    the delay in 14nm production will be ironed out within the next six to ten months, leaving Intel all geared up for 14nm when AMD introduces 7nm to the market.

    and obtw, any lowering of density on Intel's 10nm process will create an inferior product vs. TSMC 7nm. right now, with the density of the 10nm unchanged, they are equivalent but if you neuter the 10nm then AMD will reign supreme everywhere it counts.
     
    Jagman likes this.
  2. tunejunky

    tunejunky Master Guru

    Messages:
    881
    Likes Received:
    314
    GPU:
    RadeonVII gtx1080ti
    good reasoning, but you forgot the marketplace.
    right now Intel is doing as you suggest with the low end chipsets.
    the smarter move is doing what Apple, AMD, and to a lesser extent Qualcomm have done; establish a partnership with the fab itself. and since all of the above design their own IC and/or have been in the fab business itself, their designs go to the strengths of the new process and front-loading their contract with capital investment is resulting in a lower cost per unit with the expense defrayed over several years. in other words, the money was well spent and is resulting in a lower cost per generation than has been experienced in the fab business.

    which is "freaking out" all other fabs without the deep pockets, partnerships, and technology. only Samsung is in a position that could be called favorable.
     
  3. xIcarus

    xIcarus Master Guru

    Messages:
    941
    Likes Received:
    90
    GPU:
    1080 Ti AORUS
    Sure, no ill intent in it. I just find it amusing when people exaggerate performance numbers and base their whole argument on that wrong assumption.

    About the single core performance, the aggregate difference is around 10% in any case, hwbench says 12%: http://hwbench.com/cpus/intel-core-i7-8700k-vs-amd-ryzen-7-2700x
    Just depends on the app you're using but they're really not far off from one another on average.
     
    tunejunky likes this.
  4. user1

    user1 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,384
    Likes Received:
    445
    GPU:
    hd 6870
    typically the cost comes down pretty fast, though these days the cost per transistor hasnt changed a whole lot( after the inital risk production),
    you still get other benefits for smaller chips, mainly lower power consumption, higher frequencies,density increases which allow for more transistors per chip , great example of how this can be a problem, the gv100 (815mm^2)is built on a 16nm variant that allows them to make very large chips, but nvidia would be lucky to get 1 fully functional chip per wafer, you cannot make a chip bigger feasibly, even on a 16nm variant which at this point is a mature process node. with 7nm nvidia could easily double the number of transistors (not that it would be cheap).
     

  5. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,730
    Likes Received:
    2,188
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    Then it means for this showcase there is tiny IPC difference. Intel has 9% clock advantage and 12% higher performance in this particular test set. So, IPC difference here is under 3%.
    In worst case scenario, AMD was sitting on their asses doing almost nothing and Zen2 will deliver 5% improved IPC, gaining tiny lead for this test set.
    And then they gain 10% clock from 7nm... matching intel's side in performance per core.
    It was always like that. That's why my 1st PC had 2MHz chip. People always want more. And old things reach level of toys. Today, arduino/rsPi are toys which blow out of water things of past.
    Arduino at tiny price does what big and expensive PLC did 20 years ago.
    New Raspberry Pi 3 costs 1/10th of what decent netbook does. And greatly outperforms anything with similar thermal envelope (power consumption) what came just a few years ago. People simply want more, that's what makes human.

    Amount of computational power in hands of mankind is bit crazy. Your home PC can deliver same results as supercomputer did in past. Where did those supercomputers of past got us?
    What are limits of those we have today? It's already a singularity. People just did not realize that, yet.
     
    Last edited: Sep 28, 2018
    xIcarus and tunejunky like this.

Share This Page