SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Intel Says Process Tech to Lag Competitors Until Late 2021, Will Regain Lead with 5nm (archive)
It appears that 2020 and 2021 are going to be long years for Intel. CFO George Davis presented at the Morgan Stanley conference yesterday covering a wide range of topics, but noted that despite being "undoubtedly in the 10nm era," the company felt that it would not reach process parity with competitors until it produces the 7nm node at the tail end of 2021. Davis also said that Intel wouldn't regain process leadership until it produces the 5nm node at an unspecified date.
Davis commented that the company was "definitely in the 10nm era" with Ice Lake client chips and networking ASICs already shipping, along with the pending release of discrete GPUs and Ice Lake Xeons. Intel is also moving well along the path of inter-node development, which consists of "+" revisions to existing processes. Davis said the 10nm inter-node step provides a "step-function move" with the Tiger Lake chips based on the 10nm+ process as the company awaits its 7nm process.
However, Davis noted that in spite of the shipping products and pending "+" revisions to the 10nm process, its process node still lags behind competitors, stating:
"So we bring a lot of capability to the table for our customers, in addition to the CPU, and we feel like we're starting to see the acceleration on the process side that we have been talking about to get back to parity in the 7nm generation and regain leadership in the 5nm generation."
Previously:
Intel Launches Coffee Lake Refresh, Roadmap Leaks Showing No "10nm" Desktop Parts Until 2022
Intel's Jim Keller Promises That "Moore's Law" is Not Dead, Outlines 50x Improvement Plan
Intel Roadmap Shows Plans for "5nm", "3nm", "2nm", and "1.4nm" Process Nodes by 2029
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday March 05 2020, @03:30AM (2 children)
Your friend should definitely wait for Intel to catch up, or just get one of their current systems even if it costs more and uses more power and performs worse.
After all, if he's been a die-hard Intel fan for "decades", that means he must have been an Intel user during the P4/RAMBUS days, when an Intel system cost far more than a comparable AMD system and used way more power too because the P4 was such a power hog. If he was that blinded by corporate loyalty to not jump ship back then, why should he change now?
(Score: 2) by toddestan on Thursday March 05 2020, @04:23AM
The AMD's back then were faster and cheaper, but you were often saddled with crappy VIA chipsets and SDRAM. The Intel systems cost more, but you got something that was at least stable. I remember those days, the old Socket A systems never quite ran right (including AMD's own efforts at a chipset) until the end when nVidea jumped in with the nForce. And that was only really temporary, as the next nVidia chipsets for AMD's 64-bit offerings were terrible. I'd also call the power difference a wash - the 64-bit AMD chips ran cool, but the original Athlons that competed against the P4/Rambus systems ran crazy hot.
I remember back about 10-12 years ago when those later 32-bit PC's no longer had any real economic value, but were still good enough for someone to use, I'd fix up the P4 systems to give away, and get parts by scrapping the AMD systems because they just weren't worth dealing with. At least Windows 7 would run on a Pentium 4, if a bit sluggish, whereas getting anything past Windows XP to run on an Athlon XP (I see what you did there AMD...) was a bit of a crapshoot.
I ran AMD systems for years, but in 2012 I finally had enough and built my first Intel system. At this point I'm not sure whether it would be best to try rolling the dice on AMD or to just get another Intel system. Luckily for me the system I built in 2012, despite its age, should be good for a few more years so I can just wait it out.
(Score: 2) by Booga1 on Thursday March 05 2020, @06:28AM
You're correct, he did have a Pentium 4 system with Rambus RAM. I also had one, but we got them at the bargain basement price of free when the company he worked for went under during the dot-com collapse. (The 72 port switch with 3 gigabit back plane was fantastic for LAN parties.)
He's considering the change now because he keeps hearing about all the good reviews regarding AMD's latest updates to the Ryzen processor line. I built a Ryzen 1700X system two years ago for half the cost of his eight year old Intel rig. My machine outperforms his on every single metric except the video card and I know that bugs the crap outta him.
I even suggested he stick with Intel because it's what he's most familiar with, but the lure of AMD seems to be calling him. AMD has been playing their cards right if they're starting to sway hardcore Intel fans.