Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday July 25 2020, @03:07AM   Printer-friendly [Skip to comment(s)]
from the how-the-mighty-has-fallen-behind dept.

Intel's 7nm is Broken, Company Announces Delay Until 2022, 2023 (archive)

Intel announced today in its Q2 2020 earnings release that it has now delayed the rollout of its 7nm CPUs by six months relative to its previously-planned release date, undoubtedly resulting in wide-ranging delays to the company's roadmaps. Intel's press release also says that yields for its 7nm process are now twelve months behind the company's internal targets, meaning the company isn't currently on track to produce its 7nm process in an economically viable way. The company now says its 7nm CPUs will not debut on the market until late 2022 or early 2023.

[...] On the earnings call, Intel CEO Bob Swan said the company had identified a "defect mode" in its 7nm process that caused yield degradation issues. As a result, Intel has invested in "contingency plans," which Swan later defined as including using third-party foundries. The company will also use external third-party foundries for its forthcoming 7nm Ponte Vecchio GPUs, the company's first graphics chips. Ponte Vecchio comes as a chiplet-based design, and Swan clarified that production for some of the chiplets (tiles) will be outsourced to third parties. Swan noted the GPUs will come in late 2021 or early 2022, portending a delay beyond the original schedule for a 2021 launch in the exascale Aurora supercomputer.

[...] Intel's first 10nm desktop CPUs, Alder Lake, will arrive in the second half of 2021.

See also: Intel Reports Q2 2020 Earnings: Data Center Sales Fuel Another Record Quarter
Intel 7nm Delayed By 6 Months; Company to Take "Pragmatic" Approach in Using Third-Party Fabs
Intel Roadmap Update: Alder Lake In H2'21, Ice Lake-SP Late This Year


Original Submission

Related Stories

Intel Faces Class-Action Lawsuit Over "7nm" Delays 36 comments

Intel facing class-action lawsuit over 7nm delay

Intel's revenue was up 20 percent in its Q2 2020 earnings report, but its 7nm processors have been delayed by at least six months because production has fallen a year behind. The subsequent decline in share price resulted in AMD's stock jumping above its rival's for the first time in around 15 years.

On Friday, the Hagens Berman law firm put out a call to Intel investors who suffered significant losses to contact the company for a possible class-action suit. It also seeks people who may be able to assist in its investigation of possible securities fraud.

"Beginning at the Company's 2019 annual investor conference, Intel continuously represented that it would start shipping its first 7nm chips in 2021. The news was well-received since the Company claimed the 7nm chip would deliver double the area efficiency of its 10nm chips. Moreover, in the wake of severe delays derailing its 10nm chips, Intel assuaged concerns by stating, "We've made time-to-market the priority," and repeatedly affirmed the 7nm chip's timetable," states Hagens Berman.

Also at Guru3D.

Previously: Intel Delays "7nm" Products by 6 Months
Intel Engineering Chief Out After 7nm Product Delays


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday July 25 2020, @03:24AM (1 child)

    by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Saturday July 25 2020, @03:24AM (#1026069) Journal
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2020, @05:08AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2020, @05:08AM (#1026085)

    Incompetence inside

  • (Score: 2) by RamiK on Saturday July 25 2020, @09:37AM (8 children)

    by RamiK (1813) on Saturday July 25 2020, @09:37AM (#1026120)

    Originally Intel was supposed to bring early production to high-volume 10nm between 2016-2018 and early production to high-volume 7nm between 2018 to 2020: https://www.tweaktown.com/news/41582/intel-to-hit-10nm-in-2016-with-7nm-cpus-arriving-in-2018/index.html [tweaktown.com]

    In actuality, Intel only entered early 10nm in 2018 (2 years behind), expecting high-volume 10nm by late 2021 (3 years behind), and early 7nm by 2022 (4 years behind) while "cheating" like TSMC with a big.Little style mixed nodes gluing where only some of the silicon is fabricated at the highest density. Only that, TSMC was doing full production mixed 7nm (N7 as they call it) since 2018, improved the 7nm density/frequencies(/performance/power) by 20-30% in 2019 (N7P) and made another 20-40% 7nm bump in 2020 (N7+) with AMD being the exemplary beneficiary as they marched through all these incremental improvements from being significantly behind Intel and Nvidia to catching up and even coming a bit ahead of the curve.

    And while all of this is (not) happening, Speculative Execution countermeasures and AVX512 follies have been chipping away at what little fab optimization they still managed to accomplish...

    TL;DR; they've been 6 month behind schedule for the better part of the 2010s.

    --
    compiling...
    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Saturday July 25 2020, @10:26AM (6 children)

      by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Saturday July 25 2020, @10:26AM (#1026126) Journal

      "cheating" like TSMC with a big.Little style mixed nodes gluing where only some of the silicon is fabricated at the highest density

      If the "cheating" works, good for them.

      Lakefield (which put "10nm" cores on top of a "22nm" die) was a mess but they are going to get another chance at big.LITTLE with Alder Lake, allowing them to market up to a fake 16-core (8 big, 8 small).

      I think something like 8+32 would be better (40 cores around the size of 16 big cores), along with dropping the graphics to the minimum number of execution units necessary.

      Intel is still pulling in a ton of revenue while putting out lackluster CPUs. They have more financial horsepower to fall back on if they need to. It will be interesting to see what they do if AMD pulls ahead in single-threaded performance with Zen 3.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday July 25 2020, @11:55AM

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Saturday July 25 2020, @11:55AM (#1026138)

        I suspect this is 2006 all over again, Intel plays resting hare and lets the AMD tortoise get a little bit ahead for a little while - deflects accusations of monopoly abuse, gets to use other people's R&D insights for free, etc. then opens up the cash hoard and blasts ahead again.

        What would be more interesting is if Intel has re-directed their traditional die-shrink R&D into something that might make them competitive with ARM - I doubt that is happening, but it's a much more threatening competition front for them than AMD.

        --
        John Galt is a selfish crybaby [huffpost.com].
      • (Score: 2) by RamiK on Saturday July 25 2020, @01:46PM (4 children)

        by RamiK (1813) on Saturday July 25 2020, @01:46PM (#1026152)

        It will be interesting to see what they do if AMD pulls ahead in single-threaded performance with Zen 3.

        Intel's single-threaded advantage is so tiny and limited to specific workloads and chips while coming at such a high dollars and power cost that I just couldn't care less.

        I think something like 8+32 would be better (40 cores around the size of 16 big cores), along with dropping the graphics to the minimum number of execution units necessary.

        I doubt there's demand for this sort of build server configuration that can't be adequately met by AMD or even ARM at a lower price point.

        --
        compiling...
        • (Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday July 25 2020, @02:22PM (3 children)

          by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Saturday July 25 2020, @02:22PM (#1026161) Journal

          Intel's single-threaded advantage is so tiny and limited to specific workloads and chips while coming at such a high dollars and power cost that I just couldn't care less.

          As long as Intel's chips remain the top gaming chips, AMD loses on potential design wins and customers. Zen 3 is AMD's chance to turn that around and completely dominate for months. Intel may hang onto it by backporting architectural IPC improvements to "14nm" Rocket Lake while keeping clock speeds high. We'll know within a few months.

          I doubt there's demand for this sort of build server configuration that can't be adequately met by AMD or even ARM at a lower price point.

          I'm proposing 8+32 for consumer desktop chips. Workstation chips already have more cores (~28 big cores, or 64 from AMD). 8 big cores takes care of most single-threaded tasks and gaming, since next-gen consoles will have 8 cores, and the small cores can handle any well parallelized task, like video editing, 7zip, or whatever.

          Intel should also put out something like a 128-core or 256-core Atom chip for servers, using chiplets if necessary. Each Atom core takes up about 1/4 the die area of a regular core, but has more than 1/4 the performance.

          Intel already dabbled in high core count Atom chips... the cancelled Xeon Phi line. But those had AVX-512, which could be removed, and Atom cores are faster than they used to be (each core will match or exceed Ivy Bridge core performance in a generation or two).

          I'm just spitballing ideas here. The world doesn't really need Intel to exist for much longer, and AMD can't rest on its laurels since it is increasingly competing with ARM designs (from supercomputers to servers to laptops).

          --
          [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
          • (Score: 2) by RamiK on Saturday July 25 2020, @03:33PM (2 children)

            by RamiK (1813) on Saturday July 25 2020, @03:33PM (#1026172)

            As long as Intel's chips remain the top gaming chips

            Considering a $200-300 CPU won't bottleneck a gaming build even paired with a $2000 GPU, I fail to see how anything but the price point determines the top gaming chips.

            I'm proposing 8+32 for consumer desktop chips...

            My definition of a consumer desktop is browsing, watching cat videos and word processing / spread sheeting so I fail to see how a 4+8 won't be more than enough. Well, that's as long as speculative execution won't have the x86 switch to real hardware threads which might very well happen... But I'd like to think we won't be using an x86 by then.

            --
            compiling...
            • (Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday July 25 2020, @11:44PM (1 child)

              by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Saturday July 25 2020, @11:44PM (#1026352) Journal

              AMD has regularly trailed Intel in single-threaded and gaming performance for about a decade (Zen 2 wins in IPC but can't clock as high. IPC doesn't scale linearly with clock speed, and Intel does better than AMD when it can get to ~5 GHz territory. Intel's monolithic CPUs also have lower memory latency.). I think you underestimate the significance of that, even if only from a marketing standpoint. It doesn't have to be that way anymore and Zen 3 might finally put AMD on top this year. If so, it would be a gut punch for Intel and would probably force them to lower their prices, which is good for consumers.

              According to leaks [wccftech.com], Intel's Alder Lake is supposed to top out at 8 big and 8 small cores. It might come out up to a few months before AMD's Zen 4 but will likely be crushed by Zen 4 when it does come out, as AMD is already putting out 16-core "mainstream" desktop CPUs and might bump that to 24 cores on Zen 4 [pcgamesn.com]. Alder Lake could be a "Bulldozer moment" for Intel if operating systems don't handle x86 big.LITTLE scheduling well. And it's on "10nm", so if there are lingering problems with the "10nm" process, they will be in full view.

              If AMD is putting out a "mainstream" 24-core version of the 16-core Ryzen 9 3950X by 2022, or even just a faster 16-core, an 8+32 heterogeneous CPU might have a chance of fending it off. But that is not what the leaks suggest. They point to configurations like 8+8, 6+0, 2+8, and now 6+8. Even an AMD 12-core could smoke those.

              ARM is competing against x86 harder than ever before, but x86 is probably here to stay for another 5-10 years if AMD keeps crushing it. One thing that I missed: remember AMD's K12 ARM CPU [wikipedia.org] that was supposed to come out around the same time as Zen but got shelved? A recently leaked roadmap [notebookcheck.net] has "K12 FFX" on it.

              --
              [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
              • (Score: 2) by RamiK on Sunday July 26 2020, @06:55AM

                by RamiK (1813) on Sunday July 26 2020, @06:55AM (#1026485)

                I think you underestimate the significance of that, even if only from a marketing standpoint.

                But that's the thing: There's always some synthetic benchmark you can win. But, the thing is, there's really no single threaded loads like Intel measures them in the real world. People playing fairly casual games have a browser open in the browser, possibly with a wiki page pushing ads via javascript and a p2p app throttling a few connections so that alone is a more than a couple hardware threads and easily over a dozen soft threads running in the background.

                (Zen 2 wins in IPC but can't clock as high. IPC doesn't scale linearly with clock speed, and Intel does better than AMD when it can get to ~5 GHz territory. Intel's monolithic CPUs also have lower memory latency.).

                Look even if any of this wasn't just pure synthetic results, it's still not the bottleneck. The margin for when the GPU stops being the issue and the CPU becomes the problem is HUGE. Just 3-4 years ago I've seen mining boards working 3-4 GPUs on full throttle using i3s and over a dozen using i5s.

                Really, it all just doesn't matter.

                --
                compiling...
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2020, @03:32PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2020, @03:32PM (#1026171)

      According to the earnings report an issue was identified which is affecting the yield. Resolving this will take 6 months. If we believe this, the schedule shouldn't be an unending delay like the 10nm node.

      Perhaps more interesting is the 3rd party foundries comment. If they are willing to release their next gen products to TSMC (or Samsung I suppose) they can get some next gen performance on the bleeding edge chips with the roadmap to move those designs back home in the future. But it isn't clear this is their strategy. They could be referring to their previously announced plans to send 14nm chips to third party sites. All that is stated is that Intel will be more aggressive on sending production to 3rd party fabs. This could be as simple as providing CPU designs to the sites which already are making non-CPU designs at the 14nm design.

      https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-increasing-use-of-third-party-fabs-for-non-cpu-production-14nm-chip-shortage [tomshardware.com]

  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2020, @11:50AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2020, @11:50AM (#1026137)

    Trouble shrinking IME? Maybe you should try using smaller Mossad agents. This is karma for wasting your resources on data exfiltration instead of features that help the chip buyer.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2020, @01:58PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2020, @01:58PM (#1026156)

    Intel caught breaking Moore's Law.

  • (Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2020, @08:32PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 25 2020, @08:32PM (#1026259)

    See subject: hello again you rotten bastards. I'm back and this time I'm here to stay.

    * I hate niggers more than ever and I'm not ashamed of it one fucking bit. Fuck all kikes, too.

    Don't even think about trying your spam mod bullshit with me. I own this fucking shithole and you stupid niggers can't stop me. Fuck all of you rotten bastards & tranny kikes.

    APK

    P.S.=> All of you fuckers like martyb can go eat shit and die... apk

(1)