Discussion I need some clarification

[Order 66]

What is the deal with Intel’s whole thing with not naming their architectures (I’m not sure if that is the right word) with the nanometers instead of what they currently use. I’m pretty sure Intel 7 is 10nm, but I don’t know and this is why I need clarification. I think I’ve also read that it is 4nm. I am aware that while nm doesn’t matter, I still would like to know what Intel is talking about in this context.

 

[kerberos_20]

it related to TSMC proccess naming
intel 10nm being equivalent to tsmc n7

 

[USAFRet]

What is the deal with Intel’s whole thing with not naming their architectures (I’m not sure if that is the right word) with the nanometers instead of what they currently use. I’m pretty sure Intel 7 is 10nm, but I don’t know and this is why I need clarification. I think I’ve also read that it is 4nm. I am aware that while nm doesn’t matter, I still would like to know what Intel is talking about in this context.

The i7-12700k and -13700k are both 10nm.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i7-12700K-Processor-Benchmarks-and-Specs.589006.0.html

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1782515-REG/intel_core_i7_13700k_3_4_ghz.html/specs

You can easily look up any other CPU you're interested in.


Why is this a concern for you?

 

[Order 66]

m pretty sure that i7 doesnt mean nanometers, it means performance grade
i3 low end, i5 mid range, i7 high end, i9 enthusiasts

That is not what I am talking about.

might post a link to see what you talking about

https://www.xda-developers.com/inte...xt=Intel 7 is the last,is produced on Intel 4.

 

[Order 66]

Why is this a concern for you?

Mainly because I see articles and people on this site (feels like all the time) talk about it, and I’ve always been confused by it.

 

[USAFRet]

7, 4, 3, 20A, 18A.....internal marketing identifiers.
Means absolutely nothing out here.

 

[kerberos_20]

That is not what I am talking about.

https://www.xda-developers.com/intel-roadmap-2025-explainer/#:~:text=Intel 7 is the last,is produced on Intel 4.

ah yes, i did realize later you were talking about fabrication naming, rather than cpu naming

intel 10nm has same/similar transistor pitch as other 7nm processess

Intel 7 is what was formerly known as Intel 10nm Enhanced SuperFin (10 ESF), and the company later rebranded it to Intel 7 in what was essentially an effort to realign itself with the naming conventions of the rest of the fabrication industry. While one could argue it's misleading, nanometer measurements in chips are nothing more than marketing at this point and have been for a number of years.

 

[USAFRet]

The "nm" thing is defined as how small they can make a particular 'thing'.

10nanometers. Or 4. Or whatever.

It gets harder to make them smaller and smaller.

 

[USAFRet]

^^^^^^
"...nanometer measurements in chips are nothing more than marketing at this point and have been for a number of years."

So much this.

 

[Order 66]

7, 4, 3, 20A, 18A.....internal marketing identifiers.
Means absolutely nothing out here.

So nanometers don’t matter anymore? I remember that the part of the selling point of the Radeon VII was that it was the (afaik) the first 7nm GPU. I am aware that CPUs and GPUs are fundamentally different, but I feel like it would be strange for nanometers to matter for GPUs, but not CPUs.

 

[Order 66]

^^^^^^
"...nanometer measurements in chips are nothing more than marketing at this point and have been for a number of years."

So much this.

Sorry, I posted before I saw this message. At what point did nanometer measurements still matter?

 

[kerberos_20]

So nanometers don’t matter anymore? I remember that the part of the selling point of the Radeon VII was that it was the (afaik) the first 7nm GPU. I am aware that CPUs and GPUs are fundamentally different, but I feel like it would be strange for nanometers to matter for GPUs, but not CPUs.

thats just marketing trick, in the end better fabrication process results in better power draw at same clock or allows for higher clock
but if you compare tsmc 7nm vs samsung 7nm, youll get too big power draw difference even tho both are 7nm

 

[Order 66]

thats just marketing trick, in the end better fabrication process results in better power draw at same clock or allows for higher clock
but if you compare tsmc 7nm vs samsung 7nm, youll get too big power draw difference even tho both are 7nm

Another confusing thing for me is the fact that the same fabrication from 2 diffferent manufacturers would be different. I guess it’s not like generic store brand vs name brand (for some products)

 

[USAFRet]

So nanometers don’t matter anymore? I remember that the part of the selling point of the Radeon VII was that it was the (afaik) the first 7nm GPU. I am aware that CPUs and GPUs are fundamentally different, but I feel like it would be strange for nanometers to matter for GPUs, but not CPUs.

You say it right there...."selling point".

The only reason they bother to tell us the nm number, is to show it is different than the previous thing.

They could just as easily state. 1.8 billion transistors" (the last one only had 1.3B)
But 'billion' is too large a concept to wrap your head around. So "10", then 7, then 4 it is.

Like the new iPhone ads. "with Titanium". WTF does that mean...'with'?
Is the shell made from titanium? Does it use titanium batteries?
Be mysterious....make the consumer think it is something special


The nm race is sort of like the megapixel race in cameras.
At the consumer level, once we went past 5MP or so....more is irrelevant.
I have a pic from an ancient Olympus C-3000. 3 megapixel.

I can count the hairs on the dragonfly's butt, just like I can with my 14mp Fuji.