They didn't have trouble with making it work,
Nice revisionist history, there. Cannon Lake cannot be swept under the rug, so easily.
"Here was a dual core 15W processor with the integrated graphics disabled, and with lower clock frequencies than an almost-equivalent Kaby Lake 15W processor. Lots of questions were asked as to how the new 10nm process was, on paper, less efficient than the previous generation processor."
Then, the first iteration of 10 nm happened and Ice Lake was released on what some have called 10 nm+. It was fine for the 15W laptop market, but its low clock speeds meant that it couldn't scale up to a 35W laptop, much less a desktop. So, the desktop was canceled (we got Comet Lake, instead) and Intel actually had to release a 14 nm Coffee Lake-era CPU for the 35 W laptop market, which they called Wiskey Lake!
After that, 10 nm underwent
another impromevement (producing 10 nm SuperFin), and released Tiger Lake. This time, it was viable for the 35 W laptop market, yet it
still couldn't clock high enough to be viable on the desktop. So, they ported the design to 14 nm and released it as Rocket Lake.
Finally, Intel managed to create a version of their 10 nm node (Enhanced SuperFin, rebranded as Intel 7), which could reach sustainable yields and competitive clock frequencies. And that's when we
finally saw Alder Lake.
I know you know all of this, and I'd really like to know why you're trying to sweep it under the rug. You're really starting to make me feel negatively towards Intel. The funny thing is that Intel doesn't need this. If you know anything about PR, it's a good underdog/redemption story for Intel to fall behind and then have a big comeback. That's one thing some people like about AMD - they were undeniably on the ropes, and they managed to come back from the brink and compete at the top level. You're wasting a perfect opportunity to paint Intel as the underdog, here, instead of the "Evil Empire" like how some people regard them.
You are making it sound as if the unrivaled manufacturing capacity of intel is the tide that lifted amd along with them,
No, I meant cloud & datacenter expansion was the tide that lifted all boats.
Suddenly this has become a concern because nobody wants to believe that intel GPUs are actually selling.
We know that some amount of them are in the channel. Intel has said as much - that their current sales are down because customers are burning off inventory. So, I think it's entirely fair to wait a couple quarters before deciding how much market penetration Alchemist actually achieved.
Do you see a future where we will go back to the caveman ways throwing sticks at animals to survive?
Hopefully not. I have no idea what point you were trying to make, but what I expect to happen is that Intel spins off IFS once it signs up enough customers to be independently viable.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram