Intel Plows $4.1 billion Into Next-Gen Chip Production

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
I loved my Coppermine CPU, it was the first build I ever did on my own, and beat most pentium 4 CPUs for the next 2 years on the benchmarks (due to RAMBUS more than the inherent flaws that later choked the P4 line). It was truly the last good CPU to come out of Intel until the Core series.
 
[citation][nom]dragonsqrrl[/nom]"Intel is getting serious about 450 nm wafers and EUV, again."Doug, I think you mean 450 mm, right?[/citation]
Either that or they are investing in 30 year old chip tech
 
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]Either that or they are investing in 30 year old chip tech[/citation]
The day they can get more than a few transistors out of 450nm of wafer, let me know. I'm almost positive he meant mm.
 
[citation][nom]captaincharisma[/nom]i guess that whole time being 2nd to AMD gave intel that killer instinct. unfortunetly for AMD they do not turn it off[/citation]

Intel has always had better process manufaturing than anyone else, even AMD. Just not the best architecture.
 
[citation][nom]jimmysmitty[/nom]Intel has always had better process manufaturing than anyone else, even AMD. Just not the best architecture.[/citation]

Well, currently Intel can absorb losses and drown its R&D department with cash. It's a good thing for AMD that Intel's GPU team didn't have as much success as the CPU team.
 
[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]It's a good thing for AMD that Intel's GPU team didn't have as much success as the CPU team.[/citation]
true, yet Intel has finally started getting real serious about integrated graphics. AMD needs to turn on the juice, it would be nice to see Intel facing a more serious competitor from a consumer's wallet perspective
 
[citation][nom]thecolorblue[/nom]true, yet Intel has finally started getting real serious about integrated graphics. AMD needs to turn on the juice, it would be nice to see Intel facing a more serious competitor from a consumer's wallet perspective[/citation]

For laptops Trinity chips are amazing. Intel is grossly overselling the entire Ivy Bridge mobile line and Trinity wipes the floor with them at a price to performance analysis. The integrated graphics being as good as they are only helps future proof them as more software takes advantage of SIMD processing.
 
[citation][nom]Zanny[/nom]For laptops Trinity chips are amazing. Intel is grossly overselling the entire Ivy Bridge mobile line and Trinity wipes the floor with them at a price to performance analysis. The integrated graphics being as good as they are only helps future proof them as more software takes advantage of SIMD processing.[/citation]

At the end though, marketing dominates.

Popular Science hasn't mentioned AMD for a while, but did give some nice words about Intel's Sandy/Ivy Bridge and the Ultrabooks.
 
I've read every article so far on toms about mobile processors. Despite tdp you have 2 places AMD 50% less CPU 50% more you Intel 50% more CPU 50% less you its consumer choice atm until someone makes a better breakthrough
 
[citation][nom]undercovernerd6[/nom]I've read every article so far on toms about mobile processors. Despite tdp you have 2 places AMD 50% less CPU 50% more gpu Intel 50% more CPU 50% less gpu its consumer choice atm until someone makes a better breakthrough[/citation]
 
Zanny, where did you get that info on Trinity? According to Anandtech, Trinity isn't in the stratosphere of Ivy... except in integrated graphics where it's about 15% faster. CPU speed is still about a 1/3 to 1/2 slower than Ivy.
 
I was wondering when the semiconductor industry would go bigger than 300mm. Bigger usually means cheaper production costs per chip. I imagine there are a lot of hurdles with it though, especially since the chips furthest from the center tend to be the ones with the most defects.

I don't know when the last time Intel switched to a lower wavelength light source, but in 2006 Immersion Lithography was only producing "defined" lines and spaces at 22nm in the university research labs (Intel sponsored). I imagine they worked out a way to push it to 14nm since then, but I don't think another innovation as cheap and as simple as a drop of water is going to get them past 14nm.
 
[citation][nom]darkavenger123[/nom]This news like a final sword in the coffin for AMD. Make sure they'll never get up...NEVER,[/citation]
If AMD could get some wins like Winzip 16.5 where they leverage OpenCL to speed up "everyday" tasks like unzipping and zipping files, they'd really take Intel to task. Other than video and maybe audio editing though I don't think it'd matter for other tasks.

Maybe create a "Youtube upload accelerator" that uses OpenCL and AMD hardware to shrink files to make them take less data to send. Given mobile data caps it'd be huge.
 
[citation][nom]captaincharisma[/nom]all Intel need's to do is get their GPU's at the same level as the GPU's put on their CPU's and that will start the final nail in AMD's coffin[/citation]

I already posted this in a thread that it was more relevant in, but since every time Intel or AMD is talked about it starts an AMD vs Intel argument I'll post it here too.


AMD has some time left. They are getting decent attention in the server market, and their desktop/mobile consumer market share hasn't got much smaller (though still not good) over the last few years.

Will they be able to compete for the CPU crown again? Doubtful. They may even lose the IGP crown in 3 years (Intel's SkyLake) or less. But, because they are more affordable than Intel and because their IGP can boost the performance of AMD discrete graphics, both Microsoft and Sony are looking at AMD for APU's and graphics cards in the next-gen gaming consoles. Dominating the gaming console market would be a jab at both Intel and Nvidia. It would reestablish AMD's legitimacy in the CPU/APU market, which would be followed by better press coverage. The future of AMD really hinges on getting contracts for the next-gen gaming consoles.
 
[citation][nom]Bricktop[/nom]I already posted this in a thread that it was more relevant in, but since every time Intel or AMD is talked about it starts an AMD vs Intel argument I'll post it here too. AMD has some time left. They are getting decent attention in the server market, and their desktop/mobile consumer market share hasn't got much smaller (though still not good) over the last few years. Will they be able to compete for the CPU crown again? Doubtful. They may even lose the IGP crown in 3 years (Intel's SkyLake) or less. But, because they are more affordable than Intel and because their IGP can boost the performance of AMD discrete graphics, both Microsoft and Sony are looking at AMD for APU's and graphics cards in the next-gen gaming consoles. Dominating the gaming console market would be a jab at both Intel and Nvidia. It would reestablish AMD's legitimacy in the CPU/APU market, which would be followed by better press coverage. The future of AMD really hinges on getting contracts for the next-gen gaming consoles.[/citation]
Not to mention no major nations' governments will allow Intel monopoly of the traditional CPU market.
 
Only idiots want to see the competition gone, for instance i hate apple , but because of them we have win 7 otherwise we would be stuck at win 98 SP 23423423. Or no AMD and we had Celeron 3 Ghz with 64KB cache , no Lv 2 at 1000$
 
[citation][nom]otacon72[/nom]Not to be out done, AMD announced it is investing $4.10 into it's next-gen chip production.[/citation]
they don't produce chips anymore, they only design them
 
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]Either that or they are investing in 30 year old chip tech[/citation]
actually 30 years ago, they were working on 1.5um = 1500nm, not 450nm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1.5_%C2%B5m_process

[citation][nom]ohim[/nom]Only idiots want to see the competition gone, for instance i hate apple , but because of them we have win 7 otherwise we would be stuck at win 98 SP 23423423. Or no AMD and we had Celeron 3 Ghz with 64KB cache , no Lv 2 at 1000$[/citation]
actually, MS would produce no SPs because they are free, or at least charge people for them
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom