News Intel Reportedly Delays TSMC 3nm Orders for 15th Gen Arrow Lake CPUs

[Admin]

Intel's 15th-generation Arrow Lake processors will arrive in late Q4 2024 to Q1 2025. This adjustment is being done to help reduce costs amid weakened PC demand.

Intel Reportedly Delays TSMC 3nm Orders for 15th Gen Arrow Lake CPUs : Read more

 

[TerryLaze]

Intel's 15th-generation Arrow Lake processors will arrive in late Q4 2024 to Q1 2025. This adjustment is being done to help reduce costs amid weakened PC demand.

Intel Reportedly Delays TSMC 3nm Orders for 15th Gen Arrow Lake CPUs : Read more

Previous reports indicated that Intel's 15th generation disaggregated multi-tile/multi-chiplet Arrow Lake processors, which will purportedly use TSMC 3nm for the GPU tile, would launch in Q3 2024. Now, it's reported that Intel is delaying orders with TSMC until Q4 2024. So if this report is accurate, the first Arrow Lake processor will trickle in late Q4 2024 into Q1 2025.

would launch in Q3 2024
delaying orders with TSMC until Q4 2024
trickle in late Q4 2024 into Q1 2025

So they delayed getting the tiles to a month (at least) after the CPU would launch....
And then intel will combine all their CPU tiles with the GPU tiles in 6 months top, although from what I hear they need the stock ready well before they start selling them or else it's a paper launch.

 

[JayNor]

Headline I saw says Intel defers placing order, not that they delayed any existing orders.

Intel already has Granite Rapids back in the lab on Intel-3, so perhaps they no longer expect to need TSM N3.

 

[Ar558]

Still lots of time for this to slip further given they have already added Rocket lake Refresh as 14th which wasn't originally planned. Wouldn't surprise if Meteor lake gets a refresh too and these slip to late 25 early 26.

 

[shady28]

I am not surprised, but I don't think this means what a lot of posters think it means.

AMD recorded ~50% sales decline, Intel ~30%, and GPU sales dropped ~40%.

The pipeline is full of last years parts. At the rate they're selling, collectively Intel/AMD/Nvidia probably have another 12 months of CPUs and GPU sales already manufactured and in the market.

There's no reason to crank up production on a new part until a substantial part of that excess inventory is sold. This is going to take a while I think.

 

[TerryLaze]

I am not surprised, but I don't think this means what a lot of posters think it means.

AMD recorded ~50% sales decline, Intel ~30%, and GPU sales dropped ~40%.

The pipeline is full of last years parts. At the rate they're selling, collectively Intel/AMD/Nvidia probably have another 12 months of CPUs and GPU sales already manufactured and in the market.

There's no reason to crank up production on a new part until a substantial part of that excess inventory is sold. This is going to take a while I think.

That's how a lot of the industry thought at the start of the pandemic and then they were sitting there unable to produce product for an exploding market.
It's hard to tell how the market will go, but the one thing I'm sure of is that a 4th quarter release is practically set in stone for any new intel gen,I mean if you miss the holiday season then what's the point.

 

[bluvg]

"Intel 4 (7nm) compute tile along with TSMC-manufactured GPU (5nm) and SoC (6nm)"

I'm hoping Tom's and other outlets will start to report this more accurately. Before that day, how long, how many times, how many of us can repeat it: "nm" means nothing anymore. It did represent something physical once. Now it's just an extrapolation, but given how it's often reported, not a helpful one. This isn't about being an Intel fanboy or anything of the sort, just about accuracy.

This is a case-in-point: note the different treatment of Intel and TSMC. With Intel, the process is mentioned (Intel 4) along with what Intel previously called it. But for TSMC, no process is mentioned, just the rather useless nm label. As Intel showed with their density metrics, they renamed their nodes to align better with the rest of the industry. But if you look at the misleading way this continues to be reported--7nm vs. 5nm and 6nm--to the casual reader, it would appear TSMC has the relative process advantage.

My suggestion to remedy this would be simply to use each foundry's process name. There are some important distinctions between different processes--even for those starting with the same number. Using the name rather than the useless "nm" distinguishes it clearly from a no-longer-accurate physical measure and gives readers a term to research further if they want the particulars.

 

[ikjadoon]

"Intel 4 (7nm) compute tile along with TSMC-manufactured GPU (5nm) and SoC (6nm)"

I'm hoping Tom's and other outlets will start to report this more accurately. Before that day, how long, how many times, how many of us can repeat it: "nm" means nothing anymore. It did represent something physical once. Now it's just an extrapolation, but given how it's often reported, not a helpful one. This isn't about being an Intel fanboy or anything of the sort, just about accuracy.

This is a case-in-point: note the different treatment of Intel and TSMC. With Intel, the process is mentioned (Intel 4) along with what Intel previously called it. But for TSMC, no process is mentioned, just the rather useless nm label. As Intel showed with their density metrics, they renamed their nodes to align better with the rest of the industry. But if you look at the misleading way this continues to be reported--7nm vs. 5nm and 6nm--to the casual reader, it would appear TSMC has the relative process advantage.

My suggestion to remedy this would be simply to use each foundry's process name. There are some important distinctions between different processes--even for those starting with the same number. Using the name rather than the useless "nm" distinguishes it clearly from a no-longer-accurate physical measure and gives readers a term to research further if they want the particulars.

So what happens when a foundry's process name is the "nm" again? See 20A, 18A from Intel, lmao.

//

Nobody, genuinely, thinks about "nm" in this literal sense. Nobody buys a CPU and thinks, "I think Excel needs a 4nm CPU and not a 7nm CPU. Shucks, guess I have to buy TSMC now!"

Reporters have to use the numbers companies use because otherwise, there is no sense in reporting. Companies use these names all the time. Intel's in a bind of its own making because Intel (not Tom's Hardware, not AnandTech) changed Intel marketing.

They pulled a USB-IF and renamed already-announced nodes.

 

[bluvg]

Nobody, genuinely, thinks about "nm" in this literal sense.

You must not go on the internet.

 

[ikjadoon]

You must not go on the internet.

You mean the YouTube / Twitter / Substack creators cosplaying lithography engineers in the technology equivalent of Fantasy Football?

Not even internet people take nanometers literally. They pixel count images from PR departments.

 

[JayNor]

Intel says nothing has changed with their Arrow Lake, Sierra Forest, Granite Rapids Intel-3 or TSM-N3 schedules in their Capital Allocation Update conference call.