Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Accelerated: New Node Naming & Ambitious Roadmap

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Intel Accelerated: New Node Naming & Ambitious Roadmap

    Phoronix: Intel Accelerated: New Node Naming & Ambitious Roadmap

    Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger is back with another webcast following his update in March that focused on the new Intel Foundry Services, new US fabs, and more. Today's event is "Intel Accelerated" and offering an update on the company's IDM 2.0 process and packaging...

    https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...celerated-2021

  • #2
    what happened to "the only true intel nanometers"?

    Comment


    • #3
      Nice to see that the "Steve Ballmers" of Intel are not in control anymore and that a minimum of long term vision and motivation are back.

      Maybe Patoo can accelerate the death of x86 too? The electricity bill of the planet and the nerves of thousand of engineers would be saved (partially).

      Comment


      • #4
        Hey, look everyone. Intel caught TSMC! All it took was a mathmatical proof that 10=7 (probably computed on an old Pentium).

        Gelsinger pulls a lot of bullshit marketing moves for an engineer. I am aware that process descriptions are problematic, but one of the few things Intel had going for them was some integrity in their node naming schemes. That too is now thrown out the window. I hope their investors are impressed that not only is Intel now manufacturing more 10nm wafers than 14nm, but they will actually be manufacturing more 7nm wafers than 14nm by the end of the year! I would call that fairy magic, but I don't want to insult fairies.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by rmfx View Post
          Nice to see that the "Steve Ballmers" of Intel are not in control anymore and that a minimum of long term vision and motivation are back.

          Maybe Patoo can accelerate the death of x86 too? The electricity bill of the planet and the nerves of thousand of engineers would be saved (partially).
          If their "long term vision" includes playing games with their naming schemes, I wouldn't be too optimistic.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Teggs View Post
            Hey, look everyone. Intel caught TSMC! All it took was a mathmatical proof that 10=7 (probably computed on an old Pentium).

            Gelsinger pulls a lot of bullshit marketing moves for an engineer. I am aware that process descriptions are problematic, but one of the few things Intel had going for them was some integrity in their node naming schemes. That too is now thrown out the window. I hope their investors are impressed that not only is Intel now manufacturing more 10nm wafers than 14nm, but they will actually be manufacturing more 7nm wafers than 14nm by the end of the year! I would call that fairy magic, but I don't want to insult fairies.
            You are being too harsh with Gelsinger. Marketing BS is a long tradition on Intel. Take for example the AMD64 architecture. It was AMD that nailed 64bit CPUs on Windows PCs, but did Intel adopted that term as AMD adopted X86? Hell no. It is X86_64 for them and to hell with the accomplishments of our competition, that we choose to not acknowledge that exists.

            And the worst is, there will be no shortage of fanboys to validate Intel's marketing department's BS. Just wait and see the next posts.

            Comment


            • #7
              Even for an eternal n00b like me, all of this sounds like idiotic and ridiculous bullshit.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by pal666 View Post
                what happened to "the only true intel nanometers"?
                It's over; it's all marketing now.

                Prepare to see 10nm++++++++++++++++++++ just like we had with 14.

                And prepare to see Intel 7 and 4 delayed by 10 years each

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by [email protected] View Post

                  You are being too harsh with Gelsinger. Marketing BS is a long tradition on Intel. Take for example the AMD64 architecture. It was AMD that nailed 64bit CPUs on Windows PCs, but did Intel adopted that term as AMD adopted X86? Hell no. It is X86_64 for them and to hell with the accomplishments of our competition, that we choose to not acknowledge that exists.

                  And the worst is, there will be no shortage of fanboys to validate Intel's marketing department's BS. Just wait and see the next posts.
                  While the architecture could have been called AMD64, this would have caused confusion among consumers (when they see an "amd64" download they're gonna think "oh, so this is for AMD and not Intel" and use the 32-bit one....).
                  That's as if we were to call it SiFive architecture instead of RISC-V.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by tildearrow View Post
                    It's over; it's all marketing now.
                    lol, you are saying it like in the past someone sane wanted to buy chip based on some arbitrary metric rather than speed, price and power consumption
                    Last edited by pal666; 27 July 2021, 11:52 AM.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X