Go Back   OC3D Forums > [OC3D] General Forums > OC3D News
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
  #11  
Old 17-07-19, 11:00 PM
NeverBackDown NeverBackDown is offline
AMD Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: With the Asguardians of the Galaxy
Posts: 16,288
Well yields yes, but if the yields are already so low, why would you make the small chips first? Why not make more with the little you got? Makes more sense.

If they simply cannot handle the bigger dies, then sure. But that also signals the risk of bad low-end mobile dies too.

__________________
I am Iron Man.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 18-07-19, 02:52 AM
Kleptobot's Avatar
Kleptobot Kleptobot is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 246
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverBackDown View Post
Well yields yes, but if the yields are already so low, why would you make the small chips first? Why not make more with the little you got? Makes more sense.

If they simply cannot handle the bigger dies, then sure. But that also signals the risk of bad low-end mobile dies too.
Die size affects yields.
If you have defects per area that are roughly evenly distributed
The chance of having a 10mm2 patch unaffected vs a 50mm2 patch is 25 times more likely
__________________
delided 3570k (watercooled)
hd7970 (watercooled)
8GB Gskill XM
3*140 SR1 Rad
all stuffed in an FD arc midi
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 18-07-19, 07:30 AM
Warchild Warchild is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Norway, Oslo
Posts: 5,435
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverBackDown View Post
I think Intel need the bigger things now and mobile later. The big boy chips are where the money it at for them.
Well, I wonder if their interest in the GPU market slowed down their 10nm progress.

I think I am done with incremental expectancy. I have a decent setup now. I'll run it into the ground and do a full build in 3 or 4 years time, as opposed to constantly wasting money on bits n pieces all the time.

Last 2 years have been nothing but disappointment in terms of progress. Ok Zen was a success but I have Intel, and im not swapping everything out for something that yields minimal improvement.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 18-07-19, 07:58 AM
WYP's Avatar
WYP WYP is offline
News Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 16,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverBackDown View Post
Well yields yes, but if the yields are already so low, why would you make the small chips first? Why not make more with the little you got? Makes more sense.

If they simply cannot handle the bigger dies, then sure. But that also signals the risk of bad low-end mobile dies too.
Think of silicon defects as a number of defects per silicon wafer. If you use a wafer to make a tonne of small dies, a smaller percentage of the dies will be ruined by defects. This is why small dies achieve better yields.
__________________
_______________________________
Twitter - @WYP_PC
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 18-07-19, 09:21 AM
tgrech tgrech is offline
OC3D Elite
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 1,453
Yeah and these defects, if not large enough to damage the chip functionally, will often cause transition delays in logic gates, which reduces the maximum possible clock speed you can hit, making them suitable for mobile parts in that aspect too. Of course even with no defects at all, smaller dies are also significantly more efficient use of silicon wafers because you're fitting squares into a circle and smaller squares will leave you with less waste around the edges. Also worth remembering mobile is actually Intel's largest market by revenue and volume at the moment.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump










All times are GMT. The time now is 09:24 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.