WYP
News Guru
Intel will use 14nm for desktop chips until 2022? Is 10nm really that bad?
Read more about Intel's 10nm desktop issues.
Read more about Intel's 10nm desktop issues.
Intel's reportedly planning to skip 10nm on desktop systems
- Thread starter WYP
- Start date
Master&Puppet
New member
It makes sense to me that they would prioritise the 10nm silicon for servers since that is where the big bucks are. However AMD is simply going to wipe the floor with Intel for the next 3 years technically speaking.
The advantage that Intel has is that the server space is notoriously slow to adopt new tech. The recent security flaws which have hurt Intel more than AMD have however sped things up to a certain extent.
The truth is that any serious builds over the next 3 years, server or desktop, should probably be build with AMD parts. They will just simply be better in every way. However Intel have a whole load of money available to ride the storm and will seek to maintain market share. Unfortunately that will probably mean making deals with partners and will unlikely translate to a significant discount at the customer level.
The advantage that Intel has is that the server space is notoriously slow to adopt new tech. The recent security flaws which have hurt Intel more than AMD have however sped things up to a certain extent.
The truth is that any serious builds over the next 3 years, server or desktop, should probably be build with AMD parts. They will just simply be better in every way. However Intel have a whole load of money available to ride the storm and will seek to maintain market share. Unfortunately that will probably mean making deals with partners and will unlikely translate to a significant discount at the customer level.
Dicehunter
Resident Newb
As long as there is a performance increase of at least 10% over the previous gen that's all that matters.
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
They should have cut their losses long ago and put the money towards 7nm since they seemingly have had less trouble with it. Keeps getting pushed back by Intel wanting to make a profit off of 10nm. But by staying and spending with 10nm it only gets worse and worse for them... Now they are behind everyone else.
10nm is mostly to please the shareholders at this point, iirc they scrapped three quarters of the fab space planned to be used for it a while ago and behind the scenes moved most of the focus to 7nm, in a practical sense 10nm should have been fully scrapped, but that could have p*ed off the investors so what was clearly illogical to the engineers leaking out Intel's 10nm woes since 2015 seems to have been perceived as a necessity to the boardroom fodder.
While Ice Lake/10nm probably won't be able to see any meaningful uptake in the enterprise market that's at least one area it could provide some very nice graphs and powerpoints, in those densities the limit is usually still thermal so the lower max clock speed limitations they've faced won't show through as they'll probably still be firmly thermally limited, similar situation with most mobile parts too today ofc. In performance desktop however where 100W+ coolers are a regular occurrence that 4Ghz limit would be laid bare, even a paper launch of cherry picked benchmarks would probably earn ridicule.
While Ice Lake/10nm probably won't be able to see any meaningful uptake in the enterprise market that's at least one area it could provide some very nice graphs and powerpoints, in those densities the limit is usually still thermal so the lower max clock speed limitations they've faced won't show through as they'll probably still be firmly thermally limited, similar situation with most mobile parts too today ofc. In performance desktop however where 100W+ coolers are a regular occurrence that 4Ghz limit would be laid bare, even a paper launch of cherry picked benchmarks would probably earn ridicule.
Last edited:
AngryGoldfish
Old N Gold
Man, Intel are losing so much potential profit. That's an awful long time to rely on such a dated process.
AlienALX
Well-known member
I think it's about clock speed loss tbh.
That may be why they're not putting them into the desktop space, because Xeons are usually lower clocked for 100% stability. However, if the rumours recently were anything to go by then I'd be correct, 'cause the clock speed sucked.
And this wouldn't be the first time either. When Ivy released the clock speeds and ocs were so naff it was 0% faster than Sandy bridge. It was only after millions of dollars and lots of ++++ that it got better again.
What's the point in releasing a 10nm desktop CPU that's going to get trounced by their own 14nm++++++++++++++++++++++++ CPUs?
Not much.
demonking
New member
Im not sure on this bit. Agreed Intel has made some serious bucks over the last decade but odds are its not in the bank. A company this big would have used alot of this money to create more shares, pay dividends to its investors and pay out some big bonuses, this in turn reduces their tax bill. What attracts investors most is good dividends and share price increases. Losing 50p a share is not alot when you only have 100 shares, but when its billions of shares, thats a lot of money and then people become afraid to invest.
This I think is spot on. If they released 10nm desktop next year it would perform the same as current chips due to the higher ipc but lower clocks. They would more than likely loose the 5ghz halo and it would be a PR disaster as it would be seen as a back step.
Master&Puppet
New member
I'm not saying that you are wrong at all. Shareholders like to be paid and after all, leaks are leaks but google "Intel meet comp" to draw your own conclusions.
My point was based on a recent leak from an internal sales meeting where apparently Intel have ring fencing approximately $3bn for a "meet comp" plan (a plan to help partners "meet the competition"). That's approximately 10 times what AMD made net in 2018. The money will be used to "incentivise" partners to use Intel products.
We've seen it before back in 2009 when Intel literally paid Dell and HP to limit the amount of AMD products they would ship. Intel got caught and fined $1.45 bn by the European Commission and a similar case was made by New York Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo who filed a federal lawsuit against Intel accusing it of paying computer makers rebates to illegally maintain its monopoly power and preventing AMD from gaining business with PC makers.
Considering that Intel have nothing in the pipeline until 2022 I can absolutely see them carefully treading the line between legality and anti-competitive practice to maintain market dominance by literally throwing money at the problem.
Just for the record I have 3 pcs in my house all of which, now regrettably, are intel/nvidia parts and I haven't owned an AMD part since the Phemon II 1100t and a pair of 5850s which must be nearly a decade ago now.
Last edited:
Avet
Active member
Intel responds. 10nm not quite gone, but not so close either...
https://www.techpowerup.com/260141/...esktop-cpus-still-on-the-table-likely-in-2021
https://www.techpowerup.com/260141/...esktop-cpus-still-on-the-table-likely-in-2021
Will be low-TDP quad cores for NUC's or something though. Basically mobile parts with an LGA package. If they're saying 14nm desktop is still going to last through 2021 in their "rebuttal" then it's probably going to be similar to their mobile splitting of the market, Ice Lake for benhmarks/low volume, low TDP, low performance parts, with 14nm still the meat in their sandwich. Like Broadwell too I guess.
Last edited:
AlienALX
Well-known member
Yup same reason they pretty much skipped Broadwell on desktop by pretty much making the one or two CPUs they made in weeny amounts. Quite simply because sandy could still achieve 5ghz.
This is also why they revised Haswell into DC, to get back closer to that figure.
Now the stakes are higher. Much much higher, because they're miles behind. I'll tell you why I think that matters so much too.
Yesterday someone said that Intel won't care because they still dominate the server markets etc. Not true, not any more. Not because AMD are winning but simply because the desktop market is now the most important area. It has over taken everything else. The Xbone and PS4 are now both second fiddle. Why do you think ms are desperately releasing their games and passes on pc? Are these the actions of the same company who used to deliberately block titles on pc and designed a console to kill off pc gaming and make more money?
No.
The pc gaming market is now absolutely enormous. Bigger than you realise.
Master&Puppet
New member
My first impression of this news was that these 10mn DT parts would be HEDT and sold on the basis of brand rather than ability.
This made me do a bit of research and I came across this article which was interesting.
https://www.wepc.com/news/video-game-statistics/
Specific to your point was this graph
I do worry about the combination of increasing mobile presence (which I don't personally enjoy, although I've tried) and the recent increasing costs of gaming pcs. Looking at you Intel and nvidia.
This made me do a bit of research and I came across this article which was interesting.
https://www.wepc.com/news/video-game-statistics/
Specific to your point was this graph
I do worry about the combination of increasing mobile presence (which I don't personally enjoy, although I've tried) and the recent increasing costs of gaming pcs. Looking at you Intel and nvidia.
Last edited:
AlienALX
Well-known member
Yup remember that's all consoles combined. Crap like Fortnite and pubg are the reason why kids are building pcs.
The desktop market is now worth more than the server space. It's nuts.
That's why sony have that streaming app and ms all sorts of crossover stuff with the pc.
Last time ms made a pc game and or pushed them to pc owners was like, 1999. As soon as the Xbox came out we were the ginger haired step child. No midtown madness 3, only for Xbox. No Alan wake for years etc.
Now? They're realising that they have no other option. With the amount of guys on YT showing kids how to build pcs and the savagely cut down complexion if windows 10 it's never been easier to build and run a gaming PC.
If you asked a kid these days what an IRQ conflict is he or she would think it was something that had kicked off in the middle East.
The desktop market is now worth more than the server space. It's nuts.
That's why sony have that streaming app and ms all sorts of crossover stuff with the pc.
Last time ms made a pc game and or pushed them to pc owners was like, 1999. As soon as the Xbox came out we were the ginger haired step child. No midtown madness 3, only for Xbox. No Alan wake for years etc.
Now? They're realising that they have no other option. With the amount of guys on YT showing kids how to build pcs and the savagely cut down complexion if windows 10 it's never been easier to build and run a gaming PC.
If you asked a kid these days what an IRQ conflict is he or she would think it was something that had kicked off in the middle East.
I'm not sure this is quite true in terms of CPU market splits unless things have changed recently, the "PC market" is bigger ($9.8bn yearly for Intel at end of 2018 vs $6.1bn in data-centres) but "PC market" is desktop + laptop, and while I've not seen any super recent data on the absolute split in 2016 that was 2:1 laptops:desktops by volume and I think the former has continued to grow faster since then. Notebooks was a slightly bigger market by volume of chips than datacenters for Intel last year but i think that puts desktops at around half of either.
In terms of gaming I think you're right though, kids seem to be adopting PC's at a much higher rate nowadays, especially now we're back to that late-phase in the console cycle, and by games sales the PC does usually seem to outstrip either individual console atm.
The issue with the graph above is that the world-wide situation looks very different from US/EU markets, in the developing and newly developed world smartphone gaming absolutely dominates, while particularly here in the EU it's a tiny market in comparison, especially for in-game purchases, we do that far less and so revenue leans much more to paid titles here. The rise of smartphone gaming on the worldwide market is very much linked to the rise in availability of cheap smartphones in south east Asia, Africa, and South America.
Last edited:
Similar threads
