Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Why is intel stuck on 14nm?

Go to solution Solved by CommanderAlex,
16 minutes ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

i fail to see the relation.

anyway, 55 ads is a lot for some TLDR

It all ranges from a new lithography size (14nm->10nm), poor yields from the silicon wafers, and also a new way of printing the circuits out on the wafers called EUV (short for Extreme Ultraviolet lithography). Since the new lithography is a lot different than what they were previously using 193nm UV light to print the circuitry into the silicon, this changes how they normally do things as they are delayed in mass producing chips and prioritize fixing the issues that arise. Don't forget that the smaller you go, the increased chances of malfunctions occur since we are on a tightrope with the laws of physics. 

 

One example of going really small is the smaller the lithography size, the shorter the gate's length is in a transistor...now Intel is at the point that electricity will actually jump this gate, causing a short and is unintended and thus, poor yields. Now also don't forget EUV is a whole new process for Intel as they straighten out the issues of this new lithography process. The whole semiconductor industry measures transistor "devices" different so Intel's 14nm is not the same is AMD's 14nm (really TSMC as they are the semiconductor fabrication company that AMD uses as AMD, Apple, and NVIDIA are what we call "Fab-less" as they do not own any semiconductor fabrication plants, rather they contract their work out to companies that specialize in this industry). 

Hi

I've always wondered, why exactly is intel really staying on 14nm?

i mean seeing that the performance rivals somewhat closely to AMD, the only reason i can think of is since the barrier is at around 2nm, intel does not want to switch from silicon to something else, and so have used R&D to make better performance, with the same cpu size but only to prepare themselves for when they really are at the 3/2nm barrier.

other than, would there be any explanations? (other than: "Intel engineers dunno how to do smaller than 14nm" because i hardly believe they are not "smart" enough to go lower)

Link to post
Share on other sites

because they do not care about enthusiasts this is just how they were stuck on 4 cores for 10 years. They target the less tech savy market with promises of performance that was not event thinkable a year ago. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

image.png.48146b8874a75aa6655651018a42d980.pngimage.thumb.png.ed7488dd6099d207e6cbb6ba59cabed7.png

im not going on there

Odd I get on there just fine. Aaah you use 2 adblockers and one is adblock plus aka the one that is the easiest to detect. Just use ublock origin as your only one it's about as good as it gets on chrome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Site loads and works just fine for me with uBlock Origin. 

PSU Tier List Thread

Please make sure to Quote me or Tag me to see your reply!

 

"White Ice"

Ryzen 7 3700x | Asus Crosshair VIII Hero (Wi-Fi) | EVGA RTX 2080ti | Ballistix 32gb 16-18-16-36 3600mhz | Custom Water Cooling Loop | 1tb Samsung 970 Evo

2tb Crucial MX500 SSD | 2x 3tb Seagate Drive | Fractal Design Meshify S2 |  EVGA G2 750w PSU | 3x Corsair LL140 | 3x Corsair LL120

 

Dedicated Streaming Rig

 Ryzen 7 1800x | Asus B450-F Strix | 32gb Gskill Flare X 3000mhz | Corsair RM550x | EVGA GTX 1060 3gb | 250gb 860 Evo m.2

Phanteks Enthoo Evolv |  Elgato HD60 Pro | Elgato 4k60 Pro mk.2 | Avermedia 4k GC573 Capture Card

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Den-Fi said:

Beginning to understand why you have this question, lol.

i fail to see the relation.

anyway, 55 ads is a lot for some TLDR

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

i fail to see the relation.

anyway, 55 ads is a lot for some TLDR

It all ranges from a new lithography size (14nm->10nm), poor yields from the silicon wafers, and also a new way of printing the circuits out on the wafers called EUV (short for Extreme Ultraviolet lithography). Since the new lithography is a lot different than what they were previously using 193nm UV light to print the circuitry into the silicon, this changes how they normally do things as they are delayed in mass producing chips and prioritize fixing the issues that arise. Don't forget that the smaller you go, the increased chances of malfunctions occur since we are on a tightrope with the laws of physics. 

 

One example of going really small is the smaller the lithography size, the shorter the gate's length is in a transistor...now Intel is at the point that electricity will actually jump this gate, causing a short and is unintended and thus, poor yields. Now also don't forget EUV is a whole new process for Intel as they straighten out the issues of this new lithography process. The whole semiconductor industry measures transistor "devices" different so Intel's 14nm is not the same is AMD's 14nm (really TSMC as they are the semiconductor fabrication company that AMD uses as AMD, Apple, and NVIDIA are what we call "Fab-less" as they do not own any semiconductor fabrication plants, rather they contract their work out to companies that specialize in this industry). 

CPU: Intel i9-10980XE 18C/36T  |  CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D15 Air Cooler |  RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB(4x8GB) DDR4-3200  |  Mobo: MSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC  |  SSD: Samsung 970 EVO  1TB M.2-2280 Boot Drive/Some Games)  |  HDD:2X Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB(Game Drive)  |  GPU: MSI RTX 2080 GAMING X TRIO  |  PSU: EVGA P2 850W  |  Case: NZXT Phantom 530 Black  |  Mouse: Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum RGB  |  Keyboard: Logitech G513 Carbon RGB with Romer-G Tactile Switches  |  Mouse Pad: Corsair MM300 Extended  |  MonitorMSI MAG271CQR 144HZ 27" 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CommanderAlex said:

It all ranges from a new lithography size (14nm->10nm), poor yields from the silicon wafers, and also a new way of printing the circuits out on the wafers called EUV (short for Extreme Ultraviolet lithography). Since the new lithography is a lot different than what they were previously using 193nm UV light to print the circuitry into the silicon, this changes how they normally do things as they are delayed in mass producing chips and prioritize fixing the issues that arise. Don't forget that the smaller you go, the increased chances of malfunctions occur since we are on a tightrope with the laws of physics. 

 

One example of going really small is the smaller the lithography size, the shorter the gate's length is in a transistor...now Intel is at the point that electricity will actually jump this gate, causing a short and is unintended and thus, poor yields. Now also don't forget EUV is a whole new process for Intel as they straighten out the issues of this new lithography process. The whole semiconductor industry measures transistor "devices" different so Intel's 14nm is not the same is AMD's 14nm (really TSMC as they are the semiconductor fabrication company that AMD uses as AMD, Apple, and NVIDIA are what we call "Fab-less" as they do not own any semiconductor fabrication plants, rather they contract their work out to companies that specialize in this industry). 

Thank You!

now can you please explain to me why intel is struggling with this (which you just explained) but why AMD is Not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

Thank You!

now can you please explain to me why intel is struggling with this (which you just explained) but why AMD is Not.

Because Intel is new to the fabrication method, and TSMC (the fab AMD uses) is not. It's a simple matter of TSMC having a better fab than Intel.

CPURyzen 5 3600 Cooler: Arctic Liquid Freezer II 120mm AIO RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws V 4x8GB 3600 16-16-16-36 MoboASRock X570M Pro4

Graphics Card: ASRock Reference RX 5700 XT Case: Antec P5 PSU: Rosewill Capstone 750M Monitor: MSI Optix MAG241C Case Fans: 2x Arctic P12 PWM

Storage: HP EX950 1TB NVMe, HP EX900 1TB NVMe, dual Constellation ES 2GB in RAID1

https://hwbot.org/submission/4497882_btgbullseye_gpupi_v3.3___32b_radeon_rx_5700_xt_13min_37sec_848ms

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BTGbullseye said:

Because Intel is new to the fabrication method, and TSMC (the fab AMD uses) is not. It's a simple matter of TSMC having a better fab than Intel.

thanks.

now new question

Why isn't intel switching to tsmc?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Lord Szechenyi said:

thanks.

now new question

Why isn't intel switching to tsmc?

They are. They just haven't gotten there yet. Also, TSMC is already at capacity on their 7nm node because of AMD.

CPURyzen 5 3600 Cooler: Arctic Liquid Freezer II 120mm AIO RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws V 4x8GB 3600 16-16-16-36 MoboASRock X570M Pro4

Graphics Card: ASRock Reference RX 5700 XT Case: Antec P5 PSU: Rosewill Capstone 750M Monitor: MSI Optix MAG241C Case Fans: 2x Arctic P12 PWM

Storage: HP EX950 1TB NVMe, HP EX900 1TB NVMe, dual Constellation ES 2GB in RAID1

https://hwbot.org/submission/4497882_btgbullseye_gpupi_v3.3___32b_radeon_rx_5700_xt_13min_37sec_848ms

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

Thank You!

now can you please explain to me why intel is struggling with this (which you just explained) but why AMD is Not.

Well Intel is struggling as they both design and manufacture the chips. They own the fabrication plants (I believe in Arizona, New York, and Israel) and TSMC already has history with this process. AMD used to be a fab company as well but decided to spin-off their fab plants into a company called GlobalFoundries. GlobalFoundries was planning on using EUV but discontinued in like 2017 because EUV is very expensive with all the equipment and processes used. 

1 minute ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

thanks.

now new question

Why isn't intel switching to tsmc?

There has been rumors from Intel's CEO stating that they may start placing orders with TSMC for their processes until they catch up with their own. 

CPU: Intel i9-10980XE 18C/36T  |  CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D15 Air Cooler |  RAM: Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro 32GB(4x8GB) DDR4-3200  |  Mobo: MSI X299 Gaming Pro Carbon AC  |  SSD: Samsung 970 EVO  1TB M.2-2280 Boot Drive/Some Games)  |  HDD:2X Western Digital Caviar Blue 1TB(Game Drive)  |  GPU: MSI RTX 2080 GAMING X TRIO  |  PSU: EVGA P2 850W  |  Case: NZXT Phantom 530 Black  |  Mouse: Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum RGB  |  Keyboard: Logitech G513 Carbon RGB with Romer-G Tactile Switches  |  Mouse Pad: Corsair MM300 Extended  |  MonitorMSI MAG271CQR 144HZ 27" 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, BTGbullseye said:

They are. They just haven't gotten there yet. Also, TSMC is already at capacity on their 7nm node because of AMD.

i see.

one last question

why isn't amd copying intel?

to be more precise:

intel made the actual dies (or dye idk whats the plural) smaller on the cpu.

if amd does that wouldn't they get a huge performance boost?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lord Szechenyi said:

i see.

one last question

why isn't amd copying intel?

to be more precise:

intel made the actual dies (or dye idk whats the plural) smaller on the cpu.

if amd does that wouldn't they get a huge performance boost?

AMD already uses a chiplet design. Those chiplets are significantly smaller than Intel's chips. AMD can get much better yields per silicon wafer than Intel can because of the combination of smaller and greater number of chiplets. All they have to do is select the ones that have 3 out of 4 cores that pass all tests, and put 2 of them in the lowest end chip. Ones that have all 4 pass, get a pair going into the middle grade chip. Ones that pass 3 out 4 cores above average get 4 chiplets put into the high end chip. And ones that have effectively perfect scores on all 4 cores get 4 put into a top-end chip. (all chips also have the same memory controller chiplet that is made on the 14nm fab for all of the Zen 2 and Zen 3 chips)

 

If AMD switched to doing it like Intel does, they would be nowhere near as good of performance, and way lower yields from the fab.

CPURyzen 5 3600 Cooler: Arctic Liquid Freezer II 120mm AIO RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws V 4x8GB 3600 16-16-16-36 MoboASRock X570M Pro4

Graphics Card: ASRock Reference RX 5700 XT Case: Antec P5 PSU: Rosewill Capstone 750M Monitor: MSI Optix MAG241C Case Fans: 2x Arctic P12 PWM

Storage: HP EX950 1TB NVMe, HP EX900 1TB NVMe, dual Constellation ES 2GB in RAID1

https://hwbot.org/submission/4497882_btgbullseye_gpupi_v3.3___32b_radeon_rx_5700_xt_13min_37sec_848ms

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BTGbullseye said:

AMD already uses a chiplet design. Those chiplets are significantly smaller than Intel's chips. AMD can get much better yields per silicon wafer than Intel can because of the combination of smaller and greater number of chiplets. All they have to do is select the ones that have 3 out of 4 cores that pass all tests, and put 2 of them in the lowest end chip. Ones that have all 4 pass, get a pair going into the middle grade chip. Ones that pass 3 out 4 cores above average get 3 chiplets put into the high end chip. And ones that have effectively perfect scores on all 4 cores get 3 put into a top-end chip. (all chips also have the same memory controller chiplet that is made on the 14nm fab for all of the Zen 2 and Zen 3 chips)

 

If AMD switched to doing it like Intel does, they would be nowhere near as good of performance, and way lower yields from the fab.

i see, thank you for the detailed explanation.

have a nice day

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, BTGbullseye said:

AMD already uses a chiplet design. Those chiplets are significantly smaller than Intel's chips. AMD can get much better yields per silicon wafer than Intel can because of the combination of smaller and greater number of chiplets. All they have to do is select the ones that have 3 out of 4 cores that pass all tests, and put 2 of them in the lowest end chip. Ones that have all 4 pass, get a pair going into the middle grade chip. Ones that pass 3 out 4 cores above average get 3 chiplets put into the high end chip. And ones that have effectively perfect scores on all 4 cores get 3 put into a top-end chip. (all chips also have the same memory controller chiplet that is made on the 14nm fab for all of the Zen 2 and Zen 3 chips)

 

If AMD switched to doing it like Intel does, they would be nowhere near as good of performance, and way lower yields from the fab.

fab-ulous

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×