Intel gets an ARM license - but it's not what you think

[zMeul]

source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-16/intel-licenses-arm-technology-in-move-to-boost-foundry-business

 

Quote

Intel Corp., the world’s biggest semiconductor maker, said it’s licensing technology from rival ARM Holdings Plc, a move to win more customers for its business that manufactures chips for other companies.
The two chipmakers, whose designs and technology dominate in computing and mobile, unveiled the agreement Tuesday at the Intel Developer Forum in San Francisco. The accord will let Intel offer third-party semiconductor companies its most advanced 10-nanometer production lines for manufacturing the complex chips usually used in smartphones.

 

ARM chips on 10nm should have some HW manufacturers flock to Intel's fabs - not even Samsung can compete at that level

 

Quote

Intel announced that LG Electronics Inc., South Korea’s second-biggest phone maker behind Samsung Electronics Co., will use Intel’s foundry business to manufacture 10 nanometer mobile-phone parts.

 

one of the biggest candidates for Intel's business is, of course, Apple - but I think they're little to late as I expect Apple to already have wheels in motion for their upcoming iPhone7

 

to note:

Quote

Intel said it won’t use extreme ultraviolet lithography as a manufacturing technique in its 10-nanometer production.

 

---

 

something I remembered and I think it needs to be added

back in Dec last year, Intel acquired Altera Corporation and Altera's business (part of) was ARM based SoCs - it's quite possible Intel sat on the licence whole this time; but's also possible the ARM licence wasn't transferable

Edited August 16, 2016 by zMeul

[AnnoyedShelf]

4 minutes ago, zMeul said:

one of the biggest candidates for Intel's business is, of course, Apple - but I think they're little to late as I expect Apple to already have wheels in motion for their upcoming iPhone7

uh yeah, of course they're too late.  The iPhone 7 is slated for release in like a month... Developing a chip takes a couple YEARS.

[themaniac]

hm, interesting, though I would've thought companies would be more interested in using an x86-64 chip that's similarly power efficient and performs similarly to the current top of the line ARM chips which i'm certain intel could do, but I guess intel finds this to be the better plan

[Cela1]

10nm is coming!!!!

 

Oh well, see you in 2 years anyhow.

[zMeul]

27 minutes ago, AnnoyedShelf said:

The iPhone 7 is slated for release in like a month

I don't follow Apple news, just bits and piece I stumble upon

[AnnoyedShelf]

On 8/16/2016 at 6:34 PM, zMeul said:

I don't follow Apple news, just bits and piece I stumble upon

Neither do I, but everybody knows they announce new iPhones in september of every year.

[zMeul]

7 minutes ago, AnnoyedShelf said:

everybody knows they announce new iPhones in september of every year.

I do not

why? I do not give a shit about iPhones or Apple in general

[mariushm]

Intel's 10 nm is not quite 10 nm  ... unlike other producers (Samsung, TSMC, Globalfoundries), they measure some things differently, basically it's as if their 10nm process is more like 10.5-11 nm with some structures made at 16-22nm just like their 14 nm process is closer to 16 nm

 

Anyway, you won't see generic cheap phone processors on 14 nm soon, they're still 3-4x times more expensive to make than 22nm, which is 1.5-2x times more expensive to make than 28nm ... cheap

ARM chips on 10nm should have some HW manufacturers flock to Intel's fabs - not even Samsung can compete at that level

Apple A9 is already made at Samsung on 14nm , no reason to spend tens/hundreds of thousands of dollars just to shrink it down to 10 nm and then really depend on Intel factories and how free they are for Apple. On 14nm , Apple can switch between Samsung and GlobalFoundries 14nm as needed with minimal tweaks of the cpu design.

 

Also see http://fudzilla.com/news/mobile/41304-samsung-working-on-10nm-soc

 

Quoting from another forum :

 

10nm

Samsung is currently planning two versions of 10nm technology:

10LPE - once again the early access version. Risk production is in the initial ramp stage and mass production is expected by the end of the year.
10LPP - a second generation version that will offer 10% better power. We joked about 14LPP offering 14% better performance and 10LPP offering 10% better performance and he said it was just a coincidence. I commented that if 7LPP has a 7% performance improvement there will be a lot of disappointed customers.

 

From the VLSI technology paper we know the Samsung 10nm process will have a 64nm contacted poly pitch (CPP) and a 48nm minimum metal pitch (MMP). The numbers I have heard from TSMC are 64nm CPP and 42nm MMP (although those are not confirmed numbers). In theory this would suggest a density advantage for TSMC however there is more to real world design density than just CPP x MMP and Samsung has added some interesting features to the process to optimize density.

Single diffusion break - reduces the area of standard cells by 5-8% versus double diffusion break.
Cross couple constructs - reduces the area of standard cells.
Litho-Etch-Litho-Etch-Litho-Etch (LE3) metal 1 patterning - allows bidirectional metal for denser interconnect.

 

Samsung works on shrinking down a 20nm design ( Exynos 8895) down to 10nm and some leaks suggest they got the chip working at 4 Ghz for short periods of time (like turbo/boost  mode)

[themaniac]

2 minutes ago, Nicholatian said:

The whole reason Intel’s chips are so power hungry is because of their complex architecture – ARM stands for Advanced RISC Machines, RISC meaning Reduced Instruction Set Computing. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

iirc intels goldmont(I believe it was called) were pretty power effeicient so it and if they didn't cancel broadlake(I think it was) they might be able to have similar power efficiency

[AnnoyedShelf]

On 8/16/2016 at 6:49 PM, zMeul said:

I do not

why? I do not give a shit about iPhones or Apple in general

Neither do I tbh.  I just happen to have a really good memory for stupid shit and it just lingers there.

 

EDIT: Plus, you know they release a new phone every year just like every other smartphone manufacturer, so my point still stands.

[themctipers]

>sometime in 2030

 

my new iphone will have an unlocked core i7 3770k sticker on it.  

unless jailbreaking dies.. 

[patrickjp93]

And there it is: Intel officially calling out TSMC and Samsung on their BS definition of 10nm. It seems Kirzanich has his head on straight: steal business from its rivals.

4 hours ago, Nicholatian said:

The whole reason Intel’s chips are so power hungry is because of their complex architecture – ARM stands for Advanced RISC Machines, RISC meaning Reduced Instruction Set Computing. You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

That's actually not true, as the Cavium Thunder X proved. For ARM to even get close to x86 performance, its heat output and power requirements rise to meet it. Intel's problem in the phone business has ever been the use of that BS benchmark called Geekbench.

[Zodiark1593]

I thought Intel had an ARM license for years now? 

[patrickjp93]

8 hours ago, mariushm said:

Intel's 10 nm is not quite 10 nm  ... unlike other producers (Samsung, TSMC, Globalfoundries), they measure some things differently, basically it's as if their 10nm process is more like 10.5-11 nm with some structures made at 16-22nm just like their 14 nm process is closer to 16 nm

 

Anyway, you won't see generic cheap phone processors on 14 nm soon, they're still 3-4x times more expensive to make than 22nm, which is 1.5-2x times more expensive to make than 28nm ... cheap

 

 

Apple A9 is already made at Samsung on 14nm , no reason to spend tens/hundreds of thousands of dollars just to shrink it down to 10 nm and then really depend on Intel factories and how free they are for Apple. On 14nm , Apple can switch between Samsung and GlobalFoundries 14nm as needed with minimal tweaks of the cpu design.

 

Also see http://fudzilla.com/news/mobile/41304-samsung-working-on-10nm-soc

 

Quoting from another forum :

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Samsung works on shrinking down a 20nm design ( Exynos 8895) down to 10nm and some leaks suggest they got the chip working at 4 Ghz for short periods of time (like turbo/boost  mode)

Intel's 10nm is much closer to being 10nm than TSMC's or Samsungs, just as it was with 14nm.

[patrickjp93]

3 hours ago, Zodiark1593 said:

I thought Intel had an ARM license for years now? 

It has. The title is a bit misleading. Intel is just announcing a foundry collaboration for ARM designs.

[MrDynamicMan]

"Which dominates in computing... And mobile."

 

 Lol, nice try.

[Tomsen]

In many ways, this makes sense for Intel to do. It is a big step away from their past, where they used their process advantage on its fullest.

 

After Intel retreated from the mobile space, I think Intel saw the opportunity still make some revenue from that market.

Still think all contract will be limited to the mobile market (or just market that Intel isn't in), to avoid competition.

Intel is also desperate to fill up their 10nm fabs (14nm also had issues in the beginning, and I expect 10nm to be worse), as they need the volume to go up or the price of the individual die will be to high.

 

It is not entirely open their fabs for customers, and I think we would likely see few customers joining (the significant once can be counted on one hand), and others (the majority) staying with bigger players like TSMC and samsung. 

 

16 hours ago, themaniac said:

hm, interesting, though I would've thought companies would be more interested in using an x86-64 chip that's similarly power efficient and performs similarly to the current top of the line ARM chips which i'm certain intel could do, but I guess intel finds this to be the better plan

These big mobile companies don't want to go anywhere near x86, and Intel have been giving them the temptation.

You bet that if Intel could convince them to go x86, they would, as that gives Intel more control and money.

[VerticalDiscussions]

17 hours ago, zMeul said:

-snip-

Lawl, okay but why you gotta be so rude to Apple? 

[zMeul]

40 minutes ago, VerticalDiscussions said:

Lawl, okay but why you gotta be so rude to Apple? 

I'm sorry .. it's you, Apple!?

[VerticalDiscussions]

1 hour ago, zMeul said:

-snip-

Im sorry what you mean?

[zMeul]

13 minutes ago, VerticalDiscussions said:

Im sorry what you mean?

what do I mean?!

why are you telling me I'm rude to Apple? why do you care? do you identify yourself with Apple?

[VerticalDiscussions]

1 minute ago, zMeul said:

-snip-

I care for the same reason anyone above would care. Nothing... But i dont understand the hate for Apple, with no offense to you ofc. If i identify with them, remains to be seen. Maybe in the future, since ive finally broke free from the devil of smartphones/tablets!

 

Thanks for sharing the news btw.

[zMeul]

2 minutes ago, VerticalDiscussions said:

I care for the same reason anyone above would care. Nothing... But i dont understand the hate for Apple, with no offense to you ofc. If i identify with them, remains to be seen. Maybe in the future, since ive finally broke free from the devil of smartphones/tablets!

then, I'm sorry for you

 

Apple is a big enough corporation to fend for itself; they don't need individuals to carry their battles

or any other corp for that matter

[VerticalDiscussions]

29 minutes ago, zMeul said:

-snip-

I never stated i was carrying theyr battle... all i was trying to imply was that theyr products are great products, but this rotten and uneducated internet has stuck on theyr heads that Apple = Rotten (Again, not claiming its you). Most corporations dont have to fight battles, since theyr left in the dust. Sadly, many have indoctrinated potential users to turn into them, thanks to false advertising and gimmicky features in software alongside customer support being completely faulty.

[zMeul]

2 minutes ago, VerticalDiscussions said:

I never stated i was carrying theyr battle... all i was trying to imply was that theyr products are great products

mate, I do not give a flying fuck about Apple and their products .. as I already said

and you quoted me saying I'm rude to Apple .. 

 

that seems to me you're taking it personal, and I don't get that