why could intel not just go with 12nm

[realsmooth59]

Instead of 10nm could they just go with 12nm they are doing too much of a leap. And at least they could work on 10 nm in the meantime and there won't be too many chips clogging up their foundries, and they would not be too far behind also there are many other little benefits with this. What do you think?

[Pixel5]

i think intel could have mastered 10nm much earlier if they had invested their money into development instead of bribing companies to not sell or use AMD CPU´s.

[bellabichon]

1 minute ago, Pixel5 said:

i think intel could have mastered 10nm much earlier if they had invested their money into development instead of bribing companies to not sell or use AMD CPU´s.

Yeah, that's probably true. That bribing, however, is paying off big time right now. For the first time in a decade, AMD has legitimately competitive offerings in the consumer market, but Intel still holds a massive portion of market share. 

[XR6]

4 minutes ago, Pixel5 said:

i think intel could have mastered 10nm much earlier if they had invested their money into development instead of bribing companies to not sell or use AMD CPU´s.

Yeah but with Intel being Intel, from what I can gather they want to be the main company in the market. A bit like the apple strategy if i'm honest.

[bellabichon]

1 minute ago, 1kv said:

Yeah but with Intel being Intel, from what I can gather they want to be the only ones in the market. A bit like the apple strategy if i'm honest.

Well, yes and no. Apple's philosophy is about making products easier for the consumer, at the cost of more expensive offerings, and loss of right-to-repair. Intel seems to really not care what you do with your CPU, as long as you pay them. 

[realsmooth59]

3 minutes ago, Pixel5 said:

i think intel could have mastered 10nm much earlier if they had invested their money into development instead of bribing companies to not sell or use AMD CPU´s.

yeah they are a multibillion dollar company and their strategy is kind of stupid now their i7 i5 and i3 chips and their server chips are clogging their 14nm ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ foundrys 

[XR6]

3 minutes ago, bellabichon said:

Well, yes and no. Apple's philosophy is about making products easier for the consumer, at the cost of more expensive offerings, and loss of right-to-repair. Intel seems to really not care what you do with your CPU, as long as you pay them. 

That's sorta what i was getting at. I meant as in they've tried to heavily promote themselves and try to block out the competition, with my example being Intel as apple and AMD being android. Android's been on the rise with the Note 9 and OP6 recently and that's why I sorta thought up that idea. 

[Dedayog]

6 minutes ago, Somekid5 said:

yeah they are a multibillion dollar company and their strategy is kind of stupid now their i7 i5 and i3 chips and their server chips are clogging their 14nm ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ foundrys 

I think there was a whole lot more involved in their conference meetings about strategy then just should we go 10, 12, 1nm....  These things take YEARS of planning, funding, research, reinvention, etc etc etc.  

 

They didn't expect (or put enough money into bribing AMD personnel) AMD to perform as they did.  Infact, I'll wager 5 years ago no one would have confidence that AMD would have been here (I'm sure AMD employees scuttlebutted a boatload about WTF are we doing?!). Normal business stuff.

 

You take educated guesses, a bit of risk (especially when leading an industry), and if it works you're just doing okay and if it fails... you get random speculation about how stupid your strategy was

 

Work in Corporate at the management level or C level, and you'll understand a lot more than just a forum can shed light on.

 

Edit:  As the poster after me said, it's just a label.  Think about cars.  Should everyone go larger engines for more power?  Bigger doesn't mean better.  In chips, smaller doesn't mean better either.  Refinement is a huge part of things.

[Coaxialgamer]

Ultimately , 12 nm is just a label at this point .

Globalfoundries' 12nm tech was not much more than an optimized variant of their 14nm tech.

If you're suggesting intel go with GF 12nm , then you should know that intel's 14nm is ultimately superior to 12nm GF . It's faster and denser ( or at least just as much), not to mention a shift to that tech would require porting all their designs to work with GF's process.

 

But i don't think that's what you mean .

Do you mean " Why doesn't intel introduce a stopgap process until 10nm , with a less aggressive shrink ".

The answer :

-Making a dedicated process from scratch requires a lot of money , which would be foolish for something which is essentially a short lived stopgap

-They already are... sort of :

Intel's improved 14nm processes (14nm+ and ++)  fit this description in a way . What they did was take the existing 14nm process and add many of the features they were planning to introduce in 10nm. Single dummy gates and COAG were originally planned to debut in 10nm , but were introduced in these 14nm processes , which reduced size and increase performance . They didn't do much for power by themselves , but that was mostly dealt with by standard node improvements as expected of a mature process.