Intel splitting manufacturing group into three parts after repeated 10nm delays

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 32
    re the "same apps" running on iOS and macOS: Adobe just announced that "full photoshop" is being released on ipads, so maybe others are coming?
  • Reply 22 of 32
    Since Apple doesn't sell servers, or sell its custom ASIC to any outside manufacturers, Apple's migration doesn't really hurt Intel. Intel makes the big money on servers. Apple is less than 3% of Intel's overall business, and that's including modems and lesser components. The volume on Macs is insignificant compared to the number of Chromebook and Windows PC devices sold.
    Your right, losing Apples current market share in PCs doesn’t matter. In a few years when you can have Mac quality experience (reliable components, aesthetically pleasing, MacOS, equal or better performance) for the same price as a PC without Apple hurting normal margins, meaningful amounts of people will buy them over PCs which cuts Intel out. Apple will drop a server when the time is right and will cripple both Microsoft and Intel simultaneously.
  • Reply 23 of 32
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    It seems like what is needed is some sort of Eureka moment in to how to solve the 10nm technical problems. Not sure how reorganising people would cause that, it might even significantly distract them further delaying a solution.
  • Reply 24 of 32
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    sully54 said:
    I'm wondering, are there technical differences in complexity between intel chips and TSMC made A-series chips that make apple's chips more possible to make on a 7nm design? Or to put my question another way, are Intel chips more technically complex that it's harder to design in on a 7nm scale? I don't have much technical knowledge on Intel's development process but I just don't understand how they're so behind.
    A12 if you count transistors, A12 is more complex than many (most) of Intels current processors. If you look at circuit complexity I doubt many of Intels chips even come close to the complexity of A12.  Think about it a bit, we all know about the ARM application processors, the GPU and now the Neural Engine. The reality though that is just a start when it comes to processor count, there are many additional special function or encode / decode processors.  The SoC actually has rather large on board caches 

    in a nut shell there is a lot of complexity in A12 that isn’t seen in too many intel processors.  Interestingly some of those auxiliary processors are rumored to have ARM cores directing the specialized logic.   Whatever the reality there is a lot going on in Apples chips.  

    The bigger problem with Intel appears to be process technology not processor technology or chip complexity.  It is important to understand the difference.  In Apples case TSMC handles the process technology with Apple handling the processor / chip technology.   To put it another way TSMC handles the process that the chips are built with.  In fact many companies will use TSMC’s 7nm process to build chips upon.  
  • Reply 25 of 32
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    bill1357 said:
    Not sure if this is true, but it seems like I have heard that Intels 10 nm and TSMC's are quite different and that perhaps if Intels ever works, it will be noticeably better than TSMC's at the same line width.  One of course has to also take into account that sometimes a tech number in nm refers only to SOME of the features, like maybe the company pushed one or a few features smaller while the overall chip is more represented by a larger nm number.  No real way to tell without reading the tech papers.  Listening to the "advertising" doesn't hack it.
    True there are differences between processes but Apple A12 is pretty much proof of the pudding.   While I doubt we can get extremely accurate info the real measure for comparison is transistors per square millimeter.  

    Beyound that TSMC is pretty confident that they will have a new 7nm process running on extreme UV.  So in 2019 TSMC will be on their second generation 7nm process with Intel still screwing around.  Supposedly this gen 2 process at TSMC is pretty good so Intel May have a significant challenge on their hands in 2019.  The challenge will come from both AMD and Apple.  
  • Reply 26 of 32
    jkichlinejkichline Posts: 1,369member
    lkrupp said:
    More and more, the articles around Intel's 10nm delays are reminding me the speculation leading up to "the G5 PowerBook". I doubt Apple is ready to sour the relationship with Intel before they've got a replacement ready to go, but I wonder if they might diversify with AMD in the near future. AMD's willingness to entertain semi-custom designs and their new series of Zen-based APUs would be good fits for the new Mac Pro and Mac mini, respectively, but Intel would undoubtedly view that... poorly.
    Unlikely to happen. More likely to happen is a transition to in house A processors for the Mac like the iPhone. A unified platform with cross developed apps seems likely for Apple’s future. Traditionalists will foam at the mouth, of course. What about Boot Camp they will sputter. Apple did it once before with the PowerPC to Intel migration. I’d bet serious money that Apple already has macOS running on the A chip architecture in the lab. All they’ll need is a Rosetta style translator to make the jump. Developers like Adobe and Microsoft will follow. Office already runs on iOS.
    If you mean the same exact apps & UI on iOS and macOS, I don’t know how many times Craig and the execs have to say they don’t foresee that happening for reasons they’ve openly discussed. 
    The same code can be used for both and simply compiled with a different SDK. That’s what they demonstrated with many native Mojave apps like News. They have already begun the ability to write iOS apps that are cross-platform. Then they just need to bundle the app to run on either platform and you can have the millions of titles available on iOS running on MacBooks.
  • Reply 27 of 32
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,718member
    mattinoz said:
    lkrupp said:
    More and more, the articles around Intel's 10nm delays are reminding me the speculation leading up to "the G5 PowerBook". I doubt Apple is ready to sour the relationship with Intel before they've got a replacement ready to go, but I wonder if they might diversify with AMD in the near future. AMD's willingness to entertain semi-custom designs and their new series of Zen-based APUs would be good fits for the new Mac Pro and Mac mini, respectively, but Intel would undoubtedly view that... poorly.
    Unlikely to happen. More likely to happen is a transition to in house A processors for the Mac like the iPhone. A unified platform with cross developed apps seems likely for Apple’s future. Traditionalists will foam at the mouth, of course. What about Boot Camp they will sputter. Apple did it once before with the PowerPC to Intel migration. I’d bet serious money that Apple already has macOS running on the A chip architecture in the lab. All they’ll need is a Rosetta style translator to make the jump. Developers like Adobe and Microsoft will follow. Office already runs on iOS.
    Why not both?
    Relegate x86 to a applications coprocessor use A series as the main platform chip. Intel are already doing a custom for Cray and are said to be dumping Phi for a commercialised variation of the Cray chip. Apple gets unified platform across the line up to the PCIe bridge which on iOS it just connects to the ligthening port. On Mac would connect into a PCIe hub and on to higher bandwidth ports and the co-processor(s). Even maybe in the future add eAPU support to Mac and iOS in future. Each Mac range would be defined by co-processor load in it.  Software either runs completely on coprocessor as legacy or marizpan completely on Aseries with a couple of options in between to be running on both. 
    An Intel CPU as a BTO in higher-end Macs for those that want virtualization is all that would be needed IMHO once Apple have their own CPUs.  I read somewhere yesterday <5% of Mac users run VMware or Parallels so making an Intel CPU a simple *language card' seems logical.  

    *Flashbacks to Apple][ s  ...  
    edited October 2018
  • Reply 28 of 32
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,911member
    kimberly said:
    JWSC said:
    rob53 said:
    Why would Qualcomm say Apple gave secrets to Intel when all intel had to do was talk to the old Qualcomm person they hired in 2015?
    As conditions of employment, many employers ask new hires to sign documents related to proprietary data, such as non-disclosure agreements (NDAs).  Even if you never signed an NDA you could still be sued for breach of trust.  Some companies handle this differently by requiring departing employees to not work for a direct competitor for several years, on the threat that the company could sue them.  The threat alone is enough to deter most people who are moving to new companies.
    Wow (see bold above) ... in Australia, engaging in that caper is called restraint of trade and is illegal (an NDA would be binding though).
    I signed such a document, called a non-compete in the US.  As Vp of Product Development and designer of my company’s software apps you can imagine my company not wanting me to jump to a competitor.  The non-compete term was 18 months post employment.  But no worries as I was all done with the software game when I left in 2011, preferring to become a full-time investor since.  
    Noncompete agreements are very common in the medical profession and other service professions as well. Basically, if a group hires someone, they don’t want him/her to leave the group, open up a practice across the street and steal all the patients or clients, directly harming the rest of the group. The argument is harder to make for the technical industry, though.
  • Reply 29 of 32
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    I think the real question is:   What the hell happened to Intel?  

    They were leaders in design, development and manufacturing.   Now, not so much.  They're being out designed, out developed and out manufactured by newbies.

    So what happened?
    williamlondonJWSC
  • Reply 30 of 32
    netmagenetmage Posts: 314member
    TSMC’s main competition may be Samsung as they just announced successful EUV at 7nm and will be entering mass production.
    Regardless of Apple’s reluctance to continue back door funding a competitor, they are pragmatic and will Select Samsung again if their EUV is more attractive then TSMC.
    edited October 2018
  • Reply 31 of 32
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,648member
    Intel is done for.
  • Reply 32 of 32

    kimberly said:
    JWSC said:
    rob53 said:
    Why would Qualcomm say Apple gave secrets to Intel when all intel had to do was talk to the old Qualcomm person they hired in 2015?
    As conditions of employment, many employers ask new hires to sign documents related to proprietary data, such as non-disclosure agreements (NDAs).  Even if you never signed an NDA you could still be sued for breach of trust.  Some companies handle this differently by requiring departing employees to not work for a direct competitor for several years, on the threat that the company could sue them.  The threat alone is enough to deter most people who are moving to new companies.
    Wow (see bold above) ... in Australia, engaging in that caper is called restraint of trade and is illegal (an NDA would be binding though).
    I signed such a document, called a non-compete in the US.  As Vp of Product Development and designer of my company’s software apps you can imagine my company not wanting me to jump to a competitor.  The non-compete term was 18 months post employment.  But no worries as I was all done with the software game when I left in 2011, preferring to become a full-time investor since.  
    am a bit out of date re CA, but 10 years ago or so restrictive employment contracts were common in CA, AND unenforceable by state law.
Sign In or Register to comment.