Intel's Process Roadmap to 2025: with 4nm, 3nm, 20A and 18A?!
by Dr. Ian Cutress on July 26, 2021 5:00 PM ESTCustomers Customers Customers
As a roadmap announcement today, the focus isn’t so much on the customers but on the technology. Because Intel is moving into a phase where it expects its IFS offerings to compete against the established players, it has to consider its disclosures with respect to both its internal use and any external interest, which is a new concept for the company – at least on this scale compared to its previous foundry efforts.
Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger, in the company’s Q3 financial call last week, was keen to point out that they already have a large hyperscaler customer signed up for their next generation packaging technology, however today there would appear to also be another customer in the mix. Now we assume that Intel’s Foundry Services is talking to 100s of chip companies, big and small, but it doesn’t take much to sign an NDA to start to talk – what will be interesting is when customers start making commitments to using Intel’s facilities, and if any of those are volume orders.
As part of the announcement today, Intel held a little bit back from us, saying that they are saving some of the details specifically for the event that is going on as we publish this piece. All we know is that our draft press release has a big yellow bar that says ‘[customer news]’ on it, right next to Intel’s 20A process node details.
For reference, Intel 20A is a 2024 technology using first generation Gate-All-Around transistors, marketed as RibbonFETs, as well as backside power delivery, marketed as PowerVias. At this time Intel expects to have second/third-generation EMIB available as well as fourth-generation Foveros Direct. So if a customer is already committing to Intel 20A, there’s going to be a lot of potential here.
When the announcement is made, we will update this news article.
To conclude, Intel maintains that these roadmaps will showcase a clear path to process performance leadership* by 2025. It’s a tall order, and the company has to execute better than it has in recent memory - but that’s kind of why the company has rehired a number of former Intel experts and fellows in research, product design, and execution.
*as measured by performance per watt at iso-power
Here's a secondary comparison chart (compared to the one on page one) with all three main foundry offerings listed in each of the main segments that Intel has discussed today.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
326 Comments
View All Comments
alufan - Tuesday, July 27, 2021 - link
Lol is all just LolSeems Anandtech is still swallowing all Intels Bull
so a 4 is not 4nm but is actually 7nm!
You just know they are failing at producing decent CPUs at up to date processes when they think of a ruse like this to slap on machines in store to make the non Techies of the world swallow the pill intel is lower so must therefore be better, shame on you Anandtech for not calling this what it is an Intel crap sandwich
mode_13h - Wednesday, July 28, 2021 - link
> when they think of a ruse like this to slap on machines in storeNobody ever said they're using this in retail branding! No, they already have BS numbering schemes for that, with i3/i5/i7/i9 and Nth generation.
These names are mostly for foundry customers, and also those tech insiders who even know what a manufacturing process is.
dicobalt - Tuesday, July 27, 2021 - link
When I started reading I automatically assumed this meant Intel is going to lie about the process just like everyone else is. Then I saw that I was right. Maybe Intel should be using density as they have suggested before instead of lying like everyone else. There's also the most real life relevant performance per dollar metric too. Intel should be setting standards that people can use not playing a stupid marketing game with the coke addled wallstreet gimps.mode_13h - Wednesday, July 28, 2021 - link
Manufacturers never *want* to use real metrics. Maybe when their products are head-and-shoulders above everyone else, but otherwise not.It's like how hi-fi gear uses A-weighted SNR, when they really should use C-weighted (if they even tell you the SNR, that is). Why do they use A-weighted? Because someone figured they could get better numbers that way and then everyone else had to follow.
But they'd really rather sell on the basis of non-quantifiable things, like Apple is probably most famous for doing. When Apple lists product specs, it's mostly just to upsell its customers vs. other products they're considering or already own. But rarely does someone actually buy Apple because of the specs.
Oxford Guy - Wednesday, July 28, 2021 - link
‘But rarely does someone actually buy Apple because of the specs.’Tell that to all the Mac owners who were forced to buy replacement machines because Apple force-fed them the APFS file system — incompatible with hard drives (unless one counts glacial speeds as evidence of compatibility).
Then, there are the quickly-orphaned iPad 1 owners, orphaned because Apple put so little RAM into them. (That’s Apple’s #1 ploy and has been since 1984.)
Spunjji - Thursday, July 29, 2021 - link
You're still making a pretty solid argument in favour of most Apple owners not buying due to specs. I know a few people who still used iPad 1s until relatively recently (usually as a glorified e-Reader) and really didn't care about the OS not being updated. Most of them only stopped when the devices got physically broken.For most of the people who got screwed by the things you mentioned, it was a surprise because they just didn't think about those specs until they were forced to.
GeoffreyA - Friday, July 30, 2021 - link
"Apple is the best. I'm buying this. Not interested in any of that last-grade Android junk."Oxford Guy - Tuesday, August 3, 2021 - link
Android was quite an inferior experience the last time I used it — and I think a good number of iOS design choices are vile. Just today, for instance, it harassed me with pop ups twice in a row (three times over the course of me writing a single message) — demanding that I turn on dictation. It also popped up a harassment window to order me to enter my Apple ID.So, for Android to be a worse experience than that says what needs to be said about the state of ‘smart’ phones.
mode_13h - Wednesday, August 4, 2021 - link
> for Android to be a worse experience than thatThere's not a singular Android experience. Each phone maker customizes it in varying ways and to varying degrees. Samsung supposedly does heavier customization, among phone makers.
Back when Google had the "Nexus" product line, it was supposed to be mostly unmodified. I'm not sure if their Pixel devices continue that tradition, but it would make sense.
Oxford Guy - Wednesday, August 11, 2021 - link
‘There's not a singular Android experience’Uh huh.