Hacker News Reader

Comment by mbell | Hacker News Reader

Intel has actually been selling 10nm chips since late last year (in very low volume, a single SKU i believe) so it seems more likely their estimates are on track now.

As for Intel vs TSMC - The node 'sizes' aren't directly comparable, Intel's 10nm is roughly equivalent to TSMC's 7nm and Intel's 7nm is expected to be similar to TSMC's 5nm. TSMC is targeting 2020 for 5nm so Intel is a bit behind still but not as far as the node names would make it appear.

View on HN

The 10nm chip Intel sold last year was bullshit -- low volume and single SKU because it wasn't anything to write home about.

People also keep trying to defend Intel by saying their 10nm is roughly equivalent to the TSMC 7nm, but that's a pretty BS defense seeing as Intel hasn't shipped a real product with it.

Meanwhile TSMC is already working out the kinks on their 5nm process for next year. No matter how you slice it, Intel has fallen behind.

Intels 10nm is nowhere as good as TSMC 7nm.

In theory is was going to be a bit better than TSMC 7mm, with only 7+nm equaling or exceeding it.

In practice, it's slower than Intel 14nm, denser (better be!!), and consumes less power. And has pesky yield issues, Semiaccurate is convinced it'll never be a profitable node.

Yea every other time this conversation starts, there's a table floating around showing how the process sizes actually compare on various measurements. It doesn't line up exactly, but yes it's close to what you say, Intel 14nm ~= TSMC/Samsung 10nm, Intel 10nm ~= TSMC/Samsung 7nm.

ish.

That cpu was like that Bob Dylan cd collection Sony made 100 copies of.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com