Klimax (danklima.delete@this.gmail.com) on August 26, 2014 3:38 am wrote:
> juanrga (nospam.delete@this.juanrga.com) on August 26, 2014 2:16 am wrote:
> > Klimax (danklima.delete@this.gmail.com) on August 25, 2014 10:12 pm wrote:
> > > juanrga (nospam.delete@this.juanrga.com) on August 25, 2014 3:11 pm wrote:
> > > > Klimax (danklima.delete@this.gmail.com) on August 25, 2014 2:14 pm wrote:
> > > > > juanrga (nospam.delete@this.juanrga.com) on August 25, 2014 12:29 pm wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > > And TSMC has accelerated roadmap and will start 16nm volume production in 1Q15:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) will advance volume production on its 16nm
> > > > > > process to the first quarter of 2015 with monthly output of 50,000 wafers in order to meet demand
> > > > > > for Apple's A9 processors, the Chinese-language Economic Daily News (EDN) has reported.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > TSMC originally planned to kicked off 16nm volume production in second-quarter 2015.
> > > > > > TSMC faces strong competition from Samsung Electronics' foundry business.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20140825PB201.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Broadwell-EP @14nm vs ARM server-class @16nm will be an interesting figth to watch.
> > > > >
> > > > > Only when against all odds TSMC actually delivers. So far their track record is supremely abysmal. So far
> > > > > there is high probability ARM server chips on that node will go against later Intel chips, not Broadwell.
> > > > > Also it seems that Intel fitted into their 14nm more changes then so far foundries to their "16nm".
> > > >
> > > > Broadwell-EP is scheduled for Q3 2015. Moreover, Skylake will use same node.
> > > >
> > > > Intel 14nm will be only about half-node ahead of TSMC 16nm. The gap has reduced.
> > > They will likely e against that Skylake.
> > > Half-node? They are not yet even fully on "20nm". (one baseband
> > > modem and only limited availability) And it doesn't
> > > look like they have even similar advantages on 16nm as Intel gets from 14nm. (Under discussion here)
> > >
> > > So far there are no sings of actually catching up with Intel any where else but slides...
> > >
> >
> > Intel 14nm is about half-node away from TSMC 16nm.
> >
> > And I don't know what slides you are mentioning. The slides showing Broadwell would be in stores before
> > it was delayed and next delayed and then delayed again? Or do you mean the infamous slide where Intel
> > showed invalid densities for other's nodes, increasing artificially the gap between the nodes?
>
> Until "16nm" is actually shipping, then they are not. Also "16nm" has not that
> much in common with 14nm by Intel. To my knowledge 16nm is just 20nm with trigates.
> (First generation) So in no way it is half node away from 14nm.
>
> As for slides, I refer to their various published slides about
> their advances and how they are supposedly closing gap...
>
> As for delays of Broadwell. Well, Intel is targeting "real" 14nm (that is, they
> get full node shrink advantage), unlike 16nm, which is no such thing. Original
> process was to use more advanced equipment, which didn't materialize.

Intel is not targeting "real" 14nm. Intel deviated from ITRS rules years ago, what they call 14nm is "real" ~16nm.

TSMC and Glofo/Samsung are playing by same rules than Intel now, just to avoid marketing abuse from Intel. As Scott Thompson (former Intel fellow) said: "Intel's 22nm node is really 26nm, so if Intel does new math, so will we."

What part of Intel 14nm is only about half-node away from TSMC 16nm is not stil understood?