Print 47 comment(s) - last by talonvor.. on Oct 23 at 7:50 AM

CEO says next generation 14 nm "tock" architecture refresh (Skylake) will not be delayed

Intel Corp. (INTC), which reported its earnings yesterday, gave investors an unwelcome surprise as well when it announced its first 14 nm chip, codenamed Broadwell, is being delayed by a quarter.

I. A Minor Slip

Intel was supposed to start shipping Broadwell chips to OEMs in Q4 2013 (this quarter) giving them time to integrate the chip into their new notebooks, laptops, desktops, and tablets.  Instead the new chips will start shipping in Q1 2014.

Currently, Intel's premium Core Series-branded Haswell chips are produced on a 22 nm process.  But moving from 22 nm node to 14 nm has proved trickier than Intel expected.

IDF 2013
[Image Source: Jason Mick/DailyTech LLC]

Normally a die shrink involves years of prototyping technologies.  When a production process is mature enough to come out the laboratory, it's installed at the fab.  Equipment must often be updated or replaced to handle the new process once it's moved to a full-scale fab on its final path towards production.  At that point tests runs are executed to study the efficacy of the fab hardware and methodology for the node, typically at lower volumes that the final production runs.

It is typical to find problems with the process at that stage, and it is up to the engineers to institute a set of process method and hardware changes to minimize those defects.  When the fixes are in place, a semiconductor manufacturer crosses its fingers, metaphorically speaking and moves to volume production.
Haswell shot
Intel currently owns 95 percent of the server market (Haswell is pictured).

This approach typically works out for Intel, but this time something went wrong.  The fix failed to minimize the number of wafer defects to the extent expect, and as a result a relatively high percentage of Intel's CPU were turning out dead on arrival.

Intel's new CEO Brian Krzanich insists this is not uncommon stating, "We have confidence the problem is fixed because we have data it is fixed.  This happens sometimes in development phases like this. That's why we moved it a quarter.  We have a strong desire to get Broadwell to market. If I could, there'd be nothing slowing me down. This is a small blip in the schedule, and we'll continue on from here."

In Intel's internal jargon, Broadwell is a so-called "tick" release, which involves simply shrinking the previous processor architecture (Haswell, in this case), while possibly adopting some minor tweaks/improvements based on lessons learned.  By contrast, the next generation after Broadwell will be a new architecture, called a "tock".  That "tock" release -- Skylake – will not be delayed, Mr. Krzanich stated, from its prospective 2015 ship date.

II. Intel Enjoys Healthy Process Lead, but Its Chips are Slower than Samsung's

The delay of Broadwell is a bit of bad news, but it could be much worse; the earnings report for Intel was otherwise better than expected.  And while Intel has yet to establish a strong presence in the smartphone and tablet markets (unlike the server and traditional PC markets that it dominates), it is starting to attract interest in the mobile space, thanks in part to its process lead and the intrinsic power savings that lead provides.

Intel 14 nm fab
Intel is producing 14 nm chips at three key fab facilities. [Image Source: Intel]

Despite the setback, that lead remains relatively large.  International Business Machines, Inc. (IBM) in August soft launched 22 nm Power8 architecture high-end server chips and licensable architecture.  However, it's still working with partners to try to bring that chip to the market in physical form.  Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Comp., Ltd. (TPE:233028 nm process -- a top third party manufacturer for ARM chips (the mobile industry's dominant architecture), has taped out 16 nm chips.  It's attempting to jump directly from 28 nm to 16 nm.

16 nm is still a larger node than 14 nm, but TSMC didn't seem to have the same problems with its die shrink, opening the floodgates to production with the release of design flows for common chip types (including various ARM CPUs) last month.

On the other hand, Intel's new Bay Trail Atom Z3770 chip faces stiff competition from a 28 nm Samsung Electronics Comp., Ltd. (KSC:005930) produced chip -- the A7 processor Apple, Inc. (AAPL) uses in its new iPhone 5S.  The performance of the A7 shows that while process provides some advantages power and processing wise, those advantages may increasingly be unable to overcome the inherent architectural baggage that x86 brings to the table.  

Apple's A7 managed to beat Bay Trail chips, despite a slower clock and larger node size.
Samsung's process is 28nm LP (Gate-First high-κ metal gate (HKMG)), while Intel's 22 nm process is Gate-Last HMKG.  This is a huge win for Samsung as it means that it's producing a better chip on a cheaper mature process -- the best possible scenario.  By contrast, Intel's still fresh 22 nm is not only slower -- it also costs Intel more to produce.

In other words, don't bet against Intel's ARM rivals, even if they're a bit behind on process technology.

Source: CNET via Intel

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Intel is now the underdog
By bug77 on 10/16/2013 6:51:52 PM , Rating: 1
x86 has been "loosing" for a while. Its complex instructions have been the best solution in an age where computing power was more limited and compilers were limiting the ability to write code in simple instructions.
Times have changed. Compilers of today can work wonders. The rise of mobile brought us power as a limiting factor. So far intel has been mitigating those with an enormous library of existing software and a lead in manufacturing process. But that won't be sustainable forever.
x86 is already stuff of legend. It's been with us for almost 40 years, it has brought computing to our houses. In fact, I'm pretty sure ARM does (did?) development on x86 platforms.
I say let's thank to everybody involved for pushing the envelope and let the best platform won.

RE: Intel is now the underdog
By CaedenV on 10/16/2013 10:50:10 PM , Rating: 1
On the contrary, I am seeing the exact oposite thing happening. As mobile devices become more and more useful there is more and more need for a return of complex instructions. This is inflating the ARM feature set and it is not scaling well with power. Intel chips are already vastly more efficient (work/power), and they are getting their power usage down very quickly while ARM is rising in power usage without gaining much returns in efficiency.

I am not saying that Intel is not going to hit a wall, because once they get down to a sub 10nm die then there is a very real wall that will be hit. But what I am saying is that ARM is going to hit that exact same wall, and they will not be nearly as prepared for it.

At the end of the day both x86 and ARM are loosers. x86 cannot be cut down small enough (well... there is quark), and ARM will never be efficient enough. Once the die shrink wall is hit then something else will need to be done. Be it more efficient and flexible instructions, or moving from a binary to a trinary processor (we are already seeing it in storage), but something drastic is going to have to change within the next 10 years and nither platform will survive the transition. Intel has the budget and R&D to make this 'something new' that may come... but Sammy and Arm do not.

RE: Intel is now the underdog
By purerice on 10/17/2013 12:25:16 AM , Rating: 3
The RISC vs CISC debate may never end and as you suggest, new technology may be required that leaves both in the dust.

RISC has several design (as opposed to performance) advantages over CISC but for the longest time the market for RISC was limited to Apple, some consoles, and some embedded platforms. The lack of market hampered RISC more than inherent advantages helped. With little funding available IBM and ARM became the sole developers of RISC processors. In 1997 Motorola planned a 2ghz CPU for launch in 3 years. Those chip designers walked to Intel and helped create Netbu(r)st for Intel.

CISC developers largely ignored the smartphone space and that is what gave RISC the opportunity to finally flex its muscles.

My Merom-powered desktop was about 30x the power of the original iPhone. The new Haswell powered version of my desktop is about 4x the power of the iPhone 5s. If (and only if) that level of relative improvement continues over the next 6 1/2 years, the iPhone of 2020 will be about 2x the speed of the typical Intel desktop. Until recently, Intel did not view RISC as a competitor to CISC and worked just hard enough to stay ahead of AMD. With RISC reemerging as a performance competitor to Intel's chips, perhaps Intel will redouble development efforts.

RE: Intel is now the underdog
By inighthawki on 10/17/2013 10:12:09 PM , Rating: 2
You're forgetting that 1) For the past three generations, Intel has barely focused on improving performance at all (Haswell is almost identical to ivy bridge, and ivy bridge was only about 10% over sandy bridge), and 2) It's easier to have the appearance of "catching up" so quickly when when you're using modern technology to produce a 5 year old chip.

"If you mod me down, I will become more insightful than you can possibly imagine." -- Slashdot

Most Popular ArticlesTop 5 Smart Watches
July 21, 2016, 11:48 PM
Free Windows 10 offer ends July 29th, 2016: 10 Reasons to Upgrade Immediately
July 22, 2016, 9:19 PM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki