backtop


Print 18 comment(s) - last by 2ManyOptions.. on Jun 1 at 10:48 AM


Intel hopes that its Moorestown and Oak Trail platforms will see pickup in the tablet sector. It's accelerating its Atom roadmap, hoping to release 22 nm CPUs in 2013 and 14 nm CPUs in 2014.  (Source: PC Forum)

Intel also plans to FINALLY add USB 3.0 support, based on comments. Past commentary indicate that Intel will ship chipsets with support sometime in 2012.  (Source: USB3.com)

ASUS UX Series
Intel plans to hit 14 nm with Atom by 2014

The last couple days have been dominated by Intel Corp.'s (INTC) key competitors [1] [2].  Today at the hardware convention Computex 2011 in Taiwan, Intel fired back reaffirming its commitment to the mobile sector.

I. Die Shrinks Every Year

Intel's Atom is behind.  It's behind Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.'s (AMD) similarly priced Fusion processor in performance.  It's behind ARM Holdings plc's (ARMH) designs in power consumption.

Despite that, it's ahead in the one thing that really matters -- market share.  

Intel is hoping to maintain that lead by getting more aggressive with Atom.  On Monday, Intel executives reaffirmed their commitment to accelerating the roadmap of Atom.

Atom's codenamed Cedar Trail (part of the Saltwell family) -- a 32 nm Atom die shrink -- is supposed to launch in Q4 2011, three and a quarter years after the launch of the original 45 nm Atom in Q3 2008.  By contrast Intel plans to release a 22 nm Atom, dubbed Silvermont only two years later in 2013, and a 14 nm Atom dubbed Airmont in 2014.

That's the same plan that Intel revealed at its annual investors' meeting two weeks ago.

Cutting its die shrink time from 3 years to two years, then to a single year seems no easy task.  So how is Intel accomplishing this feat?

Well it turns out it already has these die shrinks, on its high-end personal computer lineup.  It shrunk to 32 nm with Westmere, the die-shrink of Nehalem, which launched in Q1 2010.  So the die shrink on the Atom side is almost two years behind.

Similarly, Intel plans to release its 22 nm Ivy Bridge CPU in 2012 (the die shrink of Sandy Bridge), followed by the 14 nm Broadwell in 2014 (the die shrink of Ivy Bridge successor Haswell).  So, in short, Intel should have the technology on hand to shrink atom to the promised marks.  

That's great news for Intel as it would put it at least a year or two ahead of the competition such AMD spinoff Global Foundries, South Korea's Samsung Electronics (SEO:005930), and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Limited (TSM).  Paired with Intel's recent announcement of tri-gate transistors at the 22 nm node (a 3D design that "wraps" the channel in three dimensions to reduce leakage), Intel may have a winner on its hands.

However, the plan still carries significant risks.

The biggest risk is price.  Intel must keep prices low, even if its new Atom chips begin to close the gap with its competitors in power consumption and/or performance.  That's no easy order, as Intel's aggressive acceleration of the Atom roadmap mandates that it expand its manufacturing capabilities to support full Atom production at a smaller node.  All that costs money, and the questions are where that money will come from and whether that expense will impact the critical price per chip.

A second risk is in a potential letdown post-2014.  Assuming Intel can hit 14 nm by 2014, it likely won't hit the next smallest node until 2016 (following its progress on the desktop side).  And from there it's anyone's guess -- the physical limits of optical die shrinks will likely stretch the time it takes to implement them.

In short, the next several years could be very good for Atom -- or very bad.

II. Medfield, Tablets, and Ultrabooks, Oh My!

Intel also talked a bit about its upcoming smart phone processor "Medfield".  Mired in the departure of a key executive in charge of its mobile unit and delays, Intel hopes to get Medfield out the door sometime next year.

Little is known about the chip.  

Intel promises a fanless Atom, which can deliver enough processing power for a tablet or smart phone.  The only real detail it shared is that it's targeting "sub-9mm designs".  That figure is in line with current state-of-the-art Android smart phones, which are thinner than 8.5 mm, or the somewhat outdated iPhone 4 from Apple, Inc. (AAPL), which is 9.3 mm.

Intel was also plugging its tablet efforts.  The company in April launched Oak Trail, a high-end tablet platform, which is primarily targeted at Windows tablets.  Oak Trail is essentially the same as the Moorestown platform (complete with Z6xx branded Lincroft), with a few minor additions, such as the inclusion of a PCI link.

Sales of Atom-powered tablets so far haven't been stellar, but it's still early and Intel has great expectations.

Rounding off Intel's ultra-mobility push is the so-called "ultrabook".  Intel defines an ultrabook as a small notebook with a touch screen for tablet-like features.  Intel says it plans to transfer 40 percent of consumer laptop production to ultrabooks by 2012.

The ultrabook will come at a sub-$1,000 price point.  Intel gave a teaser of one design -- the ASUS UX21 ultrabook from ASUSTEK Computer Inc. (TPE:2357).  ASUS Chairman Jonney Shih plugged the format, stating, "At ASUS, we are very much aligned with Intel’s vision of Ultrabook. Our customers are demanding an uncompromised computing experience in a lightweight, highly portable design that responds to their needs quickly. Transforming the PC into an ultra thin, ultra responsive device will change the way people interact with their PC."

III. USB 3.0

Last, but not least, Intel dropped mention of USB 3.0.  In his keynote Executive Vice President Sean Maloney called USB 3.0 a "complementary" technology to Intel's "Thunderbolt" -- the preliminary implementation of its "Light Peak" connectivity technology.

Intel has long turned its back on USB 3.0, choosing to push Light Peak instead.  Thunderbolt -- the preliminary implementation of Light Peak -- disappointed, however, offering copper-based connections, rather than the optical connections that Intel (and the tech's title) suggested.

USB 3.0 support is currently provided by third parties who make controller chips for compatible motherboards.  Thus far Intel continues to give the tech a cold shoulder production-wise, even while rival AMD announced the availability of new USB 3.0-ready chipsets in April.  

But Intel is rumored to finally be preparing to get onboard, shipping chips with USB 3.0 in 2012.  The fact that Intel briefly plugged the technology in its keynote lends some credence to this theory.



Comments     Threshold


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

USB 3.0 vs. Thunderbolt
By SuckRaven on 5/31/2011 1:49:09 PM , Rating: 1
Wouldn't surprise me if somehow Intel intentionally cripples USB 3.0 performance on their chipsets, to give an artificial advantage to their own proprietary connectivity. Might be interesting to watch, and compare USB 3.0 performance accross chipsets. Just a thought.




RE: USB 3.0 vs. Thunderbolt
By name99 on 5/31/11, Rating: 0
RE: USB 3.0 vs. Thunderbolt
By bjacobson on 5/31/2011 5:02:18 PM , Rating: 2
for starters, any code compiled by Intel's compiler

http://arstechnica.com/hardware/reviews/2008/07/at...

there's another more damning investigation of this behavior but I don't recall where.


RE: USB 3.0 vs. Thunderbolt
By TheJian on 5/31/2011 11:11:56 PM , Rating: 3
LOL. Search for Van Smith and AMD cpuid sysmark

That should get you a bunch of info on Intel even OWNING Bapco's residence (they were in Intel's complex so to speak, Intel engineers worked on Bapco software..ROFL). They even owned their friggin domain! They had to hide all this as fast as they could since AMD cleaned their clock if you told it your AMD processor was an Intel chip...LOL. Repeated excel searches (among other things you don't do in real life, but made them look great when SSE was turned off on AMD in sysmark) No, no dirty tricks there. Photoshop ran like crap (filters etc) until you told it to turn on SSE. Van wanted to expose this (and did) which is part of his falling out at Toms's hardware if memory serves.

This is when Tom's basically sold out to Intel and Van nailed them and left. Tom's site dropped to supposedly Million dollar status while Anand was priced then at about 10mil I think. Hardcore toms fans cringed, while he sold out, bought a BMW (provided pics etc..LOL - I guess it was a big deal to him) and went back to being a doctor IIRC. Which really sucked, because the guy uncovered a lot of stuff and was very thorough in his articles (much like an anand cpu overclocking article). Bummer. But INTEL CHEATS. Period. Every chance they get. No surprise there though MS does it too.

I'd go as far as to say they are in the position they're in now because of cheating. If Intel hadn't told ASUS etc put that board in a white unmarked box, blocked chip sales from AMD at big box makers, cheated in the most prolific benchmark at the time etc, they'd probably be 50/50 with AMD right now. AMD led in CPU performance by a good margin for 3 years and got nothing due all the blocking Intel did. Intel survived some really bad products that would have killed most companies were in not for their ability to cheat :) It didn't stop me from buying an Intel chip so the fanboys can all back off :)


RE: USB 3.0 vs. Thunderbolt
By TheJian on 5/31/2011 11:26:33 PM , Rating: 2
Looks like they still do it...
http://arstechnica.com/hardware/reviews/2008/07/at...

Screwing the nano on memory performance in the benchmark. People should just toss this benchmark (anything from bapco/mad onion/futuremark) out. We don't need them. Van's stuff covered sysmark 2000/2002 I think. This was still happening in the 2005 version it seems.


RE: USB 3.0 vs. Thunderbolt
By Black1969ta on 5/31/2011 4:04:08 PM , Rating: 2
What proprietary connectivity does Intel have that competes with USB 3.0? Lightpeak? Lightpeak, aka Thunderbolt, only carries PCIe and Video signals at the moment and even future iterations could only carry USB 3.0 and most other protocols. So Thunderbolt complements USB 3.0, not competes with it.

On that note, anybody else envision a Convertible Tablet like Eee transformer, but the CPU in the base dock connects to the CPU of the Tablet via Thunderbolt, and the Tablet CPU becomes the GPU of the system. Using Thunderbolt to act like the InterCore Die Connects would enable modular processing.


RE: USB 3.0 vs. Thunderbolt
By rangerdavid on 6/1/2011 2:20:10 AM , Rating: 2
Not quite correct, I think... Light Peak / Thunderbolt is essentially just a way to carry PCIe out of the box. And just like PCIe on the motherboard, you can pass anything you want over it - video, sound, USB, Firewire, whatever - so long as you have the right controller chip to load/unload the data at the other end. And it can carry a bunch of this stuff at once, with a full 10 Gbps each way, so the device at the other end could be a hub for multiple standards, like a display with built-in USB and Firewire and who-knows-what, all on one cable.


RE: USB 3.0 vs. Thunderbolt
By 2ManyOptions on 6/1/2011 10:48:59 AM , Rating: 2
Wow, that's a nasty thought :)
I don't understand why people wouldn't want a new technology which offers significantly greater speeds compared to something else. As with any new technology, it will take time to gather momentum. I would rather prefer 2 USB 3.0 ports + a Thunderbolt on my laptop rather than 2 USB 2.0 ports and 1 USB 3.0.


Asus UX?
By robinthakur on 5/31/2011 12:15:35 PM , Rating: 3
Wow that Macbook Air sure looks swee...Hey Waaaaiitaminute! Are Asus now copying Samsung copying Apple? Why do these Chinese and Korean companies think it's acceptable to steal an American firm's product IP and likeness? It sure seems cheaper than designing your own products when you can piggy back on Apple's marketing AND devalue your competitor's product. Is it for people who can't afford Apple yet it actually costs more?




RE: Asus UX?
By 2ManyOptions on 5/31/2011 1:12:48 PM , Rating: 2
So no other company is supposed to release an ultra-thin laptop just because Apple released it first? Just because it is white and thin it is a Macbook Air rip-off? What do you need to differentiate it from Macbook Air - paint it black? Let it go already !!


RE: Asus UX?
By robinthakur on 6/1/2011 5:54:22 AM , Rating: 3
No, that's not the issue and you are being a little kind to Asus here. It looks like an aluminium bodied laptop in the familiar thin *wedge* popularised by the MBA, it's nothing to do with it being an "ultra thin laptop", the look totally and shamelessly copies Apple's laptop. The design might seem obvious after the fact, but would Asus have given the laptop the same look and feel had the revised MBA not come out? I think not.

It actually is more black and white than you think, have you seen their Imac competitor (see anandtech)? The designs are just too similar to be cooincidental, and I reckon Apple will respond with force on this because they work hard and spend hard to make their products look like nothing else on the market. What's the point of doing that if another top tier competitor which has no interest in differentiating it's brand can simply take your ideas with impunity? The danger is that consumers who are not particularly technical will be duped into buying this thinking that it is actually a MBA and that is categorically unfair to both the consumer and Apple.

Seriously, Samsung, Asus and LG need to be hauled over the proverbial coals. Having seen an advert this morning for the LG Optimus Black, I had to do a double take as it looks identical to an iPhone4 down to the rounded corners and front camera placement and this has been the trend with handsets from HTC and Samsung as well copying the 3GS and the IP4 as anyone with an eye for design would be able to attest! Since when was this deemed acceptable?


RE: Asus UX?
By 2ManyOptions on 6/1/2011 10:43:27 AM , Rating: 2
If any company comes out with a thin laptop (maybe aluminium DOES make sense) it might look like Mac Air because you will no doubt find similarities among them. Saying that it is a complete copy and that Asus or any other company did nothing but copying Apple is rather too harsh.

"I had to do a double take as it looks identical to an iPhone4 down to the rounded corners and front camera placement "

If it makes sense to have the camera placed there then it will probably placed there, is it really a crime because Apple did it first?
While iPhone/Air are devices that definitely look great (I only own an iPod touch and neither of these two) they would have probably patented stuff you have mentioned if they seemed it had to be (or if it COULD be).
I believe there are enough innovations in every product, but also some overlaps do exist which can't be helped but seem similar to other products out there.


x86 on a smartphone?
By BugblatterIII on 5/31/2011 4:23:57 PM , Rating: 2
Why?




RE: x86 on a smartphone?
By bobsmith1492 on 5/31/2011 4:49:35 PM , Rating: 2
Why not... if it works.


RE: x86 on a smartphone?
By BugblatterIII on 5/31/2011 5:19:23 PM , Rating: 2
It's thinking like that that got us reality TV! :oÞ


Intel is feeling the heat
By Beenthere on 5/31/2011 12:03:44 PM , Rating: 2
With AMD's big gain in mobile devices the last quarter and a ton of new APUs coming, Intel is feeling the heat. As noted a die shrink every year is unlikely and in itself doesn't mean better performance, just potentially lower power consumption.




RE: Intel is feeling the heat
By ilt24 on 5/31/2011 12:30:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
With AMD's big gain in mobile devices the last quarter

What big gain? AMD did well last quarter with sales of their new APU, but at the expense of sales of their other mobile processors.

"In 1Q11 by form factor, Intel earned 86.3% share in the mobile PC processor segment, a gain of 0.2%, AMD finished with 13.4%, a loss of 0.1%, and VIA earned 0.3%."

http://www.guru3d.com/news/cpu-shipments-jump-up-7...


By DanNeely on 5/31/2011 11:09:09 AM , Rating: 2
All they're doing is bringing atom to the new process at the same time as main stream parts instead of a year later. Likely this also means bringing the low power process for mobile parts forward to launch at the same time as the high power process for mainstream laptop and desktop parts. Either way this is going to be a one off for the 14nm atom, not a mass change.




"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki