TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Intel’s Manufacturing Roadmap from 2019 to 2029

164 点作者 hkmaxpro超过 5 年前

21 条评论

huffmsa超过 5 年前
5 and 10 year plans are <i>always</i> over optimistic projections by people who can&#x27;t deliver in the present to reassure investors faith.<p>They might ship 1.4nm, but it has a good chance of having Soviet tractor quality.
评论 #21771207 未加载
评论 #21775242 未加载
评论 #21771179 未加载
评论 #21778221 未加载
评论 #21771804 未加载
评论 #21772372 未加载
评论 #21772366 未加载
评论 #21771318 未加载
soygul超过 5 年前
I know that past performance does not indicate future results but looking at their 2013-2016 roadmap [1] which promises 10nm at Q1 2016 (which never happened!), I strongly doubt their future roadmap will hold.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;wccftech.com&#x2F;intel-processor-roadmap-leaked-10nm-cannonlake-skylakee-arrives-q3-2016-skylake-muy-chips-q4-2015&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;wccftech.com&#x2F;intel-processor-roadmap-leaked-10nm-can...</a>
评论 #21773995 未加载
评论 #21772099 未加载
评论 #21775322 未加载
评论 #21772181 未加载
nightcracker超过 5 年前
Reality: 14nm,14nm,14nm,14nm,14nm.
评论 #21771581 未加载
评论 #21773371 未加载
评论 #21771124 未加载
评论 #21779072 未加载
eyegor超过 5 年前
So if Intel actually stayed on track for this roadmap, they&#x27;re saying &quot;we only have 10 years left to advance our fabs&quot;. Unless 1.4nm is actually meaningless, they&#x27;d be edging up to electron tunneling issues with a contacted gate pitch of ~10 atoms across.<p>I&#x27;m being optimistic with this guesswork. Intel&#x27;s historical naming is that cpp = 3-5x node name [1]. Silicon lattice spacing is ~0.54nm.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikichip.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;intel&#x2F;process" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikichip.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;intel&#x2F;process</a>
评论 #21774029 未加载
评论 #21774021 未加载
评论 #21772685 未加载
wadkar超过 5 年前
I really liked the last quote:<p>&gt; It’s worth also pointing out, based on the title of this slide, that Intel still believes in Moore’s Law.<p>&gt; Just don’t ask how much it’ll cost.<p>I once got an opportunity to ask something similar to an Apple executive during a presentation on their hardware capabilities (it was a university event).<p>He laughed and answered another part of my question.
评论 #21772916 未加载
评论 #21771488 未加载
baybal2超过 5 年前
A poorly held secret in the semi industry is that transistors have stopped scaling at around 30nm - the practical limit of 193nm litho.<p>What has been scaling was the amount of free space in between them, metal layers, design rules, cell designs and such.<p>Before transistor scaling stalled, any process node shrink was an automatic performance gain without any side effects, but not so much after. Some designs may well be seeing net losses with process shrinks these days.<p>From 10nm on, higher density is actually hurting your performance, not adding it. For a process technologist, you have now to work on both performance, and density in parallel, and not solely on the last one thinking that gains in it will automatically translate into gains in performance.<p>So its a tricky business now to both squeeze more transistors into a design, and have a net gain from it.
andy_ppp超过 5 年前
Just as an interesting aside does anyone have a list of weird engineering hacks used in these processes to get smaller and smaller transistor densities? There must be some very clever stuff to jam them in there and still be able to etch the lines.
评论 #21771807 未加载
评论 #21773218 未加载
评论 #21772878 未加载
评论 #21773013 未加载
PedroBatista超过 5 年前
You can always count on Intel&#x27;s marketing team for top notch slide presentations.<p>However, Intel is closer to 22nm than 7nm let alone anything smaller than that. ( I&#x27;m talking about consistent product lines that anyone can buy at a store ), not some Houdini show.<p>On the commercial side they have a huge footing and large tentacles so they don&#x27;t need to worry too much about time-frames, let&#x27;s hope they also don&#x27;t worry too little..
kuu超过 5 年前
How is it possible to have 1.4nm transistors?
评论 #21771121 未加载
评论 #21771146 未加载
评论 #21771035 未加载
评论 #21771699 未加载
评论 #21772683 未加载
nootropicat超过 5 年前
For comparison, Intel&#x27;s roadmap from IDF2013: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;files.catbox.moe&#x2F;psgnbp.jpg" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;files.catbox.moe&#x2F;psgnbp.jpg</a>
diegoperini超过 5 年前
What kind material science improvement would make non-marketing, real ~10nm scales a reality? I literally have no idea how RnD works in this field. Is it trial and error? How do these scientists come up with ideas that increases the transistor density? Do our current gen CPUs have 2d or 3d curcuit layout? How one can learn about these stuff without working in the field?
评论 #21771495 未加载
评论 #21778540 未加载
评论 #21776115 未加载
评论 #21771271 未加载
baybal2超过 5 年前
Adding to my previous post, a lot of people don&#x27;t understand where 10nm EUV litho stands in the grand plan of thins.<p>&quot;If EUV doesn&#x27;t make a more performant chip, what it does?&quot; EUV is there to alleviate <i>extreme</i> process costs associated with multiple patterning, and process cycle time.<p>Even if EUV tool does 1 exposure a little bit slower than quadruple patterning, it can do 4 patterning steps in one — a very huge thing in process technology.<p>You have then lessen the amount of thermal processes performed on the device. You may have more defects, but on overall higher quality, higher performance devices in the end.
评论 #21771225 未加载
josteink超过 5 年前
&gt; Intel expects to be on 2 year cadence with its manufacturing process node technology, starting with 10nm in 2019 and moving to 7nm EUV in 2021<p>Not to say it could <i>never</i> happen, but given how many years Intel has spent on 10nm with it always been &#x27;next year&#x27; tech year after year, 7nm in 2021 seems overly optimistic for me.<p>I guess time will tell if they got it right this time.
评论 #21771170 未加载
评论 #21771258 未加载
HelloNurse超过 5 年前
The &quot;backporting&quot; doctrine clearly implies total lack of faith in process roadmaps, to the point of compromising processor designs and increasing cost and time to market to avoid committing to a millstone around the neck.
randyrand超过 5 年前
I&#x27;ve read that as chips get smaller, their working life gets shorter. Anyone have more info?
评论 #21774973 未加载
dmos62超过 5 年前
A beginner question: what&#x27;s the motivation behind reducing chip size? Less power consumption?
评论 #21776077 未加载
评论 #21775044 未加载
评论 #21775245 未加载
metalforever超过 5 年前
Sounds like bullshit.
HocusLocus超过 5 年前
Measure with micrometer. Mark with chalk. Cut with an axe.
RosanaAnaDana超过 5 年前
So, long AMD?<p>Edit: oof with the down votes. Jesus people; comma added for clarity.
评论 #21774509 未加载
bullen超过 5 年前
All change requires energy, and we&#x27;re going to have less energy, so the speed of change inevitably has to go down.<p>Because the only energy added to the planet comes from the sun and the only viable option to collect that energy are trees and plants.<p>(I&#x27;m going to post this comment on every naive technology optimist post, you can downvote me all you want, I have to do this to be able to sleep at night, fake karma is not more valuable than real karma)
lachlan-sneff超过 5 年前
What perplexes me is that neither Intel, AMD, IBM, or any other company, as far as I can tell, is pursuing the bootstrapping path of self-assembling nanotech. Once someone does it, every other company is going to be left several orders of magnitude in the dust, so it surprises me that no one is going for it.
评论 #21772463 未加载
评论 #21772810 未加载
评论 #21772476 未加载
评论 #21773023 未加载