Intel Says it Fixed 7nm Process, But Will Still Outsource Some Parts | Tom's Hardware
 
Intel has today reported its Q4 2020 earnings disclosing full-year revenue with the current CEO Bob Swan, upcoming new CEO Pat Gelsinger, and Omar Ishrak, Chairman of Intel's board. During the call, company officials have talked about Intel's earnings and most importantly, addressing the current problems about the company's manufacturing part - semiconductor foundries. Incoming Intel CEO, Pat Gelsinger, has talked about the state of the 7 nm node, giving shareholders reassurance and a will to remain in such a position. He has made an argument that he has personally reviewed the progress of the "health and recovery of the 7 nm program."

The 7 nm node has been originally delayed by a full year amid the expectations, and as with the 10 nm node, we have believed that it is going to experience similar issues. However, the incoming CEO has reassured everyone that it is very much improving. The new 7 nm node is on track for 2023 delivery, when Intel is expected to compete with the 3 nm node of TSMC. Firstly, Intel will make a debut of the 7 nm node with client processors scheduled for 1H 2023 arrival, with data center models following that. The company leads have confirmed that Intel will stay true to its internal manufacturing, but have stressed that there will still be a need for some outsourcing to happen.
 
Well it certainly took long enough in my personal opinion. 

Hopefully Intel is able to catch up and take the lead. This long of a delay should never have happened to an industry leader.

rjohnson11

Hoggle
Hopefully Intel is able to catch up and take the lead. This long of a delay should never have happened to an industry leader.

Personally I hope Intel doesn't take the lead. It's time for AMD to lead for a while. 

Why? Once AMD got the lead everyone thought AMD would bless us with lower prices then Intel, but that didn't happen.

kougar

kram36
Why? Once AMD got the lead everyone thought AMD would bless us with lower prices then Intel, but that didn't happen.

Price/performance is still way better than Intel, and that's what it's always been about. 

No it's not, it used to be that way with AMD, but no longer. When was the last time you looked at component prices? Even AMD's latest 6000 series video cards are over priced.
 
If Intel can make a better product, why should we not get it? Just so AMD can have the "lead for a while"?

kougar

kram36
No it's not, it used to be that way with AMD, but no longer. When was the last time you looked at component prices? Even AMD's latest 6000 series video cards are over priced.
 
If Intel can make a better product, why should we not get it? Just so AMD can have the "lead for a while"?

You're bouncing the subject around all over the place. Since the discussion was specifically AMD CPUs and the context was MSRP, I'm sticking with those. Even with the higher price of Ryzen 5000 it still wins the price/performance comparisons over Intel. Just look at the Price to performance charts if you're going to skip the rest. https://www.techspot.com/.../2135-amd-ryzen-5600x/

I'm not bouncing anything, I'm responding to the comment that AMD should keep the lead. Why? The i7-10700KF is ranked 5% better at gaming then the Ryzen 7 5800X and is ranked as a 11% better performance value. The i9-10850K is ranked 7% better at gaming then the Ryzen 7 5800X and is ranked as a 8% better performance value. The i9-10900KF is ranked 7% better at gaming then the Ryzen 9 5950X and is ranked as a 24% better performance value.
 
So much for that AMD price/performance myth. AMD wasn't the price savior to Intel everyone thought they would be, at least not since AMD "got the lead" with the Ryzen 5000 series processors.

kougar

kram36
No it's not, it used to be that way with AMD, but no longer. When was the last time you looked at component prices? Even AMD's latest 6000 series video cards are over priced.
 
If Intel can make a better product, why should we not get it? Just so AMD can have the "lead for a while"?

You're bouncing the subject around all over the place. Since the discussion was specifically AMD CPUs and the context was MSRP, I'm sticking with those. Even with the higher price of Ryzen 5000 it still wins the price/performance comparisons over Intel. Just look at the Price to performance charts if you're going to skip the rest. https://www.techspot.com/.../2135-amd-ryzen-5600x/

The problem with that is most of the performance charts are excluding the i9 10850K which is actually an amazing deal. Nothing really competes with it at the $400 price point. I'm all ready seeing the i9 10900K for $469 at microcenter now. I have noticed reviewers love to hinder performance of the i9 10900K when comparing it to AMD because they don't think it's fair to include any overclocking, even though it's as easy as clicking two buttons to get it to run games at 5.2GHz all core.

I'm not sure about that. Steve definitely leans towards AMD though, ever notice his charts do not list the driver set of the video card? That is an important neglected factor to the validity of his data. I just updated my drivers yesterday, saw huge improvements in FPS on Call of Duty Warzone. Before in the menus I was getting 120-160, now i'm getting 250FPS in the menus. I can turn on Ray Tracing and still get 130-140FPS which is amazing, because before it was more like 70-90FPS on Call of Duty Modern Warfare. Steve picks the games that are good at pushing his points, not the ones that most people care about. He's even admitted that he spends very little on PC hardware himself, he still owns a FX8350 as his main PC. He's in love with the old AMD before Global Foundries was no more, but they are about to start pushing up the prices, this jump from $329 for an 8 core 16 thread processor to a new generation went to $449. Looks like it's going to get worse. 

kram36

rjohnson11

Hoggle
Hopefully Intel is able to catch up and take the lead. This long of a delay should never have happened to an industry leader.

Personally I hope Intel doesn't take the lead. It's time for AMD to lead for a while. 

Why? Once AMD got the lead everyone thought AMD would bless us with lower prices then Intel, but that didn't happen.

Don't forget the better GPU availability.

kram36

kevinc313

kram36

rjohnson11

Hoggle
Hopefully Intel is able to catch up and take the lead. This long of a delay should never have happened to an industry leader.

Personally I hope Intel doesn't take the lead. It's time for AMD to lead for a while. 

Why? Once AMD got the lead everyone thought AMD would bless us with lower prices then Intel, but that didn't happen.

Don't forget the better GPU availability.

Eh, nope. You can't get a 6000 series gpu right now and the RX 5700 XT you can't get, unless you're willing to pay $1,000+ for a RX 5700 XT.
 
https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=100007709%20601341484&Order=1
 
https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=100007709%20601359511&Order=1
 

Errr, nope???  It was claimed by many that AMD would release competitive GPU's with better availability than Nvidia.  While they are competitive, they certainly aren't available.

kram36

kevinc313

kram36

kevinc313

kram36

rjohnson11

Hoggle
Hopefully Intel is able to catch up and take the lead. This long of a delay should never have happened to an industry leader.

Personally I hope Intel doesn't take the lead. It's time for AMD to lead for a while. 

Why? Once AMD got the lead everyone thought AMD would bless us with lower prices then Intel, but that didn't happen.

Don't forget the better GPU availability.

Eh, nope. You can't get a 6000 series gpu right now and the RX 5700 XT you can't get, unless you're willing to pay $1,000+ for a RX 5700 XT.
 
https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=100007709%20601341484&Order=1
 
https://www.newegg.com/p/pl?N=100007709%20601359511&Order=1
 

Errr, nope???  It was claimed by many that AMD would release competitive GPU's with better availability than Nvidia.  While they are competitive, they certainly aren't available.

Did you read what you posted? Let me put it here again "Don't forget the better GPU availability". You were wrong and I showed it and then you confirmed it with "they certainly aren't available". What are you even replying for?

LOL.  The only thing wrong is your contextual reading comprehension.  I replied to a post saying people were wrong about AMD keeping prices low by reminding everyone about the claim of AMD providing better GPU availability, which they obviously did not and that people were also wrong about.

TSMC contracted to do 3nm for intel
 
https://www.guru3d.com/ne...for-intel-in-2020.html