https://wccftech.com/rumor-intel-moving-select-cpus-to-globalfoundries/
 
With its own silicon fabrication facilities pushed to their capacity limits, Intel is looking for third-party semiconductor foundries to share some of its supply load, and according to a WCCFTech report, its latest partner could be GlobalFoundries, which has a 14 nm-class fab in Upstate New York. If it goes through, the possible Intel-GloFo deal could see contract manufacturing commence within 2020.

GloFo's fab offers 14 nm FinFET and 12LPP, a refinement that's marketed as 12 nm. According to the report, Intel could use GloFo for manufacturing CPU dies, specifically its entry-level chips such as Core i3, Pentium, and Celeron. Intel is also known to shed its own manufacturing workload by contracting foundries for 14 nm core-logic (chipsets). In a bid to maximize 14 nm fab allocation for its CPUs, Intel also started making some of its 300-series chipsets on the older 22 nm process, which goes to show the company's appetite for 14 nm.
 
I guess my feelings about this is that I feel Intel is absolutely not on the right track yet. 14nm still?! That is just terrible. 

Except Intel has been improving the density of their 14nm chips to the point where all these +'s have made it equivalent to first generation 10nm Cannonlake. How could they double the core counts from 7700K to 9900K on the same 14nm and 95W TDP? Because it isn't the same density.

That's why I think they should skip 10nm, I don't see many gains other than return on investment and marketing. At least with 7nm, Intel should be able to double core count again at the same TDP, i.e. double 9900K at 95W.

Except by then, I'm sure AMD will have 5nm, and we may see 16-core chiplets.

This just goes to show how much Intel is trying to hold on, time will tell.... 

lehpron
Except Intel has been improving the density of their 14nm chips to the point where all these +'s have made it equivalent to first generation 10nm Cannonlake. How could they double the core counts from 7700K to 9900K on the same 14nm and 95W TDP? Because it isn't the same density.

That's why I think they should skip 10nm, I don't see many gains other than return on investment and marketing. At least with 7nm, Intel should be able to double core count again at the same TDP, i.e. double 9900K at 95W.

Except by then, I'm sure AMD will have 5nm, and we may see 16-core chiplets.

It is the same density, just larger and larger dies.... The TDP is honestly just a crap number for both Intel and AMD. A 9900k uses much more power than a 7700K.

boylerya
I think once sales drop when NVIDIA releases PCIe 4.0 gaming cards and Intel still only has PCIe 3.0 boards, their sales will drop and any need for outsourcing will no longer exist.

You're right, the PC market is absolutely clamoring for PCIe Gen 4.  
 
In other news, a survey revealed that 99% of all PC users had no idea what PCIe was and that 90% of PC users don't know the difference between a SSD and HDD.  30% of users thought that this was a "hard disk":
 

 
 
 

boylerya

kevinc313

boylerya
I think once sales drop when NVIDIA releases PCIe 4.0 gaming cards and Intel still only has PCIe 3.0 boards, their sales will drop and any need for outsourcing will no longer exist.

You're right, the PC market is absolutely clamoring for PCIe Gen 4.  
 
In other news, a survey revealed that 99% of all PC users had no idea what PCIe was and that 90% of PC users don't know the difference between a SSD and HDD.  30% of users thought that this was a "hard disk":
 

 
 
 

"PC market" was never used in my statement.

You made the preposterous assertion that, SOMEHOW, a lack of PCIe 4.0 support would negatively impact Intel's sales to the point that they would not have to offload.  
 
Intel could skip PCIe 4.0 entirely and implement PCIe 5.0 in 2025 and not have it's sales impacted in any meaningful way. 
 
Heck, they could simply just stop selling commercial channel individual CPU's today and not be effected at all.
 
If (BIG IF) Nvidia releases 4.0 cards they will be fully backwards compatible with PCIe 3.0 platforms with no impact to performance.
 
Ain't nobody need 5 GB/s sequential reads on their SSD.
 
 

kevinc313

boylerya

kevinc313

boylerya
I think once sales drop when NVIDIA releases PCIe 4.0 gaming cards and Intel still only has PCIe 3.0 boards, their sales will drop and any need for outsourcing will no longer exist.

You're right, the PC market is absolutely clamoring for PCIe Gen 4.  
 
In other news, a survey revealed that 99% of all PC users had no idea what PCIe was and that 90% of PC users don't know the difference between a SSD and HDD.  30% of users thought that this was a "hard disk":
 

 
 
 

"PC market" was never used in my statement.

You made the preposterous assertion that, SOMEHOW, a lack of PCIe 4.0 support would negatively impact Intel's sales to the point that they would not have to offload.  
 
Intel could skip PCIe 4.0 entirely and implement PCIe 5.0 in 2025 and not have it's sales impacted in any meaningful way. 
 
Heck, they could simply just stop selling commercial channel individual CPU's today and not be effected at all.
 
If (BIG IF) Nvidia releases 4.0 cards they will be fully backwards compatible with PCIe 3.0 platforms with no impact to performance.
 
Ain't nobody need 5 GB/s sequential reads on their SSD.
 
 

Im not getting into an argument, but only going to post some reference material so anyone reading can see the facts.
A GTX2080Ti pretty much fully saturates a PCIe 3.0 x16 slot (16GB/sec): https://www.techpowerup.com/review/nvidia-geforce-rtx-2080-ti-pci-express-scaling/
As a result it is safe to assume that next gen cards will require more.  Any enthusiast or practical person that wants to spend the money on a new build will go for the more future proof build rather than buying into old tech.

boylerya
I suppose I should have instead posted that WCCFTech info is the garbage news of the internet type response for this type of rumor as I normally do rather than making nonchalant statements that no one can prove or disprove at this point in time that subsequently cause me to waste my time with nonsensical debates. 

Sorry, I'm just tired of the "intel is dooomed" posting.  Is it sooper lame that Intel isn't releasing a consumer PCIe Gen 4.0 platform in the near future?  Sure.  But the vast, vast majority of their cpu's go into OEM, enterprise or server systems where nobody really cares about a faster bus speed. 
 
Even in the server space where you would think the higher bandwidth would make a difference, the majority of server traffic is small to medium random I/O that doesn't saturate a 3.0 4x bus.  That's why Intel can actually sell extremely expensive Optane server drives and are working on a new generation of PCIe 4.0 Optane.
 
https://www.intel.com/con...-dc-p4800x-series.html
 
My Optane 900P U.2 OS drive (on market two years) connected over a PCIe 3.0 chipset bus via M.2 adapter cable is still faster all around than any Gen 4.0 NVMe drive available.