You (Asraf) once claimed Broxton on Intel 14nm would be about 58mm^2. Do you still claim that? This was ostensibly based on you believing Intel and your "scaling" from some Intel die shots. I had multiple posts to you regarding Intel's admission of 4 different 14nm processes. I recall my claim was you simply do not and can not know what 14nm process and what fraction of any chip suscribes to what ground rule. I expressed extreme doubts about Intel 14nm yields even way back then. Also Intel no longer gives out transistor counts or die sizes. This makes trying to assign transistor counts to specific functional blocks near impossible. Thus overall transistor density can not be compared to competing processes. I maintain until Intel sells a low/mid level mobile SOC with competitive features at a profit on their own process, you can NOT say that yields are good. Intel could still sell at cost for a low yielding process given profits elsewhere. In addition Intel conveniently no longer breaks out mobile revenue and losses.So in summary, I can claim that Intel SOC designs have been lacking in features and generally poor, their time to market has been abysmal,they have been largely uncompetitive, the actual transistor densities can not be inferred but are disputed, their actual 14nm transistor design has been claimed inferior, that yields can not known. However, thru Intel revelations, Intel obfuscations, competitor comments, and simple common sense, a lot of my claims regarding Intel 14nm mobile SOC could well be true. So after all this time, what do you say now?
