Replies to post #139442 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[wthdik2]

the bigger problem for Intel then, is that their customer base (HP, Dell, Lenovo,etc) has struggled to turn Intel's chip advances into operating profits.i.e. if you're stumbling along with low single digit operating margins..you're probably spending your time questioning what you are even doing in the pc biz in the first place..not banging the table for Intel to turn the crank on another process shrink.

The ARM foundries on the other hand...have huge financial incentives (the Apple and Qualcomm accounts) to get to the next node first..

[techno_bull]

I must admit I've lost track a bit of what is currently in volume production by Intel's competitors so this is a serious question.

Are either Samsung or TSMC currently producing 16nm FinFet in significant volume?

I understand the term 'significant volume' is relative but it would be great if any responses to this post were realistic about what significant production volume means. At the heart of my question is whether the foundrys have already solved the mysteries of FinFet process technology or whether they are still working on it?

[DavidA2]

Intel's first Finfet was three years ago. I'll give Samsung a break an assume that the Samsung 16 Finfet is between the Intel 22nm and 14 nm. So Intel is about 2 years ahead.

Maybe you can answer this question then.

It took 22nm Atom cores to barely compete against 28nm ARM products, having no "FinFET" to boot.

ARM cores in 28nm were smaller than Intel 22nm cores. Also, nowadays Atom can't clock higher NOR perform better than ARM. Actually, Atom is substantially behind ARM.

How do you figure then, Intel has a "2 years" lead when it has no density or performance advantage?