Replies to post #147497 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[flumoxed2012]

How about calling it 7*2nm ?

[Golfbum]

You need to differentiate between "average consumer" and the "designing consumer".

The AC just buys a product and doesn't care what's inside rather what it does.

The DC cares a lot about the technical details such as currents, pitches, etc since it makes it possible for the DC to do their job to deliver what the AC sees.

I doubt very much that the marketing number makes much difference to the DC when they can't get their products to work.

gb

[Elmer Phud]

TCaE

It's not going to be good for Intel's public image if all of its competitors are using "7nm" technology while Intel is trying to field "10nm" technology

Maybe but I'm inclined to think that's the minor player who's anti Intel in the first place.

[Colonel Sanders]

With Intel having no phone CPU's/SOC's, does it really matter?

Isn't this a bit like saying Apple better have a quad core or more SOC to compete against Qualcomm's 8 & 10 core SOC's?

[morrowinder]

TCE: actually average consumers don't care about process technology...

AMD was able to limp along with 28nm for years because customers don't know or care what nm their processor is. This is nothing new btw. IBM and TI used to lie about their process technology too. But they were behind and they stayed behind. The ARM guys will have to produce a processor that is legitimately faster than Intel to achieve anything in Server and TSMCs weaksauce 10nm isn't gonna do that. And in phones, the die is already cast and Intel lost. So process technology doesn't matter there either. Bottom line: if Intel has better performance they win. Marketing bullshit on process technology won't decide anything.