Hacker News Reader

Comment by bschne | Hacker News Reader

Am I reading this correctly that at 7nm intel had >2x the transistor density of TSMC and their 7nm node is still ahead of TSMCs 5nm node on that measure? That‘s not what I‘d have expected given everything one hears abt. intel —- have they fallen off mainly by not progressing beyond that node, or along other dimensions?

View on HN

Intel 7nm on that chart is what has been rebranded Intel 4, ie the process that still isn't in high volume production. Meanwhile TSMC is in high volume for N3 (the next iPhone chips are currently using up that capacity).

They have fallen off, but not by nearly as much as the node names indicate. TSMC has been "cheating" with their node designations for years (c.f. 3nm is not remotely a (5/3)^2==2.8x increase in density vs. 5nm, it's more like 30-50% denser), where Intel stuck with the notionally numeric scales for longer.

But Intel has given up now too, the "7nm" line in that chart is actually showing the process they're marketing as "Intel 4" (denoting that it sits roughly where a "4nm" process would vs. their competitors).

The Athlon XP naming approach. Intel following AMD again! /s

Nitpick: this practice actually began way before the Athlon XP, with the Am5x86: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Performance_Rating

Isn't what Intel now sells as "7" a rebranded 10nm process and actual 7nm which you're referring to does not yet exist commercially?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com