Intel admits it won't catch up with AMD's 7nm chips until 2021

Hotwired · 19 Jul 2019 at 02:01

smilingcrow said:
That could be AMD's new slogan.
Intel: We got 10 cores now.
AMD: You can't touch this (whip out a 3950X).

Interesting scaling.

Intel adding two cores each year
AMD multiplying cores by two each year

HEDT, pro and server is looking grim if that's how they're gonna do it.

Zernath · 19 Jul 2019 at 02:30

Rofflay said:
Eurgh intel make me feel dirty i have one in my pc...

Time for an AMD build then!

Rroff · 19 Jul 2019 at 03:35

pmc25 said:
Their 7nm has repeatedly been pushed back too. Their first gen EUV process will ship in volume (they hope) about a year later than TSMC & Samsung's 3rd gen EUV (7nm EUV -> 6nm EUV -> 5nm EUV), which should all be out in volume in 2020, at least for the mobile chips.

2021 is still Core. We know that.

We know Zen 3 is 7nm EUV in 2020. We know Zen 4 is 5nm EUV in 2021.

It looks like it will get worse for Intel, not better.

Intel's 7nm even now is aggressive - personally I think it is still going to bite them in the rear but if they pull it off it competes well against TSMC 5FF and still holds up well in the aspects most important to CPU design against the current 3nm plans by competitors.

hlennie · 19 Jul 2019 at 04:00

Loving the fact AMD are seriously back in the game and i hope they give intel a good run for the next couple of years. If i was still on my 6400 i would be so jumping ship but alas the 8700k serves me well and cant be doing another rebuild so soon.

Next up grade AMD gets my monies.

Curlyriff · 19 Jul 2019 at 07:41

pmc25 said:
That's still Core, and that assumes their 7nm EUV will be available in volume in 2021, and not be totally borked.

So it's a pretty big if. Plus they'll be facing Zen 4 on 5nm EUV; & whether TSMC or Samsung or both, it will definitely work and be available in volume.

2022, process allowing, would be a better bet for them being competitive, as that's the likely launch window for Keller's new post-Core chiplet design, on 7nm EUV+.

But, again, they'll be facing Zen 5, probably on either 3 or 4nm (and they'll still be on 7nm).

Personally I think they stand more chance of being competitive in GPUs over the next couple of years.

Really no point in trying to use 4nm Vs 7nm and say one better than other like you suggesting because they just marketing names and not really relative to process/performance. Which is frustrating from a technical standpoint when trying to compare.

humbug · 19 Jul 2019 at 09:12

4K8KW10 said:
How does AMD compete with the i7-8750H and i7-9850H?

Despite being stuck on the 14nm+++, intel's lineup is pretty competitive and currently there is only one Ryzen 9 3900X that is also out of stock that is faster than i9-9900K.

So, I don't see why intel would worry, at all.

The i7-9850H is a 2.6Ghz 45 Watt 6 core, given that AMD have a 4Ghz 65 Watt 8 core on the Desktop pretty well i would suggest.
----------

Anyway, 7nm+ Zen 2+ Ryzen 4000 in 2020, 5nm Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 in 2021.

If Intel can't compete with what AMD have today until 2021 they still ain't catching up.

opethdisciple · 19 Jul 2019 at 09:14

But how important is it for Intel to reach 7nm for them to 'catch up'? Are we not putting too much importance in to a node process.

Silent_Scone · 19 Jul 2019 at 09:17

opethdisciple said:
But how important is it for Intel to reach 7nm for them to 'catch up'? Are we not putting too much importance in to a node process.

Yes, but that doesn't make a tangible difference to the fact that Intel isn't going to have anything that looks comfortable next to Zen 2 this year.

humbug · 19 Jul 2019 at 09:19

opethdisciple said:
But how important is it for Intel to reach 7nm for them to 'catch up'? Are we not putting too much importance in to a node process.

They need to get the the transistor density down to get the DIE size down because Intel are still on and look's like will be for some time yet on monolithic dies, AMD are already knocking out 64 high performance cores today, Intel can't get anywhere near that with monolithic dies, they probably wouldn't even do it on 7nm.

That maters, a lot.

opethdisciple · 19 Jul 2019 at 09:21

humbug said:
They need to get the the transistor density down to get the DIE size down because Intel are still on and look's like will be for some time yet on monolithic dies, AMD are already knocking out 64 high performance cores today, Intel can't get anywhere near that with monolithic dies, they probably wouldn't even do it on 7nm.

That maters, a lot.

And yet, in certain tasks AMD cant match Intel (gaming tasks for example). Also the same with the GPU's. They are on a more advanced node and yet, no where near Nvidia.

humbug · 19 Jul 2019 at 09:23

opethdisciple said:
And yet, in certain tasks AMD cant match Intel (gaming tasks for example). Also the same with the GPU's. They are on a more advanced node and yet, no where near Nvidia.

Ryzen 3000 at 4.3Ghz all core are 10% down on Intel with 5Ghz all core.

Its just not enough to matter and the sales reflect that. in fact some reviewers using a much larger pallet of games have it at 5%.

AMD are outselling Intel all over the shop.

I have what is essentially an 8700K for £190, running comfortably on an £80 board.

MassiveJim · 19 Jul 2019 at 09:50

Why do we need smaller chips?

Why can't and/Intel produce chips that are physically larger?
Would certainly aid cooling.

I assume it's a cost thing?

razorpakk · 19 Jul 2019 at 10:04

motiv said:
I suppose good news for competition. It should give AMD time to respin the current 3600-3900s to improve them further (along with some tweaks on the PBO they need to bring out soon). If AMD can get some good market share, then Intel will be under price pressure come 2021/2022.

Good for all us consumers.

That makes no sense. Both companies being always active and trading blows is good for competition, Intel being stuck isn't.

Hotwired · 19 Jul 2019 at 10:18

opethdisciple said:
And yet, in certain tasks AMD cant match Intel (gaming tasks for example). Also the same with the GPU's. They are on a more advanced node and yet, no where near Nvidia.

How do you work that out?

If your measure is that they don't have a 2080Ti competitor then it's flawed.

4K8KW10 · 19 Jul 2019 at 10:28

humbug said:
The i7-9850H is a 2.6Ghz 45 Watt 6 core, given that AMD have a 4Ghz 65 Watt 8 core on the Desktop pretty well i would suggest.
----------

Anyway, 7nm+ Zen 2+ Ryzen 4000 in 2020, 5nm Zen 3 Ryzen 5000 in 2021.

If Intel can't compete with what AMD have today until 2021 they still ain't catching up.

Zen 3 is 7nm+ 2020..

The best mobile chip that AMD has is the R7 3750H 35W.
Which manages to get only ~9000 Passmark points https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+7+3750H&id=3441
The i7 9850H 45W gets ~14400 Passmark points https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-9850H+@+2.60GHz&id=3478

10W for 60% higher performance.

opethdisciple · 19 Jul 2019 at 10:34

Hotwired said:
How do you work that out?

If your measure is that they don't have a 2080Ti competitor then it's flawed.

Well the 5700XT is what a 2070 Super and the Radeon 7 is now end of life.

That's the best AMD have GPU wise. Nvidia have 2080, 2080 Super and 2080ti. And I image they are holding back as well.

Orange Nexus · 19 Jul 2019 at 10:59

4K8KW10 said:
Zen 3 is 7nm+ 2020..

The best mobile chip that AMD has is the R7 3750H 35W.
Which manages to get only ~9000 Passmark points https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=AMD+Ryzen+7+3750H&id=3441
The i7 9850H 45W gets ~14400 Passmark points https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-9850H+@+2.60GHz&id=3478

10W for 60% higher performance.

Here you go Pro-consumer you . . .

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/checkout/deleteArticle/sDelete/27716077/sTargetAction/cart

Hotwired · 19 Jul 2019 at 11:21

opethdisciple said:
Well the 5700XT is what a 2070 Super and the Radeon 7 is now end of life.

That's the best AMD have GPU wise. Nvidia have 2080, 2080 Super and 2080ti. And I image they are holding back as well.

Like I said, saying they don't have a 2080Ti competitor is a bad argument.

They've done two cards on 7nm so when you said they are nowhere near nvidia on a more advanced node... what FPS are they getting done with the watts their 7nm cards are using.

Seems plenty near Nvidia. Prices are whatever each company feels like but for what it's worth the 5700's are better priced.

Are you actually making the pitch that without a 2080Ti competitor they're not competing. They've just released cards for the largest market segment even if both sides are overpriced right now.

MartinPrince · 19 Jul 2019 at 12:13

Zernath said:
That's what resting on your laurels gets you!

How many years did we get barely 5-10% improvement from Intel? Then forcing socket change on top of that! The chickens have come home to roost.

motiv · 19 Jul 2019 at 12:28

razorpakk said:
That makes no sense. Both companies being always active and trading blows is good for competition, Intel being stuck isn't.

Intel have a far bigger market share, especially in the business world of desktops. Intel moving from top dog to second on chip capability in the next two years will create a vibrant competitive playing field for them to spring back from.