• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Intel has a Pretty Big Problem..

AthlonXP1800 said:
wccftech.com

Intel's 18A Process Reportedly Shows "Disappointing" Yield Rates As They Are Now At 20%-30%, Making Mass-Production Impossible

Intel's 18A yields are now to be around 20%- 30%, as the company is now claimed to face a massive roadblock to switching to mass production.
wccftech.com wccftech.com

Intel 18A yield is now less than 20-30% compared to 10% a few months ago, still a long way to reach 50-60%+ for mass production target for H2 2025. Very doubtful if we will see Panther Lake launch in H2 2025 on Intel 18A or delay further into 2026 or it could be switch to TSMC?
Click to expand...

But will 18a rust?

You have to keep in mind that Intel will be able to operate internally at lower yields and still run at lower costs than manufacturing compared to using TSMC. Intels bigger problem is coming up with some competitive new architectures that are actually worth producing.
 
Korean minister says TSMC is looking to take a 20% ownership stake in Intel, but has yet to ask for government approval

wccftech.com

TSMC Is Yet To Report Any Intel Acquisition Plans To Taiwan Government, Says Minister

The Taiwanese government is yet to receive any information about TSMC acquiring a 20% stake in Intel according to Minister of Economic Affairs, Kuo Chih-hui. Minister Kuo made the remarks in an interview reported by the Taiwanese press, where he shared that any such deals require approval by...
wccftech.com wccftech.com
 
Last edited:
StriderX said:
A direct competitor taking a stake in the other?

How is that not collusion?
Click to expand...
Intel's fab business is in no way competition to TSMC. 20% stake for some access to technologies that might be beneficial in more competent hands? Sounds fun.

Also sounds like monopoly fuel.
 
Last edited:
Armageus said:
Gelsinger had the right idea in theory (and didn't have much time to make an impact, but he didn't have the backing of the board.
Click to expand...

While Pat made some uncouth comments at moments, as you say I thought he had the right ideas, but I tend to think the board are Intel's biggest issue and has been for a little while.

Lip-Bu background seems quite interesting and is more on the foundry side more than the product side.
 
RSR said:
and is more on the foundry side more than the product side.
Click to expand...
And that's Intel's biggest weakness. How often have we seen Intel's engineers design something potentially excellent, but they literally can't build it because the foundry sucks? What could Rocket Lake have been if it was 10nm as intended, instead of backporting to 14nm and fudging huge swathes of the design as a result?
 
LePhuronn said:
And that's Intel's biggest weakness. How often have we seen Intel's engineers design something potentially excellent, but they literally can't build it because the foundry sucks? What could Rocket Lake have been if it was 10nm as intended, instead of backporting to 14nm and fudging huge swathes of the design as a result?
Click to expand...

I was watching Dr. Ian Cutress last night chat about it and found it interesting. If its the right or wrong move, time will tell.

 
Gerard said:
It's so weird to see Intel, once the goliaths of the cpu world in this situation. Hopefully they get back on track at some point.
Click to expand...
They did not innovate for ~10 years. This is what happens when you become complacent with your market position and lift off the throttle. This has happened time and time again. Many giants have come undone by their own doing.

It would be just as awful for AMD to do the same thing that Intel did. The pendulum should certainly not swing to the other company in the duopoly. The past 8 years have been huge leaps forward.
 
aaronyuri said:
They did not innovate for ~10 years. This is what happens when you become complacent with your market position and lift off the throttle. This has happened time and time again. Many giants have come undone by their own doing.

It would be just as awful for AMD to do the same thing that Intel did. The pendulum should certainly not swing to the other company in the duopoly. The past 8 years have been huge leaps forward.
Click to expand...
Next up will be nvidia that will follow the same path as Intel
 
aaronyuri said:
They did not innovate for ~10 years. This is what happens when you become complacent with your market position and lift off the throttle. This has happened time and time again. Many giants have come undone by their own doing.

It would be just as awful for AMD to do the same thing that Intel did. The pendulum should certainly not swing to the other company in the duopoly. The past 8 years have been huge leaps forward.
Click to expand...

Very aware of what intel did, just very strange to see them on the backfoot. Even in the pentium 4 days it wasn't this bad as they had their "partners" by the plums, threatening to withhold stock or giving massive discounts to ignore amds better offerings.

The tide has definitely changed thanks to their "sell a half assed quad core with minimal improvements for eternity" mentality when amd were down and almost out.

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom