Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

anandtech.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 247 posts

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#21

Post by jacquesm »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #18
rayiner wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are various limits in play: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/97469-is-14nm-the-end-... . At sub-nanometer we're talking about features of 5-10 atoms across. At that scale you get effects like electrons quantum tunneling between transistors: https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2016/10/6/13187820/o... . We probably won't get there with existing silicon technology.

I read on HN, a couple months ago, these numbers no longer represent the physical size of anything but are now just a marketing label, a sort of 'performance equivalent to a theoretical size of'. Anyone know if there's any truth to this? Might try to find the comment later when I have time.

Think of them as relative indications of feature size and of spacing between identical parts (arrays if you want to use a software analogy), so even if an actual transistor will not be 10 nm or 14 nm their relative sizes will relate on one axis as 10 nm to 14 nm. Keeping the numbers from a single manufacturer will definitely aid in the comparison.

There is a ton of black magic going on here with layers being stacked vertically and masks not having any obvious visual resemblance to the shape they project on the silicon because of the interaction between the photons / xrays and the masks due to the fact that the required resulting image is small relative to the wavelength of the particles used to project it.

There is a super interesting youtube video floating around about this that I highly recommend, it's called 'indistinguishable from magic':

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGFhc8R_uO4

It's up to date to 22 nm. Highly recommended.

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#22

Post by jerf »

spyhi wrote: post #7
wmf wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ice Lake has been delayed from 2017 to 2018, so I'm not sure what competition has to do with it.

> it's rare these days for Intel to talk more than a generation ahead in CPU architectures. This, to me, looks like the PS2 vs Dreamcast move, where Sony blocked Dreamcast sales with PS2 hype. We've been waiting for 10nm for a while now, and now Intel is essentially confirming "yes, it's really coming this time" where they might not have otherwise--it's hard to not see that as a reaction to Threadripper. At least on…

The Osborne effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect

Although it has been deliberately deployed many times now, as you note one example of.

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#23

Post by Osmium »

jacquesm wrote: post #13
GuiA wrote: post #10

According to the table in the article: - 2011: 32nm - 2012: 22nm - 2014: 14nm - 2018?: 10nm I don't know much about foundry processes, but it seems that it's taking more and more time for lesser and lesser gains, right? At this rate, how long until we reach sub nanometer? What are the physical limits on these processes, and does it have any implications for end users? Will we be using 2nm CPUs for 50 years? Would lov…

The step from 14 to 10 nm is huge . Both from a technological perspective on the manufacturing side as well as on the effect it will have to the number of transistors on a die and the power consumption of those transistors. Remember that power consumption and the number of transistors are related to the surface area so there is a square factor in there. 14 nm ^2 = 196, 10 nm ^2 = 100, so that's almost a doubling of t…

While true, the same math holds for 22 nm^2 (484) to 14 nm^2 (196).

Real world gains will never be as high as the math suggests, as you get into leakage currents etc.

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#24

Post by spyhi »

jerf wrote: post #22
spyhi wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's rare these days for Intel to talk more than a generation ahead in CPU architectures. This, to me, looks like the PS2 vs Dreamcast move, where Sony blocked Dreamcast sales with PS2 hype. We've been waiting for 10nm for a while now, and now Intel is essentially confirming "yes, it's really coming this time" where they might not have otherwise--it's hard to not see that as a reaction to Threadripper. At least on…

The Osborne effect: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect Although it has been deliberately deployed many times now, as you note one example of.

Nice, I never knew what it was called. Thanks!

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#25

Post by frozenport »

slededit wrote: post #9

At this point real compute happens on the GPU. I think we'll see a shift to major apps being driven by GPGPU. The CPU's performance has started matter less and less.

Intel chips have a giant iGPU, that on certain models occupies near half the space. It can currently decode 4k Netflix. The technology is equally applicable to GPUs.

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#26

Post by JohnJamesRambo »

"Working purely on lithographic nomenclature, Intel has three processes on 14nm: 14, 14+, and 14++. As shown to everyone at Intel’s Technology Manufacturing Day a couple of months ago, these will be followed by a trio of 10nm processes: 10nm, 10nm+ (10+), and 10++"

What imbecile thinks these are good names for the processes? Especially in an era where the consumer is already totally confused about current CPU offerings and rightfully views incremental CPU upgrades in a stalled Moore's Law world with suspicion already?

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#27

Post by ant6n »

slededit wrote: post #9

At this point real compute happens on the GPU. I think we'll see a shift to major apps being driven by GPGPU. The CPU's performance has started matter less and less.

I've never run a piece of software that used a GPU for anything other than rendering. I believe I'm part of a very large majority.

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#28

Post by whackedspinach »

jacquesm wrote: post #21
TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read on HN, a couple months ago, these numbers no longer represent the physical size of anything but are now just a marketing label, a sort of 'performance equivalent to a theoretical size of'. Anyone know if there's any truth to this? Might try to find the comment later when I have time.

Think of them as relative indications of feature size and of spacing between identical parts (arrays if you want to use a software analogy), so even if an actual transistor will not be 10 nm or 14 nm their relative sizes will relate on one axis as 10 nm to 14 nm. Keeping the numbers from a single manufacturer will definitely aid in the comparison. There is a ton of black magic going on here with layers being stacked…

Here is the talk a few years later: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KL-I3-C-KBk

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#29

Post by SemiTom »

spydum wrote: post #12
GuiA wrote: post #10

According to the table in the article: - 2011: 32nm - 2012: 22nm - 2014: 14nm - 2018?: 10nm I don't know much about foundry processes, but it seems that it's taking more and more time for lesser and lesser gains, right? At this rate, how long until we reach sub nanometer? What are the physical limits on these processes, and does it have any implications for end users? Will we be using 2nm CPUs for 50 years? Would lov…

widely assumed 5nm is the limit. I know i've seen others discuss some ideas around how close they can get, but i'm struggling to find the thread.. In any case, this may help: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_nanometer Found it.. http://semiengineering.com/will-7nm-and-5nm-really-happen/ and the HN discussion from several years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7920108

also Is 7nm The Last Major Node? https://semiengineering.com/7nm-last-major-node/

Re: Intel Reveals Post-8th Gen. Core Architecture 10nm+ Ice Lake

#30

Post by tedunangst »

JohnJamesRambo wrote: post #26

"Working purely on lithographic nomenclature, Intel has three processes on 14nm: 14, 14+, and 14++. As shown to everyone at Intel’s Technology Manufacturing Day a couple of months ago, these will be followed by a trio of 10nm processes: 10nm, 10nm+ (10+), and 10++" What imbecile thinks these are good names for the processes? Especially in an era where the consumer is already totally confused about current CPU offerin…

They don't usually include process names in consumer targeted marketing material...
Post reply on HN