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

Intel Foundry demonstrates first Arm-based chip on 18a node

hothardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 111 posts

Re: Intel Foundry demonstrates first Arm-based chip on 18a node

#61

Post by epolanski »

close04 wrote: post #29
mallets wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Samsung is already in a much better position for this. They have external customers and experience facilitating them. Unlike Intel's track record which doesn't inspire confidence at all.

Intel has something Samsung doesn't. It's a US company operating mostly on US soil so the US government has a vested interest to keep this strategic asset going for as long as possible.

Tech hardware is a cutthroat business, tech companies are gonna order at Intel if it has something that others don't on a business point of view: more performing, cheaper, faster delivery.

The US government can wish and encourage all they want, as long as Samsung, TSMC and any other produces better chips for less, the money will flow there.

Re: Intel Foundry demonstrates first Arm-based chip on 18a node

#62

Post by tw04 »

cameron_b wrote: post #53

I understand the part where Intel is trying to get external customers interested in the output of their fab by exhibiting an implementation of an ARM processor. In the past I understand that they did some custom implementation of Xeon cores for hyperscalers, but the meat and potatoes was the chip they designed. Do we take this to mean that the current leadership assess the value proposition -of Intel- to be in the /m…

>Do we take this to mean that the current leadership assess the value proposition -of Intel- to be in the /making/ of the chips, akin to TSMC, and not in the /designing/ of them, as in all past seasons at Intel?

No… Gelsinger laid all of this out very clearly. He wanted the design side of the house and the manufacturing side of the house to stand on their own. He didn’t want the design side relying solely on process to maintain performance leads, and he also wanted them to have the flexibility to use any fab should manufacturing fall behind.

In order for manufacturing to survive design potentially going to competitors for certain generations, they need to also support outside business.

https://www.intc.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/1451/...

Re: Intel Foundry demonstrates first Arm-based chip on 18a node

#63

Post by [deleted] »

epolanski wrote: post #60
coro_1 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The foundries they're putting together for future manufacturing are just hoping customers will comes. Intel needs partnerships because the brand isn't the same since the core founders and builders are long gone.

I don't get it. Intel has a very huge customer for their 18A node, one that could bring billions in orders: itself. If they themselves don't produce their chip there, why would anybody else do?

[deleted]

Re: Intel Foundry demonstrates first Arm-based chip on 18a node

#64

Post by chasil »

theFco wrote: post #56
cameron_b wrote: post #53

I understand the part where Intel is trying to get external customers interested in the output of their fab by exhibiting an implementation of an ARM processor. In the past I understand that they did some custom implementation of Xeon cores for hyperscalers, but the meat and potatoes was the chip they designed. Do we take this to mean that the current leadership assess the value proposition -of Intel- to be in the /m…

As I understand it, Intel's strength was in manufacturing their own design in their exclusive (and most advanced) process. So the advantage was being vertically integrated. State of the art processes are too expensive these days. x86 CPUs alone cannot sustain them. Specially, when AMD builds their CPU also with state of the art processes. So by becoming a foundry, Intel may be able to have state of the art fabs and u…

The use of standard cells for a process somewhat opens it for outside users.

The 80386 was the first use of standard cells for x86, which also introduced "automatic place and route" via a graduate student project named "Timberwolf."

https://www.righto.com/2023/10/intel-386-die-versions.html

Re: Intel Foundry demonstrates first Arm-based chip on 18a node

#65

Post by close04 »

epolanski wrote: post #61
close04 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel has something Samsung doesn't. It's a US company operating mostly on US soil so the US government has a vested interest to keep this strategic asset going for as long as possible.

Tech hardware is a cutthroat business, tech companies are gonna order at Intel if it has something that others don't on a business point of view: more performing, cheaper, faster delivery. The US government can wish and encourage all they want, as long as Samsung, TSMC and any other produces better chips for less, the money will flow there.

If a government finds a sector or company to have strategic importance they will not let it die. The rest is free-market absolutism that never comes to be. I believe today more than ever the US considers Intel to be of strategic importance.

> the money will flow there

Which money? The CHIPS act [0] isn't only for the ones who produce "better chips for less".

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHIPS_and_Science_Act

Re: Intel Foundry demonstrates first Arm-based chip on 18a node

#66

Post by mbreese »

epolanski wrote: post #60
coro_1 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The foundries they're putting together for future manufacturing are just hoping customers will comes. Intel needs partnerships because the brand isn't the same since the core founders and builders are long gone.

I don't get it. Intel has a very huge customer for their 18A node, one that could bring billions in orders: itself. If they themselves don't produce their chip there, why would anybody else do?

As far as I have read, even with themselves as the primary customer, there is still enough excess capacity to make it unprofitable to use the most advanced processes. I see it as a strict cost issue — the new fab costs $X to run. Intel can only keep it running Y% of the time with its own orders. You need someone to fill in the gap. Not to mention, at the moment the entire cost of an Intel fab is being amortized across only Intel chips. If they can spread that out to external customers, then they can start to make their CPUs more cost competitive (or better margins, or both).

Plus, if the goal is to make more chips domestically (of all kinds), Intel will need to show that they can fab chips for other customers, not just their own designs.

Re: Intel Foundry demonstrates first Arm-based chip on 18a node

#67

Post by chasil »

nxobject wrote: post #19

Random question: where did the ARM core design come from?

The actual ARM1 processor was built for the "tube" connection on a 6502-based 8-bit BBC Microcomputer in the early 1980s.

These two articles are popular for the details of that history. ARM dominates the second.

https://www.theregister.com/2012/05/02/unsung_heroes_of_tech...

https://www.theregister.com/2012/05/03/unsung_heroes_of_tech...

Re: Intel Foundry demonstrates first Arm-based chip on 18a node

#68

Post by darknoon »

mbreese wrote: post #66
epolanski wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get it. Intel has a very huge customer for their 18A node, one that could bring billions in orders: itself. If they themselves don't produce their chip there, why would anybody else do?

As far as I have read, even with themselves as the primary customer, there is still enough excess capacity to make it unprofitable to use the most advanced processes. I see it as a strict cost issue — the new fab costs $X to run. Intel can only keep it running Y% of the time with its own orders. You need someone to fill in the gap. Not to mention, at the moment the entire cost of an Intel fab is being amortized acros…

Here's the thing, they've completely given up and started making their (inferior to AMD) CPUs on TSMC. For example, Arrow Lake is on TSMC N3B. So it's not getting amortized over anything at all and their valuation is going to 0.

Re: Intel Foundry demonstrates first Arm-based chip on 18a node

#69

Post by axiolite »

epolanski wrote: post #60
coro_1 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The foundries they're putting together for future manufacturing are just hoping customers will comes. Intel needs partnerships because the brand isn't the same since the core founders and builders are long gone.

I don't get it. Intel has a very huge customer for their 18A node, one that could bring billions in orders: itself. If they themselves don't produce their chip there, why would anybody else do?

Intel certainly will use 18A for their own chips:

CEO Lip-Bu Tan: "Job number one is ramping Intel 18A at scale. Intel 18A and Intel 18A-P are critical nodes for Intel Products and will drive meaningful wafer volumes well into the next decade – starting with Panther Lake later this year."

But they don't want to be the ONLY customer. Intel wants other companies to invest, and as early in the processes as possible, so Intel doesn't have to bankroll the whole thing.

"Going forward, our investment in Intel 14A will be based on confirmed customer commitments. There are no more blank checks. Every investment must make economic sense. We will build what our customers need, when they need it"

https://newsroom.intel.com/corporate/lip-bu-tan-steps-in-the...

Re: Intel Foundry demonstrates first Arm-based chip on 18a node

#70

Post by throwway120385 »

testdelacc1 wrote: post #8

Assuming they’re telling the truth, they’ve successfully built one chip from that fab. That’s good, but it doesn’t mean the fab is capable of manufacturing at scale while turning a profit. They need an external customer for the fab so they can iterate and work out the issues. It’s anyone’s guess if someone trusts intel to manufacture on their behalf instead of sticking with an established player. They’re stuck in a c…

Intel has a habit of giving up on things too early. So I'm not sure I would trust them with anything even if they had a better process or were less expensive or easier to work with.
Post reply on HN