Friday, July 24th 2020

Intel 7nm CPUs Delayed by a Year, Alder Lake in 2H-2021, Other Commentary from Intel Management

Intel's silicon fabrication woes refuse to torment the company's product roadmaps, with the company disclosing in its Q2-2020 financial results release that the company's first CPUs built on the 7 nanometer silicon fabrication node are delayed by a year due to a further 6-month delay from prior expectations. The company will focus on getting its 10 nm node up to scale in the meantime.

The company mentioned that the 10 nm "Tiger Lake" mobile processor and "Ice Lake-SP" enterprise processor remains on-track for 2020. The company's 12th Generation Core "Alder Lake-S" desktop processors won't arrive before the second half of 2021. In the meantime, Intel will launch its 11th Gen Core "Rocket Lake" processor on the 14 nm node, but with increased IPC from the new "Cypress Cove" CPU cores. Also in 2H-2021, the company will launch its "Sapphire Rapids" enterprise processors that come with next-gen connectivity and updated CPU cores.
Intel 7 nanometer delay
It's interesting to note that Intel was specific about "CPU" when talking about 7 nm, meaning that Intel's foundry woes only affect its CPU product stack, and not a word was mentioned in the release about the company's discrete GPU and scalar compute processors that are being prototyped and validated. This is probably the biggest hint we'll ever get from Intel that the company's dGPUs are being designed for third-party foundries (such as Samsung or TSMC), and that the Xe dGPU product roadmap is disconnected from that of Intel's fabs.
Intel is accelerating its transition to 10 nm products this year with increasing volumes and strong demand for an expanding line up. This includes a growing portfolio of 10 nm-based Intel Core processors with "Tiger Lake" launching soon, and the first 10 nm-based server CPU "Ice Lake," which remains planned for the end of this year. In the second half of 2021, Intel expects to deliver a new line of client CPU's (code-named "Alder Lake"), which will include its first 10 nm-based desktop CPU, and a new 10 nm-based server CPU (code-named "Sapphire Rapids"). The company's 7 nm-based CPU product timing is shifting approximately six months relative to prior expectations. The primary driver is the yield of Intel's 7 nm process, which based on recent data, is now trending approximately twelve months behind the company's internal target.
Intel's post results call also revealed a handful interesting tentative dates. For starters, "Tiger Lake" is shipping in "a matter of weeks," indicating an imminent launch ahead of the "Back to School" shopping season. Next up, the company's high-performance scalar compute processor, codenamed "Ponte Vecchio" remains slated for 2021-22, and given that it's reportedly being designed for 7 nm, we have our next big hint confirmation that these dGPUs will be built on third-party 7 nm fabs. Intel did mention that the Foveros packaging technology could be further developed over the years, and its upcoming discrete GPUs could combine dies (tiles) from multiple sources, which could include its own fabs.

Given the delays in Intel's 7 nm foundry node, the first Intel client-segment processors based on the node won't arrive before late-2022 or 2023, which means refinements of the current 10 nm silicon fabrication node should support Intel's client-segment product stack for the foreseeable future. The first enterprise 7 nm processors will arrive by the first half of 2023. Intel also mentioned that they expect to see "one full node improvement" from a refined 10 nanometer process, which isn't surprising, given how much experience they have improving their 14 nanometer process.
Add your own comment

175 Comments on Intel 7nm CPUs Delayed by a Year, Alder Lake in 2H-2021, Other Commentary from Intel Management

#126
ARF
londiste
Office PCs?
OEMs, brother, I think OEMs most of the time ship office PCs, may be I am wrong, don't know..
Posted on Reply
#127
londiste
Laptops (especially light-and-thin laptops that 15W CPUs are put into ) and office PCs are two very very different market segments.
Posted on Reply
#128
HenrySomeone
I honestly feel they are fine as long as 5 nm EUV from AMD doesn't come out considerably before their (proper) 10nm; only then would I start to worry a little.
Posted on Reply
#129
ARF
londiste
Laptops (especially light-and-thin laptops that 15W CPUs are put into ) and office PCs are two very very different market segments.
Why do big organisations and companies pursue lowest possible costs for electricity? How would they achieve their targets if they don't move all of their configurations to U-series CPUs?
Office PCs need neither top extreme performance as seen in 125-watt HEDT CPUs, nor they need so high power draw, especially when they don't even measure performance/watt.
Posted on Reply
#130
ToxicTaZ
ARF
My question is. Why the likes of HP still ship this 2-year-old midrange desktop CPU in brand new office PCs? Why don't they use lower power state-of-the-art CPUs in their machines ?
That's easy!

Because HP is garbage lol
Posted on Reply
#131
watzupken
Vayra86
People overestimate Apple. Company is indeed big but in volume its not unique at all.
Apple don't compete on volume if you have not noticed. They thrive on big profit margins despite lower volume sold as compared to their competitors. And despite the high price of Apple products, they are still able to maintain a very healthy fan base.
Posted on Reply
#132
Vayra86
watzupken
Apple don't compete on volume if you have not noticed. They thrive on big profit margins despite lower volume sold as compared to their competitors. And despite the high price of Apple products, they are still able to maintain a very healthy fan base.
Yes, but in the context of being supplied with chips and components, who cares about fan base?
Posted on Reply
#133
Chrispy_
londiste
4, 6 and 8 cores are still all valid choices in mainstream. 12 and 16 cores are now viable but still niche. These OEM products you mention are not marketed or meant for enthusiasts or workstation-like uses where many cores help.
You are looking at it from the wrong side. 10900K vs 3900X/3950X is the wrong comparison to look at. Unless game is very thread-limited - and today, 6c/12t is plenty - something like 10400 is going to be as fast or faster than any Ryzen and 10600K is going to glow past them, more so when overclocked.
I'm looking at it from high-end side because that's the only side where the CPU is relevant to gaming. At the budget end the CPU is almost completely irrelevant. The money goes into the GPU at the low end, every time. If you're not doing that you're doing it wrong.

Take an R5 3600 vs the 10400 at the exact same price (ignore the fact that the 3600 is usually $5-10 cheaper and comes with a usable, rather than an unusable cooler). The 3600 is better at everything, including many games where the 3600 with DDR4-2666 will only be beaten by the 10400 using DDR4-3200. Yes, the 10600 is significantly faster at games than the R5 3600 but then you have problems even getting hold of the damn thing because it's out of stock everywhere, and price-gouging is rampant (I've only seen it in stock at $300+). If you were adamant that your gaming CPU had to be a 10600 then you've just thrown away $130 of budget forcing you to downgrade the planned 2060KO to a rubbish little 1650S. Ouch. What's the point of a faster gaming CPU when your GPU sucks?
Posted on Reply
#134
londiste
ARF
Why do big organisations and companies pursue lowest possible costs for electricity? How would they achieve their targets if they don't move all of their configurations to U-series CPUs?
Office PCs need neither top extreme performance as seen in 125-watt HEDT CPUs, nor they need so high power draw, especially when they don't even measure performance/watt.
You mentioned i5 8500 - that is a 65W CPU. 35W CPUs are available from both AMD and Intel but are not too popular, even in office PCs. Moving to U-series will not happen simply because it would be too costly.
Office PCs are not heavily loaded anyway, so their real consumption is pretty low.

Electricity consumption as a cost factor for office PCs is not a real problem for companies. Most of the energy efficiency drive for office PCs is regulatory if even that.
Posted on Reply
#135
skates
Intel lost focus, initiative & energy. Their leadership is to blame. Time will tell if Intel goes into irreversible decline or they right the ship & do what is necessary to refocus, re-energize and gain the initiative.
Posted on Reply
#136
ARF
londiste
You mentioned i5 8500 - that is a 65W CPU. 35W CPUs are available from both AMD and Intel but are not too popular, even in office PCs. Moving to U-series will not happen simply because it would be too costly.
Office PCs are not heavily loaded anyway, so their real consumption is pretty low.

Electricity consumption as a cost factor for office PCs is not a real problem for companies. Most of the energy efficiency drive for office PCs is regulatory if even that.
This is quite disputable. There are always running applications, services and updates which quite heavily load the office computer.
Posted on Reply
#137
EarthDog
ARF
This is quite disputable. There are always running applications, services and updates which quite heavily load the office computer.
Yeah, MS Office is a bitch to run, eh? Same with default services. THANK GOD AMD is here with all their cores and threads. o_O

Jokes aside, in any kind of enterprise or office environment updates are rolled out after hours 99% of the time.... not while users are sitting in front of their PC.

That said, it really depends on use. CAD designers, content creators etc, likely run a higher load than most general office workers (accounting, HR, CSRs, etc). But typical office functionality isn't much on a PC. There will always be exceptions.
Posted on Reply
#138
kapone32
skates
Intel lost focus, initiative & energy. Their leadership is to blame. Time will tell if Intel goes into irreversible decline or they right the ship & do what is necessary to refocus, re-energize and gain the initiative.
In some ways the market made Intel what it is. Publicly traded companies that are in the profiles of super rich people
EarthDog
Yeah, MS Office is a bitch to run, eh? Same with default services. THANK GOD AMD is here with all their cores and threads. o_O

Jokes aside, in any kind of enterprise or office environment updates are rolled out after hours 99% of the time.... not while users are sitting in front of their PC.

That said, it really depends on use. CAD designers, content creators etc, likey run a higher load than most general office workers (accounting, HR, CSRs, etc). But typical office functionality isn't much on a PC. There will always be exceptions.
There is no sane reason to do any work on a network during business hours. Could you imagine the Telephone company putting the lines on standy (battery power) to change a transmission cable?
Posted on Reply
#139
ARF
EarthDog
Yeah, MS Office is a bitch to run, eh? Same with default services. THANK GOD AMD is here with all their cores and threads. o_O

Jokes aside, in any kind of enterprise or office environment updates are rolled out after hours 99% of the time.... not while users are sitting in front of their PC.

That said, it really depends on use. CAD designers, content creators etc, likely run a higher load than most general office workers (accounting, HR, CSRs, etc). But typical office functionality isn't much on a PC. There will always be exceptions.
Don't browsers use a logical/physical core per open tab?
Posted on Reply
#140
EarthDog
ARF
Don't browsers use a logical/physical core per open tab?
Not that I know of...doesn't look like it on my end...open your browser and see.

I'd be in deep shit as I have, right this second, 38 Chrome tabs open and 'only' 16c/16t (its 32t CPU but I have HT disabled)............my CPU is, for all intents and purposes at idle. Browsers do use a lot of RAM... but CPU use seems negligible (for my tabs currently). With Outlook and Excel open, Paint.Net (with a dozen images), two chrome instances with a total of 30+ tabs and while watching twitch shows ~10% give or take. If I remove twitch, I'm down to 2-4% with everything else up.
Posted on Reply
#141
mtcn77
I wonder what is next for intel a leveraged buyout?
Posted on Reply
#142
EarthDog
mtcn77
I wonder what is next for intel a leveraged buyout?
Of the company? Are you serious or did I miss some sarcasm tags?
Posted on Reply
#143
trparky
EarthDog
Of the company? Are you serious or did I miss some sarcasm tags?
I'm with you on that one. Intel is too big to be bought out. Not even the likes of Amazon and/or Apple have the kind of cash on hand to buy the likes of Intel.
Posted on Reply
#144
Chrispy_
ARF
Don't browsers use a logical/physical core per open tab?
They use a separate thread per open tab.

Windows10 will happily spawn ~2000 threads on a dual-core atom netbook with 2GB RAM.
Posted on Reply
#145
EarthDog
Chrispy_
They use a separate thread per open tab.

Windows10 will happily spawn ~2000 threads on a dual-core atom netbook with 2GB RAM.
I've got 2908 currently on my 16c/16t config... :p
Posted on Reply
#146
ARF
EarthDog
Not that I know of...doesn't look like it on my end...open your browser and see.

I'd be in deep shit as I have, right this second, 38 Chrome tabs open and 'only' 16c/16t (its 32t CPU but I have HT disabled)............my CPU is, for all intents and purposes at idle. Browsers do use a lot of RAM... but CPU use seems negligible (for my tabs currently). With Outlook and Excel open, Paint.Net (with a dozen images), two chrome instances with a total of 30+ tabs and while watching twitch shows ~10% give or take. If I remove twitch, I'm down to 2-4% with everything else up.
Wrong. Those percentages are when the tab is idle. When you load the tab, you get your CPU up to 100% load.
Posted on Reply
#147
EarthDog
ARF
Wrong. Those percentages are when the tab is idle. When you load the tab, you get your CPU up to 100% load.
Wrong? LOLwut?

When working any of these tabs, I've already mentioned my peak CPU use....which is with twitch.tv streaming as the active tab. Unless I don't understand what you are saying by "load the tab"? Please be more clear if I misunderstood?
EDIT: I just tried to bring up a new tab (blank) and then one of my book marks. There was a spike to a bit over 20%... then back down to ~10% when watching twitch. My NV GPU is working harder than the CPU (by %) watching twitch. ;)

EDIT2: Currently I only have 6 tabs and none of them spike the CPU at all when making it the active tab. Again, my CPU use peaks at ~10% with twitch doing its thing as the active tab.
Posted on Reply
#148
mtcn77
trparky
I'm with you on that one. Intel is too big to be bought out. Not even the likes of Amazon and/or Apple have the kind of cash on hand to buy the likes of Intel.
EarthDog
Of the company? Are you serious or did I miss some sarcasm tags?
Yes, just watched barbarians at the gate. I took a liking to it.
Posted on Reply
#149
EarthDog
mtcn77
Yes, just watched barbarians at the gate. I took a liking to it.
lol, nice!! Fair enough! :p
Posted on Reply
#150
ARF
EarthDog
Wrong? LOLwut?

When working any of these tabs, I've already mentioned my peak CPU use....which is with twitch.tv streaming as the active tab. Unless I don't understand what you are saying by "load the tab"? Please be more clear if I misunderstood?
EDIT: I just tried to bring up a new tab (blank) and then one of my book marks. There was a spike to a bit over 20%... then back down to ~10% when watching twitch. My NV GPU is working harder than the CPU (by %) watching twitch. ;)

EDIT2: Currently I only have 6 tabs and none of them spike the CPU at all when making it the active tab. Again, my CPU use peaks at ~10% with twitch doing its thing as the active tab.
This is what my CPU does when I open YouTube in 9 new tabs.

Posted on Reply
Add your own comment