• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel Showcases 18A Node Performance: 25% Faster and 40% Lower Power Draw

AleksandarK

News Editor
Staff member
Joined
Aug 19, 2017
Messages
3,248 (1.12/day)
Intel's presentation at the VLSI Symposium in Japan offered a detailed look at the upcoming Intel 18A process, which is set to enter mass production in the second half of 2025. This node combines Gate-All-Around transistors with the PowerVia backside power delivery network, resulting in a completely new metal stack architecture. By routing power through the rear of the die, Intel has been able to tighten interconnect pitches on critical layers while relaxing spacing on the top layer, improving yield and simplifying fabrication. In standardized power, performance, and area tests on an Arm core sub-block, Intel 18A demonstrated roughly 15% higher performance at the same power draw compared to Intel 3. When operating at 1.1 volts, clock speeds increase by up to 25% without incurring additional energy costs, and at around 0.75 volts, performance can rise by 18%, or power consumption can drop by nearly 40%.

Under the hood, the process features significant cell height reductions: performance‑tuned cells measure 180 nanometers tall, while high‑density designs sit at 160 nanometers, both smaller than their predecessors. The front‑side metal layers have been reduced from between 12 and 19 on Intel 3 to between 11 and 16 on Intel 18A, with three additional rear metal layers added for PowerVia support. Pitches on layers M1 through M10 have been tightened from as much as 60 nanometers down to 32 nanometers before easing again in the upper layers. Low-NA EUV exposure is used on layers M0 through M4, cutting the number of masks required by 44% and simplifying the manufacturing flow. Intel plans to debut 18A in its low‑power "Panther Lake" compute chiplet and the efficiency‑core‑only Clearwater Forest Xeon 7 family. A cost-optimized 17-layer variant, a balanced 21-layer option, and a performance-focused 22-layer configuration will address different market segments.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source
 
Smells like shareholder propaganda to me.
 
cool, looks like its going in the right direction
 
cool, looks like its going in the right direction

I'm trying to be optimistic but I'll believe Intel when they actually release a product based on this fabrication. I mean I hope they finally beat the raptorlake core at gaming what has it been almost 3 years and they haven't beat it.
 
cool, now make a cheap small energy efficient n series chip with that and flood the market with a cheap platform to pick up all those forced windows 10 to 11 updates

I'm trying to be optimistic but I'll believe Intel when they actually release a product based on this fabrication. I mean I hope they finally beat the raptorlake core at gaming what has it been almost 3 years and they haven't beat it.
Much of that is just the games them selves.
I wonder if they have something that can combine sram and foveros so they can do their own version of x3d
 
I'm trying to be optimistic but I'll believe Intel when they actually release a product based on this fabrication. I mean I hope they finally beat the raptorlake core at gaming what has it been almost 3 years and they haven't beat it.
have faith.. amd was also in slump before super ceo lisa su took over... and managed to turn around with ryzen...
ryzen first models were ok at best.. but it got much better...
we just need intel next product to be faster at productivity/gaming. runs fairly cool and not degrade out of the box that requires microcode to fix...
 
have faith.. amd was also in slump before super ceo lisa su took over... and managed to turn around with ryzen...
ryzen first models were ok at best.. but it got much better...
we just need intel next product to be faster at productivity/gaming. runs fairly cool and not degrade out of the box that requires microcode to fix...

For sure, Intel definitely needs it's empire strikes back moment.
 
It's the VLSI symposium. Purely technical info shared here. Shareholders are mostly financially focused, not technically.
Sure. In times when Intel can't attract any customers to Intel 18A process, they keep releasing this kind of stuff.
TSMC's 2nm process is far superior in regard to yields. Even Intel has ordered some volumes in TSMC's 2nm production queue.
 
Ship it and let the world decide. These stockholder narrative stories are getting long in the tooth.
 
Thank you TPU for resisting the urge to say 1.8 nm or anything about angstroms. As a fan of true unit of measurements, I appreciate it.
 
For sure, Intel definitely needs it's empire strikes back moment.
Intel had their empire strikes back moment back in 2008 with the release of Nehalem, a significant improvement over Netburst arch. This also started the Corei3/i5/i7 branding.

I agree that Intel needs another moment. More competition, the better.
 
Intel had their empire strikes back moment back in 2008 with the release of Nehalem, a significant improvement over Netburst arch. This also started the Corei3/i5/i7 branding.

I agree that Intel needs another moment. More competition, the better.
We already got the competition in the form of ARM licensees (Qualcomm, Apple, Nvidia, etc.) and the competition will only get more fierce even if Intel vanishes from the face of the earth. In my opinion, it's best to move on from requiring the same three companies (AMD, Nvidia, Intel) to be the only companies we care about. That's what causes all this mess in the first place.

However, back on topic, we do need competition to improve in the semiconductor fab space as TSMC is the only real player. This is why I keep hoping that Intel will pivot away from chip design and concentrate only on a fab for hire model. Intel can't do both and will just go out of business if they try.
 
Surprisingly, Intel 3 is used for Xeon 6, a 578 mm² for E core only and 598 mm² P core version, It can be assumed that 18A is only for Xeon 7 and some mobile user devices if any at all. N2 for desktop is the usual mix of P/E/LP with an external memory controller.
 
Last edited:
It's the VLSI symposium. Purely technical info shared here. Shareholders are mostly financially focused, not technically.
OK, that’s maybe a bit naïve of a take, don’t shareholders have an interest in not being misled as well?
[Games being memory-dependent.]
Much of that is just the games them selves.
I wonder if they have something that can combine sram and foveros so they can do their own version of x3d
I mean, they probably could push out some cache-tiles, I guess they haven’t done it since it’d be too expensive, maybe?
I keep wondering why memory latency is that high, after all. People (seemingly dumb people) tend to bemoan that Intel has moved the memory controller away from the cores, and there was much appreciation when they announced they had moved them back, but … Look how AMD’s chiplet chips need to traverse the package (!) to reach the memory controller from the cores, so that really can’t be where the excess latency comes from.
I have now re-read more on that than I had wished for, and … is it even sure, now, what’s the problem? All I could see is that L3 is also slow, and that’s already part of why it takes so long to get to memory—even though L3 is where it’s always been.
Sure. In times when Intel can't attract any customers to Intel 18A process, they keep releasing this kind of stuff.
What kind of stuff? Positive news about their process? How dare they! :rolleyes: FWIW, the VLSI Symposium is a long-standing industry event, where it’s tradition to share that exact kind of info, so nohting out of the normal there.
TSMC's 2nm process is far superior in regard to yields. Even Intel has ordered some volumes in TSMC's 2nm production queue.
You say ‘even’, yet I don’t see any connection between these statements.
 
For sure, Intel definitely needs it's empire strikes back moment.
Wasn't Core 2 that moment righting the ship after "we're going to reach 10GHz to compensate for worser than predecessor IPC" NetBurst fiasco.
 
Wasn't Core 2 that moment righting the ship after "we're going to reach 10GHz to compensate for worser than predecessor IPC" NetBurst fiasco.

Intel had their empire strikes back moment back in 2008 with the release of Nehalem, a significant improvement over Netburst arch. This also started the Corei3/i5/i7 branding.

I agree that Intel needs another moment. More competition, the better.


OK, Revenge of the Sith!!!! lol :laugh: :toast:
 
INTEL should become a research company, then get TSMC to implement it. INTEL doing it, just costs twice as much…
 
The mean 40% more efficient power wise, but the power usage/draw will stay the same for most part
 
There's a long list of nodes from 14++++nm that Intel has bragged about and failed to deliver. How many slides were there about awesome game-changing 20A, until it got cancelled ?
End users however need competition and Intel needs to get their s*** together with this 18A node or the only Intel there will be, is the one in history books.
 
Intel had their empire strikes back moment back in 2008 with the release of Nehalem, a significant improvement over Netburst arch. This also started the Corei3/i5/i7 branding.
No, it was Conroe, a.k.a Core 2 Duo/Extreme, in 2006. AnandTech literally titled their review "The Empire Strikes Back".
AMD slashed their prices in half overnight at its launch, and never recovered until Ryzen.

Wasn't Core 2 that moment righting the ship after "we're going to reach 10GHz to compensate for worser than predecessor IPC" NetBurst fiasco.
Yes it was.
 
Seeing is believing. Intel will have to show confidence in their own node and deliver something like the compute tile of Nova Lake on 18A instead of TSMC N2. Then it needs to be competitive with AMD's TSMC-based offerings in performance and efficiency (at least on par with the non-X3D parts).

In short: Show, don't tell, Intel. Let's see actual product and then we'll judge...
 
OK. Release new OPTANE drives with up to 20TB capacity for the price of SATA drives, and see how the market cap doubles, or more.
 
OK. Release new OPTANE drives with up to 20TB capacity for the price of SATA drives, and see how the market cap doubles, or more.
Tech companies seem to think they entitled to huge margins now, a margin of 5% they seem to think is loser territory.

Imagine if we had 64TB SATA drives which is possible, for the price of say a 12TB HDD. Ironically as you said they would make as much money from the massive higher amount of sales.
 
Back
Top