Intel Research Fuels Moore's Law and Paves the Way to a Trillion Transistors by 2030

[PrettyKitten800]

Huang is right. Intel lies and has false, dream expectations. Once the reality strikes, Intel will have to accept the reality.
Intel is having serious problems with its production nodes and such roadmaps are fake even today.



It is dead and buried long time ago. Intel 10 nm is a proof.

So… you think the word of someone who’s company doesn’t *actually* manufacture anything is more reliable than the only company on the planet that can design AND manufacture its own products??

Bruh…. everyone commenting on this article is TRIPPING. Why are we hating on one of the very few companies that can ACTUALLY MANUFACTURE chips???

It’s great that other companies can design better architectures, but I’m pretty sure Qualcomm, AMD, Nvidia, Apple, Mediatek, Amazon, etc all rely on TSMC or Samsung to produce their designs.

I don’t see any companies other than TSMC, Intel, or Samsung trying to push the boundaries of chip manufacturing. Why all the hate on Intel for actually trying?

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

Wow, lotta pissed off nerds in here. Intel wants to aim for a trillion transistors and apparently thats a Bad Thing (TM).

 

[ARF]

So… you think the word of someone who’s company doesn’t *actually* manufacture anything is more reliable than the only company on the planet that can design AND manufacture its own products??

Of course, Huang is telling the truth in the particular case.

Let's remember what the Moore's "law" actually says:

Moore's Law states that the number of transistors on a microchip doubles every two years. The law claims that we can expect the speed and capability of our computers to increase every two years because of this, yet we will pay less for them.

Intel's own manufacturing processes are a proof that the above statement is no longer valid and it takes more than 2 years to double the transistors on a microchip.

Bruh…. everyone commenting on this article is TRIPPING. Why are we hating on one of the very few companies that can ACTUALLY MANUFACTURE chips???

It’s great that other companies can design better architectures, but I’m pretty sure Qualcomm, AMD, Nvidia, Apple, Mediatek, Amazon, etc all rely on TSMC or Samsung to produce their designs.

I don’t see any companies other than TSMC, Intel, or Samsung trying to push the boundaries of chip manufacturing. Why all the hate on Intel for actually trying?

TBH, I can live fine without Intel. My last Intel CPUs were Core 2 Quad Q9450 from 2008 and Core 2 Duo T5250 from 2008, and I don't plan to buy anything Intel in the future.

 

[RoutedScripter]

All this industry bickering about moore's law and performance ... it's not going where it should be, single-thread performance. In that case moore's law was dead a long time ago.

 

[Tomgang]

1 trillion transistors might be true, when they eventually get to 7 or 5 nm. But first a few years more with 10 nm++++++++++++++++++++

 

[Vayra86]

Wow, lotta pissed off nerds in here. Intel wants to aim for a trillion transistors and apparently thats a Bad Thing (TM).

Not at all! They can aim all they want, but we all have our hopes and dreams, don't we. Used to dream I could fly at some point. These slides kinda fall in that category.

 

[Denver]

For now the reality is TSMC isolated on the throne. I feel that the chances of following TSMC's progress are better on Samsung's side than on Intel's side.

 

[coozie78]

We're already seeing big problems cooling current designs at far
lower densities, how do they plan on cooling these projected monsters?

All this industry bickering about moore's law and performance ... it's not going where it should be, single-thread performance. In that case moore's law was dead a long time ago.

Maybe it's time for software to finally catch up with multi core hardware.

 

[DemonicRyzen666]

Moore's law, isn't a law, it's a theory.

But Moore's Law isn't dead?

yes it was, cause it's was never a law, in the first place.
it's a theory.

 

[thesmokingman]

Intel is fast becoming the GM of EVs, you know like how they and some president keeps pushing the narrative that they are leading the EV revolution?

 

[sepheronx]

That's nothing. I'm working on my 1 Gorrilion Transistor chip as we speak.

If intel wants to buy my design, I'll gladly sell it for a hefty sum.

 

[Wirko]

Moore's law, isn't a law, it's a theory.

yes it was, cause it's was never a law, in the first place.
it's a theory.

Ah! So it's not illegal to be Mr. Gelsinger and mske big promises, hoping shareholders would believe them?

 

[RoutedScripter]

Maybe it's time for software to finally catch up with multi core hardware.

Many resource hungry operations necessary for simulation and physics cannot be parallelized (split into multiple threads) by simply the nature of them, laws of physics. Yes only so far, software will never catch up 1:1.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Huang is right. Intel lies and has false, dream expectations.

And yet they & AMD continue to deliver steadily advancing product lines.

Once the reality strikes, Intel will have to accept the reality.

Intel has a greater grasp on reality than many of the commenters in this forum...

Intel is having serious problems with its production nodes

Not any more or less than everyone else in the world.

This is so misleading and superfluous, we're already getting pretty close the atomic level in terms of feature size in a chip, there is no smaller than that. So no, density wise there are not going to be any significant improvements going further, that's an immutable fact.

That's actually not correct. There is more progress that can be made. TSMC's 5nm and 3nm nodes are evidence of this. However we are getting close to that limit. 2nm is likely going to be the limit of what can be done in a shrink-down miniaturization effort.

Sure, you can try and pull all sorts of tricks with staking multiple and chips and whatnot but that can only take you so far.

True, there are limits to stacking. However, no one has done it yet in a commercial product. It's all theory currently. What those limits are is unknown and might be greater then is currently theorized.

I still expect the semiconductor industry to hit a brick wall in the next decade, there's just no going around these fundamental limits.

Maybe. Unless you have a crystal ball or a time machine, no one can know for sure.

 

[Jacky_BEL]

Did Intel in the past make any contribution to R&D in node shrink in silicon manufacturing?
They did R&D in CPU architecture yes.

Silicon manufacturing R&D , i think about Bell , IBM , and many other pioneering electronic companies from the past and companies like ASML nowadays.
Intel uses the processes invented by others.

 

[ymdhis]

We're already seeing big problems cooling current designs at far
lower densities, how do they plan on cooling these projected monsters?

Simply not push them to 6GHz by default and they won't end up using 300W.

Either that or drop the IHS and use direct die cooling like videocards. Can't wait until morons start chipping the die corner like it used to happen in the Athlon days.

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

2nm

Actual 2nm, not marketing 2nm if I had to guess. A 7nm product has ~35nm transistor pitch IIRC.

 

[gmn 17]

Captain, I cannot shrink it no more

 

[wolf]

Nope, both you and your savior of leather is wrong. Not even leather done by hand, full on CNC built cheap, glorified crap jacket. Just like his overpriced wasteland of silicone products.

Stop beating around the bush and tell us how you really feel lol.

--------------------------------------

Very interested to see how this goes for Intel, will this headline age like milk for them, or turn into fine wine? I won't make any sweeping predications or statements here, just keen to watch and find out.

 

[Helper]

Stop beating around the bush and tell us how you really feel lol.

Are we really going down that route? Sorry, my goal is not speedy, full ultra, extreme gaming. Since all I do nowadays is simple tasks, I can actually shrink my O11 Air and have been doing so (threw away the bigger GPU).

Some commentators are glorifying Intel but lately I've been purchasing mini PC parts and I noticed how much better AMD has been there, simply due to what they can achieve with their better node.

Also, the naming schemes. Don't get me started on them. There's the uh, what was it called... 1240F? Something like that. Pretty weird CPU, actually, the whole mobile 12th gen stack is weird. They have a lot of efficiency cores but almost no performance cores. Look at this chart, they're actually selling single real core processors for tablet machines. Does that even compete with Snapdragon?

https://www.ultrabookreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/mobil-intel-alder-lake-960x485.jpg

 

[PapaTaipei]

This again proves that Huang's claim the law is dead is just an excuse to raise the price of their cards.

THIS

 

[wolf]

Are we really going down that route?

The route you just took wasn't even on my map, I was somewhere completely different with my comment, but never mind I suppose

 

[Helper]

The route you just took wasn't even on my map, I was somewhere completely different with my comment, but never mind I suppose

Yeah I actually understood the point, I felt like meming a bit earlier on the first page since the thread is about something so newspaper worthy (nonsense news lol). Apologies for the misdirection.

Regardless though notebooks should still consume the biggest part of the consumer PC sales... and honestly, AMD CPUs offer so much more down there. Multi threaded doesn't compare even when comparing older AMD chips to the newer gen Intel.

What most people seem to agree though is, Intel's node being inferior. This largely slaps them the smaller the PC gets.

 

[PrettyKitten800]

Of course, Huang is telling the truth in the particular case.

Let's remember what the Moore's "law" actually says:



Intel's own manufacturing processes are a proof that the above statement is no longer valid and it takes more than 2 years to double the transistors on a microchip.



TBH, I can live fine without Intel. My last Intel CPUs were Core 2 Quad Q9450 from 2008 and Core 2 Duo T5250 from 2008, and I don't plan to buy anything Intel in the future.

Huang stated his opinion about a named observation. To call it "truth" is a bit silly. Everyone knows Moore's Law is not a "law" in the strict sense. Huang has no ground to stand on though because his company doesn't even manufacture the products they design. It's easy to sit back and criticize when you don't actually do any of the work and that's exactly what he is doing.

You would not live fine without Intel. Maybe you haven't used one of their CPUs in over a decade, but it's 100% guaranteed that you use multiple technologies developed by them. Intel is much, much more than just a consumer-focused design firm that can't manufacture their own products like AMD or NVIDIA. They have created tech that is so ubiquitous, you don't even know that you use it. I don't see why there is so much distaste for one of the few chip manufacturing companies left in the free world. At least Intel is trying and presenting some degree of success. AMD, NVIDIA, and Apple would cease to function if TSMC disappeared. People give these fabless chip companies WAY too much credit.

 

[Helper]

Huang stated his opinion about a named observation. To call it "truth" is a bit silly. Everyone knows Moore's Law is not a "law" in the strict sense. Huang has no ground to stand on though because his company doesn't even manufacture the products they design. It's easy to sit back and criticize when you don't actually do any of the work and that's exactly what he is doing.

You would not live fine without Intel. Maybe you haven't used one of their CPUs in over a decade, but it's 100% guaranteed that you use multiple technologies developed by them. Intel is much, much more than just a consumer-focused design firm that can't manufacture their own products like AMD or NVIDIA. They have created tech that is so ubiquitous, you don't even know that you use it. I don't see why there is so much distaste for one of the few chip manufacturing companies left in the free world. At least Intel is trying and presenting some degree of success. AMD, NVIDIA, and Apple would cease to function if TSMC disappeared. People give these fabless chip companies WAY too much credit.

Why does the approach matter so much if the end result is better for AMD though? As far as nodes are concerned, like using TSMC.

That's like saying I don't prefer an i4 for longer distances over a base Model 3, simply because it's a combustion car converted to electric.

In reality the i4 has more range than a base Model 3... the approach is not that relevant if the outcome happens to be superior.