Intel

Intel Says Process Tech to Lag Competitors Until Late 2021, Will Regain Lead with 5nm

(Image credit: Intel)

It appears that 2020 and 2021 are going to be long years for Intel. CFO George Davis presented at the Morgan Stanley conference yesterday covering a wide range of topics, but noted that despite being "undoubtedly in the 10nm era," the company felt that it would not reach process parity with competitors until it produces the 7nm node at the tail end of 2021. Davis also said that Intel wouldn't regain process leadership until it produces the 5nm node at an unspecified date.

Davis commented that the company was "definitely in the 10nm era" with Ice Lake client chips and networking ASICs already shipping, along with the pending release of discrete GPUs and Ice Lake Xeons. Intel is also moving well along the path of inter-node development, which consists of "+" revisions to existing processes. Davis said the 10nm inter-node step provides a "step-function move" with the Tiger Lake chips based on the 10nm+ process as the company awaits its 7nm process.

However, Davis noted that in spite of the shipping products and pending "+" revisions to the 10nm process, its process node still lags behind competitors, stating:

"So we bring a lot of capability to the table for our customers, in addition to the CPU, and we feel like we're starting to see the acceleration on the process side that we have been talking about to get back to parity in the 7nm generation and regain leadership in the 5nm generation."

(Image credit: news.mynavi.jp)

Intel's 10nm process provides comparable density to TSMC's competing 7nm process, so it's hard to tell if Davis's reference is to either the performance of the 10nm node, or how economically the company can produce it. In either case, Davis predicts Intel will regain parity with the industry at the end of 2021 with its own 7nm node (presumably with TSMC's 5nm being the interception point). That will obviously have an impact on Intel's competitive positioning and financial performance in the interim, particularly as the company is now fully embroiled in a price war with AMD .

Davis says the company will offset those challenges by offering differentiated platform-level solutions, which includes tight hardware integration on the AI and software fronts, but he also noted that the company's 10nm node won't be as successful as Intel's prior nodes:

"As we said back at our analyst day in May of 19: Look, this isn't just going to be the best node that Intel has ever had. It's going to be less productive than 14nm, less productive than 22nm, but we're excited about the improvements that we're seeing and we expect to start the 7nm period with a much better profile of performance over that starting at the end of 2021."

Davis noted that the company is trying to be clear with investors about the impacts of 10nm on the company's gross margins: "...but the fact is that I wanted to be clear what was happening during the 10nm generation. The fact is, it isn't going to be as strong a node as people would expect from 14nm or what they'll see in 7nm."

"Also, we were at a time when in order to regain process leadership we had to accelerate the overlap between 10nm, 7nm, and then 7nm and 5nm, so the cost that you're absorbing, starting in particular in 2021, you’ve got this intersection of the performance of 10nm, the investment in 7nm, and were also well into starting the investment in 5nm: All of those elements just combine to impact gross margin."

Davis also noted that "....the effect of 10nm in 2021. It's sort of built today, you've got to get through that product cycle and the node. We're excited about the products, but the node isn't going to be quite the performer that historically we've had."

Intel plans to roll out the 7nm process in late 2021, and the company hasn't released an official projection for the launch of its 5nm node. TSMC is moving along briskly with its new processes and should be on the 3nm node in late 2022, so it's unclear if Intel's projection to regain leadership with its 5nm node are based on TSMC's current schedule for 3nm .

In the interim, Intel will have to fend off the resurgent AMD, which could be painful, particularly in the data center.  When asked if the company was forecasting a share loss in servers, Davis responded, "We expect to see stronger competitive dynamics in the second half of this year. We thought we would see that sooner, but what we've seen is very strong demand for our products. …we do expect there to be strong competition through this period…as we look at our product roadmap we expect to offer a more competitive and compelling position as we go from 7nm to 5nm."

Intel is facing challenges, but the company has signaled a new focus on aligning its vast IP portfolio under new leadership and a new six-pillar ethos . As such, we can expect to see Intel continue to invest in its latest tech that isn't entirely contingent upon process leadership, like EMIB and Foveros , and adopt new chiplet-based architectures across the breadth of its portfolio to both leverage its packaging advantage and sidestep some of the issues with shrinking some functions to smaller nodes. We also expect Intel will continue to work on making its architectures portable across nodes to blunt the blow from potential future missteps.

  • jimmysmitty
    To me the biggest thing Intel needs to worry about is a new uArch and utilizing technologies like Foveros to implement designs like AMD is doing, or better yet like their old M2M designed Core 2 series. That is where the advantage lies.

    AMD pulling the I/O off the cores allows them to create cores that use less power overall, of course the 7nm is not hurting at all, and run cooler while also allowing for higher core counts. However the down side is this does add in latency which does affect performance in some areas. Foveros looks like it should help to mitigate that with a much closer connection and allow for Intel to have similar benefits.

    But who am I to say. I am just a lowly nerd on some forum.
    Reply
  • Giroro
    If this is what George Davis thinks the "10nm era" looks like, then maybe Intel needs a CFO with higher standards.
    If George Davis thinks letting your competitors beat your 5nm to market by 2 years is "process leadership", then... I don't even know where to start with that one. Maybe Intel should add "ability to read a calendar" to their job requirements for CFO?
    Does intel want their hypothetical first 5nm products to outperform Samsung's 4nm+ or TSMC's 5nm++? Probably. But what an executive wants and what Intel's struggling engineering department can eventually produce are two very different things.
    Reply
  • JamesSneed
    jimmysmitty said:
    To me the biggest thing Intel needs to worry about is a new uArch and utilizing technologies like Foveros to implement designs like AMD is doing, or better yet like their old M2M designed Core 2 series. That is where the advantage lies.

    AMD pulling the I/O off the cores allows them to create cores that use less power overall, of course the 7nm is not hurting at all, and run cooler while also allowing for higher core counts. However the down side is this does add in latency which does affect performance in some areas. Foveros looks like it should help to mitigate that with a much closer connection and allow for Intel to have similar benefits.

    But who am I to say. I am just a lowly nerd on some forum.


    I tend to agree. Albeit Intel also needs to get to 7nm using EUV on time as well. Foveros is a much more elegant solution than AMD's but then AMD's has been out a while now. I have a feeling AMD's Zen3 will reduce much of the inherent latencies.
    Reply
  • jimmysmitty
    JamesSneed said:
    I tend to agree. Albeit Intel also needs to get to 7nm using EUV on time as well. Foveros is a much more elegant solution than AMD's but then AMD's has been out a while now. I have a feeling AMD's Zen3 will reduce much of the inherent latencies.

    Yes 7nm but they need to move on from Core and push the new Sunny Cove or later designs in more than just laptops.

    Most of the latencies come from the distance from the I/O die to the cores. Foveros has almost none. I am sure though that AMD is working on some sort of similar design.
    Reply
  • spongiemaster
    Giroro said:
    If this is what George Davis thinks the "10nm era" looks like, then maybe Intel needs a CFO with higher standards.
    If George Davis thinks letting your competitors beat your 5nm to market by 2 years is "process leadership", then... I don't even know where to start with that one. Maybe Intel should add "ability to read a calendar" to their job requirements for CFO?
    Does intel want their hypothetical first 5nm products to outperform Samsung's 4nm+ or TSMC's 5nm++? Probably. But what an executive wants and what Intel's struggling engineering department can eventually produce are two very different things.
    You can't compare node labels between companies. By TSMC's own admission, they no longer have any real world meaning to them. Intel uses the most conservative labels in the industry which is well known. Intel's 7nm will be equivalent to the competition's 5nm. So it doesn't matter that what Intel will call its 5nm node will hit the market 2 years after what TSMC calls its 5nm because they aren't comparably dense nodes. Intel doesn't need to "want" their 5nm product to beat the competition's 5nm, because we already know it will. It should be equivalent to what TSMC will call its 3nm node.
    Reply