Intel 18A-P Node Delivers 9% Performance Increase and 18% Power Savings
Posted by SlamedCards@reddit | hardware | View on Reddit | 147 comments
Posted by SlamedCards@reddit | hardware | View on Reddit | 147 comments
IBM296@reddit
Oh well. Let’s see if next generation Panther Lake can beat M6 with this.
battler624@reddit
Nah it wont.
Hope it can beat M5 in single core tho.
Geddagod@reddit
I think it's going to be on par with the M4 tbh. A \~15% gain vs PTL in single thread perf, for the top NVL-H sku, sounds pretty plausible.
Exist50@reddit
I think they should be able to get more. ~30% ST uplift should be doable. That's about a 50/50 split between node and core.
CopperSharkk@reddit
PNC is rumored to be 12 wide with nearly 800 ROB entries. if this is really true can they also push the clocks to 6.5GHz while widening the core by that much?
Exist50@reddit
I have no idea if that 12-wide claim is correct or not, but if the IPC gains come at too much of a frequency cost (to say nothing of power or area), then they're not worth doing to begin with. Granted, Intel's done that before (SNC...), but I would be reasonably confident they intend to get at least most of the frequency entitlement from the node.
And particularly for NVL-H, shouldn't be too hard. They lost a couple hundred MHz going from ARL->PTL, and surely that's just from 18A. Depends whether NVL is using N2 or N2P (been conflicting rumors), but they may be looking at more than a full node shrink's worth of gains. Could afford to sacrifice a bit for IPC and still end up around +15/+15.
6950@reddit
I don't think it's due to 18A cause LNL has the same frequency as PTL for the P/E and tech insight did teardown for LNL and ARL and found that ARL contained 17ML vs 20 for LNL.
Exist50@reddit
What else would it be? Tick cores don't regress in frequency.
6950@reddit
Different Physical design is the only answer the P core in LNL Clocks way lower than the P core in ARL-H like decent bit.
Exist50@reddit
The cores may be slightly different, but there may also be a contribution from power/voltage limits for a low power mobile chip. Anyway, I figure comparing -H vs -H (ARL vs PTL) is as apples to apples as we can hope for in regards to all that.
jocnews@reddit
Also we have a pretty good precedent in Meteor Lake, which was a tick wrt to Raptor Lake, and it regressed to a pretty much the same level (barely being able to bin 5.0-5.1 dies) due to going to Intel 4 node. It's pretty much clear Intel 18A just has similar issues as Intel 4 because of course it does (regrettably).
Geddagod@reddit
Intel 3 seems like a decent improvement based on ARL-U
jocnews@reddit
Yeah but it took time to get there and it was more of a partial improvement (and from what was even called a new node by Intel, so perhaps you can ague it to was behind and both these nodes should have been able to reach Intel 7 clocks).
jaaval@reddit
I actually kinda hope they would sacrifice top frequency even if it ends up with slightly worse top performance. Sacrificing frequency for IPC is what gives Apple the humongous lead in power efficiency.
Remember you are taking advantage of the node frequency increase even if you do this. The transistors being faster at a given voltage is what allows larger architectures to work.
Geddagod@reddit
rumored to be 2x6 wide though, isn't it?
Geddagod@reddit
I hope that's true but apparently Intel has been communicating to OEMs it would be a lot less (mostly from a lack of ST clocks).
SmashStrider@reddit
That's also pretty optimistic if you look at Panther Lake's current single-threaded performance, which lags behind that of the M3.
grumble11@reddit
I'm thinking that the NVL is a pretty big jump. If you assume that the architecture is a bigger jump (it should be, it's a large fundamental overhaul) and if you assume that the node is a bigger jump, then you could get 1.1*1.1 = 1.21, so possibly a 20%+ improvement. this is looking like an exciting generational improvement.
jaaval@reddit
There are a few very interesting new things in nova lake. They are also adding interesting things to the ISA so we should compare generic and compiled to nova lake performance.
But most leaks indicate it’s still an iterative improvement. The actual total overhaul is a couple of generations away.
Exist50@reddit
Well, not really. It's very much an iteration on LNC. But that should still be plenty to give them 10-15% IPC.
SmashStrider@reddit
True, but that would still just match the M4, as a previous commenter said. M5 is doubtful (speaking about desktop Nova Lake vs Laptop M5, btw, on mobile the ST performance may still beat the M3 but could fall behind the M4.).
Exist50@reddit
Eh, Intel should get a bigger than average boost with NVL. I don't think it's absurd to hope for.
ResponsibleJudge3172@reddit
People are saying it's barely 10%
Exist50@reddit
Btw, where's that 10% claim coming from?
ResponsibleJudge3172@reddit
Anandtech forums. Apparently looking at some latest documents or whatever.
SmashStrider@reddit
Pretty sure that supposed 'marketing material' that claimed 10% ST and 60% MT increase over previous gen was for Panther Lake vs Lunar Lake, but tech media assumed it was Nova Lake, which makes way less sense (the leak did not state that it was Nova Lake either).
jocnews@reddit
No that was just speculation/denial or people trying to disregard it.
That said I also don't believe the 1.1 is representative of what we'll see, but there has to be some different reason why.
CopperSharkk@reddit
from adroc on AT forums. the zen 5 40% IPC guy LMAO.
Exist50@reddit
Oh, that guy? I've been banned from those forums for a while (for being too pro-Intel, if you can believe it), but his bullshit towered so high that even I can remember it.
Exist50@reddit
Bullshit. At least for the N2 chips. 10% IPC, I could see.
6950@reddit
That would be pretty based if that happens though it should be expected
Alive_Internet@reddit
To do that, they would need to beat the A18 pro in the Neo first. Apple’s advantage in single core performance with the M-series is so big that I’d be shocked if any company ever catches up.
Front_Expression_367@reddit
I mean I wouldn't say being able to catch up to Apple M5 in the year where Apple M6 is likely to released would be a clear "catch up", so I'll give the other guy that.
trololololo2137@reddit
that single-thread score for M4/M5 is fake. most of the gain is just burning power on high clocks (intel strategy lmao).
new M5 pro macbook draws 2x the power of M1 pro for 2x more perf which isn't really progress
IBM296@reddit
Doubt it. Panther Lake is 30% behind M5 in single-core. One generation node improvement won't close that big of a gap.
battler624@reddit
15% from architecture isn't a stretch and add the 12%-13% from node on desktops and it becomes a possibility.
Noble00_@reddit
I think you're forming the discussion the wrong way. This is more about IFS, and their ability to attract customers not necessarily their own consumer/DC products.
Exist50@reddit
Sure, though IFS customers aren't reading Intel's marketing material.
Noble00_@reddit
😅Lol, well of course
Exist50@reddit
Just worth pointing out that often the marketing numbers and real numbers end up quite different. Not unique to Intel by any means (N3P is funny if you poke at the details), but they've been particularly egregious with it at times.
EnglishBrekkie_1604@reddit
Could you elaborate on N3P being “funny”? Haven’t heard about this, and I’m pretty curious.
Exist50@reddit
Got bored one day and decided to poke around the library. They claim what? Up to 5% performance boost? That "up to" ends up being very key. IIRC, only found one cell, at one Vt, that matched that. Some were even slower than their N3E counterpart. A real design naively ported to N3P is extremely unlikely to see that supposed 5%.
And this isn't uncommon. All the fabs lie to some degree. Intel just pushes it the furthest. Even before all this 18A nonsense, the number they quoted for the ADL node included the gains from the RPL iteration. But by that time, they spun it as something else. And then the bullshit with p1278 where unrealistic targets got peddled around as fact.
There was a funny story a little while back where TechInsights multiplied together all the claimed performance increases and used that to "conclude" that 18A was like a node ahead of N2. Methodology obviously has some problems...
Capital-Froyo-4359@reddit
Hilarious comment given as the future M series processors are being built on this node according to news reports today.
Exist50@reddit
That's probably jumping the gun. We saw the same "test chip" articles for 18A. Nvidia even talked about it publicly. But it didn't materialize in actual products.
Maybe this time will be different. But there's a ways to go yet.
IBM296@reddit
They’re still gonna be miles better than whatever Intel makes for itself lol.
The difference between base M5 and flagship Core Ultra 3 X7-368H on 18-A is embarrassing.
jenny_905@reddit
Do you guys get alerts to these threads or something?
grumble11@reddit
No one is beating M6. Maybe on the GPU side, but what matters most for consumers, 1T performance is a huge gap.
EnigmaSpore@reddit
must be amazing... now show us the customers list. must be f'n long af
BigManWithABigBeard@reddit
No foundry does this
Exist50@reddit
I mean, the fab doesn't (usually), but the customers do announce who they're using.
Capital-Froyo-4359@reddit
The literally just landed Apple on this node today. Stock up another 12%.
Exist50@reddit
That remains to be seen. You can find similar articles from a year ago, with similar qualities of sources. https://www.techpowerup.com/339837/apple-and-nvidia-eye-intels-14a-node-for-trial-production
It's probably true that Apple is evaluating the node. But there's a big gap between that and moving forward with volume production. Hopefully Intel's worked through most of the issues that killed previous interest, but they're still not viewed as reliable.
EnigmaSpore@reddit
alright alright alriiiiight.
that's a big one. looks like intel is back on the menu
Geddagod@reddit
Plus, the PDK is supposedly much better with 18A-P vs 18A.
spicesucker@reddit
Alternative title based on the default desktop SKUs that Intel’s going to release
Geddagod@reddit
The default desktop skus (other than the low end 4+0+4 DT stuff, if they exist) are rumored to use N2 for the compute tiles.
Shredded-Juice@reddit
Screenshot of the official Intel doc which says this?
Exist50@reddit
But Intel's already publicly admitted they're using TSMC for at least some compute tiles. Only one node makes sense.
Shredded-Juice@reddit
That doesn't answer the question.
Exist50@reddit
Your question doesn't make sense for the comment you responded to. Not if you read it, anyway.
Shredded-Juice@reddit
Are you talking about yourself here?
Rumors are based on substance, quantity or quality notwithstanding.
The present rumor is based on what was said verbally roughly 2 years ago.
Surely there ought to be more substance to back it up, from official leaks by this time?
You are the second person on this subreddit who has reading comprehension issues.
nanonan@reddit
Do you have any reason to think this has changed? There's no such thing as official leaks, if it was official it wouldn't be a leak would it?
Shredded-Juice@reddit
"Official leak" refers to leaks based on source material that can inferred to be official with minimal uncertainty.
Like the detailed diagrams and specifications of Lunar Lake and its MoP module that was leaked years ago.
And yes, there are much stronger reasons now to believe that Nova Lake compute tiles are not on TSMC's N2 node since that original statement was given 2 years ago.
nanonan@reddit
The only sensible thing to do is ignore any and all "leaks". There is no indication they have moved from their stated position. Two years ago is exactly when those sort of decisions would be set in stone.
Shredded-Juice@reddit
Yes, they have. Firstly, it wasn't even stated that they'll use N2; they just said that some compute tiles will use TSMC without specifying the node.
This was inferred to mean by the leakers that the "high-end" 8+16+4 tile will use TSMC - again something that Intel has never said they will.
Then we have statements from Intel themselves saying desktop Nova Lake wafers has been pulled into internal and that 18A ramp in H2 2026 would go into serving Nova Lake in significant volume - higher than Panther Lake; they've said some variation of this on two occasions.
Then there are the shipping manifests - nothing related to Nova Lake in the past two years indicate any of them have been sourced from Taiwan. And as of February 2026, actual CPUs in the QS stage have been moving around - none of them sourced from Taiwan.
EmptyVolition242@reddit
I think this node will be used for Razer lake, but with an additional year and a half of yield improvements.
Exist50@reddit
18AP is ready for NVL timeframe. Still not enough to even compete with N2, much less beat it. RZL will either continue to use the N2 family, or won't bother at all.
EmptyVolition242@reddit
I don't think process nodes matter as much if you're not planning on using really high frequency. 18A already has really good perf/power numbers, even if it doesn't go to very high frequencies, and 18AP is basically 9 % faster, or 18% more efficient.
Core design matters more here.
Exist50@reddit
It matters across the spectrum. You pay in some combination of power and performance. You may be able to prioritize one or the other more, but it's not just an Fmax ceiling.
And people pay a premium for incremental benefits at the top end. 3D V-cache gives AMD about a full node's worth of benefit for gaming (one of the best workloads for that feature) and look how much extra they can get away with charging for it. It's well in excess of the cost difference between nodes. That's also the difference between competing with the competitors' brand new products or with the depreciating last-gen inventory. That's why Intel's willing to go through such a hassle.
Vs what? N4?
I would agree, but Intel certainly can't claim to have a lead there. Maybe UC can help them turn the tables, but that's still years away. They can now claim to have an SoC lead vs AMD in mobile, but might be unwise to assume that will hold indefinitely and ignore Apple/Qualcomm as well.
my_wing@reddit
Qualcomm is out of the door, making Snapdragon chip is a wasting sand.
Apple, just like their walled garden so much, let them enjoy, 0 backward computability, 30% profit on apps stores, no one cares about how good the mac is.
Exist50@reddit
What?
You might have missed the news, but this is a particularly good year for Macs.
my_wing@reddit
https://www.semiaccurate.com/2026/02/11/qualcomm-desperately-tried-to-hide-snapdragon-x2-elite-power-use/
Look at this article. Snapdragon is heat like hell
Exist50@reddit
Lmao, this from the same guy who straight up lied about gen 1? To say nothing of the rest of his history... Charlie is not a trustworthy source.
my_wing@reddit
Okay, he is the one that let me realised the problem, just use Google AI same result,
https://www.androidauthority.com/realme-gt8-pro-benchmarks-3613186/
I think Snapdragon is a waste of sand.
Are you a BOT ???
Exist50@reddit
Lmao, so top end phone chips can throttle. That's the bombshell? And somehow that makes Intel's chips, which are much higher power and less efficient, the only viable option?
You don't seem like you're even trying to make a coherent argument.
EmptyVolition242@reddit
My point about the node not matting is that even Apple's M1 and M2 chips which are build on older than N3 tech have much better PPW than moder Intel and AMD cores. And a large factor is because they simply don't go to very high frequencies, compared to Intel.
Also, whilst 18A isn't better than N2, given panther lake's P core efficiency, it's definitely better than N3B, and probably N3P.
Geddagod@reddit
The P-core perf/watt curve is pretty much identical to the one in ARL. Maybe a tiny bit better at Fmax.
Keep in mind that Intel cheapened out extremely on ARL-H. They used less metal layers on ARL-H than any other N3B product, and less metal layers than even Meteor Lake.
And ofc LNL just mogs PTL's across the entire curve.
Exist50@reddit
And that's for a tick uarch, where you'd expect them to improve power and clock speed iso-node.
Noble00_@reddit
I mean, from what we've seen TSMC is consistent. Their relationships with all their customers are solid, so you know things like their IPs and PDKs are robust and reliable. Couple with that TSMC still largely has the edge in process node, you can see why vendors still choose the reliable and best option.
Exist50@reddit
To be fair, TSMC still has had some issues. The whole cancelation of N3 and creation of N3B (with a different schedule) was never publicized. But all those criticisms can be applied to Intel many times over.
You'd just think that if their node was truly second best (i.e. clearly better than TSMC N-1 or Samsung N), then someone would be willing to take a gamble. But then again, TTM matters above all in the current environment.
Exist50@reddit
Sure, and that's very important. But ideally you'd be like Apple and use both the best node and best core. Intel's not going to churn out a BIC core for NVL, so do they want to be behind in both?
Frankly, we can't even conclude that it's better than N3B, and certainly not N3P. And we can make some obvious extrapolations to suggest Intel doesn't believe that either. If 18A were competitive with N3P, then 18AP would be within the same ballpark as N2, yet the gap is large enough that even before Intel knew how much 18A was slipping, they picked N2 for NVL. They wouldn't do that for just 5%. And surely they'd have no problem finding customers if they were so close to TSMC's flagship.
Noble00_@reddit
This is the tell. If it were obvious, Intel would choose their own node for effective yields as the current market is strained for TSMC N2 resources. But the confidence doesn't seem there, so we are effectively seeing Intel choose less than ideal supply from a competing node due to possibly performance reasons,
EmptyVolition242@reddit
It's my understanding that they'll be using N2P for Nova lake, which is better than 18AP.
Also I think both 18A nodes will improve a lot as yields stabilise. I could see a future 18AP node compete with TSMC's N2 node, which would be adequate if they keep focusing on IPC.
VenditatioDelendaEst@reddit
More, IMO, at the nosebleed turbo boost frequencies desktop parts run. Big L3 is worth like 1 GHz in a pure linear guesstimate, without any penalization for Amdahl's law.
nanonan@reddit
Pick one.
HamCheezeSliderz@reddit
I was under the guise over the last 24 hours that Intel would prefer to use 18AP for lower products that sell in large volume and their higher frequency parts on TSMC's N2.
Didn't they do something similar in the last few years or am I imagining events that never happened?
Exist50@reddit
Well they kind of planned that for ARL, but 20A was so broken they had to rely on N3 for everything. And they're doing a similar thing now for PTL iGPUs.
Shredded-Juice@reddit
"Not even compete with N2" - yet I can buy products made on 18A and all we've heard of N2 superiority is absurd frequency claims for desktop Zen 6.
Exist50@reddit
How many PTL devices are actually on shelves? Not like it's relevant for the comparison given how it's outperformed by N3, even N4 chips.
Intel themselves choosing it over 18AP isn't enough evidence?
Shredded-Juice@reddit
Enough for me to buy them.
Keep the argument on track. Are you talking about the node or the product made on the node? If it is the latter, testing by Raichu between PTL and LNL shows that 18A is \~15-20% more perf at iso-power than N3B.
Screenshot of the official Intel doc which serves as "evidence"?
Exist50@reddit
Lmao, you contradict yourself the very next sentence. Also, Raichu is a leaker, not reviewer. Where are you even getting these numbers from?
Again, Intel's already admitted they're using TSMC for NVL compute tiles. This is public.
Shredded-Juice@reddit
His twitter feed. You might be ignorant that he sometimes posts screenshots of his own independent testing. He's not a "reviewer" in the formal sense.
And yeah, the numbers are real.
Screenshot of the official Intel doc which corroborates verbal statements?
Exist50@reddit
Ok, then post his testing methodology for these two nodes, that you explicitly claim has nothing to do with two different products, at that.
So let me get this straight. Intel themselves admitting it is not enough for you to believe it? If it was making Intel look good, that's one thing, but this does quite the opposite.
Shredded-Juice@reddit
Are you physically infirm or simply lazy to look it up on your own.
Screenshot of the official Intel doc for the said claim?
Exist50@reddit
You're the one making the claim, not me.
Ok, so you're just trolling. Should have figured given the account age.
Geddagod@reddit
u/Shredded-Juice is the same dude who came up with the "N2 is a fmax and perf/watt regression over N3" post like a year ago lmao.
You would think after he turned out to be so wrong about "5.5GHz PTL easily" and "4+0+4 PTL would blow LNL out in efficiency" comments he would stop being so confidently incorrect, but...
Weird he is on his like 4rth alt account despite "not caring about reddit" too, but whatever.
ProfessionalPrincipa@reddit
[ Removed by Reddit ]
Exist50@reddit
Oh, lol. I have a hard time keeping track of all these alts people make. There's this one dude who I just had to block for the 3rd time in a year because he keeps spinning up new accounts. Took me a month to realize this time.
Geddagod@reddit
Idk why you bring up that same range when under that very post I showed you how those numbers aren't true lol. The number is half of that.
And even that, that's only at Fmax, where PTL looks the best. And those results aren't corroborated elsewhere, by David Huang or this reviewer.
Shredded-Juice@reddit
Idk why you accuse Raichu of lying or fabricating performance figures and graphs.
Geddagod@reddit
Where did I say that?
Shredded-Juice@reddit
Because you said that they aren't true, right above.
Exist50@reddit
Where are you getting that from?
SlamedCards@reddit (OP)
Hahaha true
Flynny123@reddit
This is not far off a full node jump, that’s impressive
grumble11@reddit
It basically takes 18A from the worst of N3 to the best of N3. 18A is pretty close to N3B in terms of performance and so on, and 18AP is looking pretty close to N3P. N3P started production in Q4 2024, so they're roughly two years behind TSMC.
They do have a chance to catch up for 14A, because they are using better equipment (High-NA) and TSMC isn't. 14A version 1 is likely to be similar to N2, which is launching Q4 2026 for TSMC, but 14A isn't until 2028 so will be two years. 14A with tweaks though... could get them to parity.
nanonan@reddit
Are you factoring in that the headline is a lie, that it is one or the other not both?
Shredded-Juice@reddit
"Half-node" and "full-node" are inapplicable terms these days.
ResponsibleJudge3172@reddit
Then people will sy it's slower than N3
Geddagod@reddit
Why did you edit from slower to worse lol
And yea, I hope this uplift would allow it to end up better than N3B, but other N3 variants like -P? Who knows.
ResponsibleJudge3172@reddit
Because I meant overall rather than FMax comparisons or estimated energy efficiency difference
del_dot_B@reddit
"According to the paper, the 18A-P node can deliver a 9% performance increase at the same power level or achieve 18% power savings at the same performance level compared to the standard 18A. "
Bit of a misleading title.
comelickmyarmpits@reddit
What do I do with this info , it's taking eternity for cpus to come from it (if I ignore panther lake laptops cpus)
Exist50@reddit
Then if you're waiting for desktop chips, you might be waiting forever. Unless you want a NVL i3 or something, lol.
Odd-Importance1947@reddit
Must be a nice comparision point. To compare Intel and TSMC's best. We'll finally have a definitive answer to TSMC's lead in P/W.
Exist50@reddit
Here's hoping. Still blueballed from the ARL fiasco.
Odd-Importance1947@reddit
Atleast we have an answer to density that is. Pleasantly surprised Intel leapfrogged from whatever Intel 4 was to matching N3B's 2-2 density (maybe even be slightly better somehow?) . By definition, it should be even with N2 in that regard, "mostly"
Exist50@reddit
To my understanding, 18A's HP logic density is competitive, maybe even better than N3. Where they lack is in HD and SRAM.
comelickmyarmpits@reddit
It's getting frustrating tbh , all months all years hearing about 18p and yet can't see it in a action , companies should shut up their mouth , announcing things way too early
Tasty_Toast_Son@reddit
Funny, Papa Gelsinger's vision is finally coming to fruition after he was sacked, and Intel tried to sue him for wages for allegedly doing such a mediocre job.
The irony of his agenda being what is making INTC not look like such a joke now is hilarious.
Unusual_Pride_6480@reddit
OK so it's not going to match apple in performance but I wonder if this could match apple in low power so you can have a powerful intel system running at as low power as say the macbook air
SmashStrider@reddit
18% power reduction as part of the same generation is actually pretty good. I'm eager to see 18A-PT's 3D stacking features :)
ResponsibleJudge3172@reddit
TSMC is hitting single digits right now so quite true. I wish a proper reputable source woul dmake a proper comparison between Samsung, Intel and TSMC. Haven't seen one since TSMC N7 era
Geddagod@reddit
We have a very good one comparing PTL and ARL/LNL for Intel vs TSMC
And ofc we get comparisons between Samsung and TSMC all the time with exynos.
Which one?
Noble00_@reddit
Also from Dr. Ian Cutress:
https://xcancel.com/IanCutress/status/2049490481554288833
VLSI 2026 is held on June 14-18 in Honolulu.
PastaPandaSimon@reddit
I know TSMC has got the business process, tools, and inertia, but it's really exciting to see Intel's technology become a real competitor to TSMC again.
Geddagod@reddit
2-3 years from now we will be looking at A14 vs 14A.
So flagship products fabbed at Intel? I doubt it, unless maybe it's an IOD.
Strazdas1@reddit
wasnt yesterday article stating that A14 delayed to 2029?
Geddagod@reddit
No? They still claim 2028 HVM. What was delayed (though not according to TSMC) is A16.
PastaPandaSimon@reddit
I think it's a bit of a wildcard and I look forward to some surprises. Nvidia fabbed their Ampere flagship GPUs on Samsung 8nm(10nm family) when TSMC was making 7nm family chips. A14 vs 14A is going to be way closer. There are interesting opportunities to unfold.
BatteryPoweredFriend@reddit
Because they completely fucked up contract negotiations trying to lowball TSMC and got their bluff called.
evolvingwild@reddit
Is there proof of this or are you just guessing thats what happened?
ResponsibleJudge3172@reddit
There is no proof. It was a MLID conspiracy theory
PastaPandaSimon@reddit
And yet they continued for the Switch 2, and the Ampere product line turned out to be successful and well received. Even if it would've been more efficient at TSMC, we got good flagship GPUs for less.
Don't get me wrong, if Nvidia can secure TSMC cutting edge process at a comparable price, I don't doubt they'd continue going that way. I also am not convinced that we'll see an Intel-fabbed RTX GPU die (they are already collaborating on packaging though).
What I'm saying is that I'm not surprised if we see a product like it fabbed with Intel. Whether they undercut TSMC, get higher volumes in less time due to a lower utilization, or other reasons, it's finally a possibility we are likely to see.
Tiddums@reddit
Yeah of course I wish the 30 series was even better than it was by being on 7, but empirically speaking the products we got were good despite the node deficit.
SlamedCards@reddit (OP)
I mean Blackwell is still 5nm
That node is 5 years old
Geddagod@reddit
For Feynman in 2028, Nvidia is expected to use A16, but for client flagship stuff, I could see Nvidia using IFS, fair enough.
Capital-Froyo-4359@reddit
Its wild this sub just totally acts like Samsung doesn't even exist.
Shredded-Juice@reddit
Samsung's Foundry business is about to go kaput with over 50,000 employees skipping work as a protest over pay and an announcement of a strike in June.
Samsung is irrelevant in this discussion.
PastaPandaSimon@reddit
Samsung is already established as the second biggest foundry by production volumes and revenue, but they've been falling behind on technology, while IFS has been accelerating at a faster pace, while having no design wins yet. Thus the wildcard effect.
Capital-Froyo-4359@reddit
Intel stock is on a great trajectory.. the actual technology not so much.
Seanspeed@reddit
Exciting, but it should be noted this is a whole new node for TSMC.
While Intel are advertising gains for an existing node process.
Fearless-Area-532@reddit
Ok now this is exciting
Kinexity@reddit
"either [...] or [...]" not "[...] and [...]". Journalists shouldn't do this.
mycall@reddit
or.. they say thousands when they should have said millions.
HamCheezeSliderz@reddit
Unfortunately they know what they're doing. This bad title brings in more views than the correct one. More ad exposure.
imaginary_num6er@reddit
I won’t hold my breath until the performance is translated into product.