If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Intel CPU prices going up?
Intel's processor prices have been going up recently, rather than down.
They're blaming it on production problems. Intel has been well known to be stuck on the 14nm node for a while now. Instead of going towards 10nm they just keep incrementing their 14nm with plus signs, what are they up to now, 14nm++++? Regardless, even at 14nm they were able to keep up with production before, why not now? It's not even only their high-end processors that are in short-supply, even their low-end value-oriented processors like i3-8100 or i5-8400 are not available. This doesn't sound like a high-demand supply shortage, it just sounds like just basic low yields to me. Do you think that maybe even their internal tinkering with 14nm is making things worse for them? Perhaps, 14nm++++ is not as good as 14nm+++? In the meantime, AMD is at 12nm and humming along, and ready to migrate towards 7nm within less than a year. Yousuf Khan |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Intel CPU prices going up?
On 2018-10-15 9:13 a.m., Yousuf Khan wrote:
Intel's processor prices have been going up recently, rather than down. They're blaming it on production problems. Intel has been well known to be stuck on the 14nm node for a while now. Instead of going towards 10nm they just keep incrementing their 14nm with plus signs, what are they up to now, 14nm++++? Regardless, even at 14nm they were able to keep up with production before, why not now? It's not even only their high-end processors that are in short-supply, even their low-end value-oriented processors like i3-8100 or i5-8400 are not available. This doesn't sound like a high-demand supply shortage, it just sounds like just basic low yields to me. Do you think that maybe even their internal tinkering with 14nm is making things worse for them? Perhaps, 14nm++++ is not as good as 14nm+++? In the meantime, AMD is at 12nm and humming along, and ready to migrate towards 7nm within less than a year. I, for one, will not be buying Intel's chips going forward. The security issues they had during the year were reason enough as is the fact that their processors usually cost a lot more than AMD's for the same performance. -- SilverSlimer |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Intel CPU prices going up?
SilverSlimer wrote:
On 2018-10-15 9:13 a.m., Yousuf Khan wrote: Intel's processor prices have been going up recently, rather than down. They're blaming it on production problems. Intel has been well known to be stuck on the 14nm node for a while now. Instead of going towards 10nm they just keep incrementing their 14nm with plus signs, what are they up to now, 14nm++++? Regardless, even at 14nm they were able to keep up with production before, why not now? It's not even only their high-end processors that are in short-supply, even their low-end value-oriented processors like i3-8100 or i5-8400 are not available. This doesn't sound like a high-demand supply shortage, it just sounds like just basic low yields to me. Do you think that maybe even their internal tinkering with 14nm is making things worse for them? Perhaps, 14nm++++ is not as good as 14nm+++? In the meantime, AMD is at 12nm and humming along, and ready to migrate towards 7nm within less than a year. I, for one, will not be buying Intel's chips going forward. The security issues they had during the year were reason enough as is the fact that their processors usually cost a lot more than AMD's for the same performance. AMDs were vulnerable, too. Go reread those security articles. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Intel CPU prices going up?
On 2018-10-15 1:19 p.m., VanguardLH wrote:
SilverSlimer wrote: On 2018-10-15 9:13 a.m., Yousuf Khan wrote: Intel's processor prices have been going up recently, rather than down. They're blaming it on production problems. Intel has been well known to be stuck on the 14nm node for a while now. Instead of going towards 10nm they just keep incrementing their 14nm with plus signs, what are they up to now, 14nm++++? Regardless, even at 14nm they were able to keep up with production before, why not now? It's not even only their high-end processors that are in short-supply, even their low-end value-oriented processors like i3-8100 or i5-8400 are not available. This doesn't sound like a high-demand supply shortage, it just sounds like just basic low yields to me. Do you think that maybe even their internal tinkering with 14nm is making things worse for them? Perhaps, 14nm++++ is not as good as 14nm+++? In the meantime, AMD is at 12nm and humming along, and ready to migrate towards 7nm within less than a year. I, for one, will not be buying Intel's chips going forward. The security issues they had during the year were reason enough as is the fact that their processors usually cost a lot more than AMD's for the same performance. AMDs were vulnerable, too. Go reread those security articles. Ah, good to know. It seems that AMD eventually admitted that Spectre2 affected their processors too. Thanks for that. -- SilverSlimer |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Intel CPU prices going up?
Yousuf Khan wrote:
Intel's processor prices have been going up recently, rather than down. They're blaming it on production problems. Intel has been well known to be stuck on the 14nm node for a while now. Instead of going towards 10nm they just keep incrementing their 14nm with plus signs, what are they up to now, 14nm++++? Regardless, even at 14nm they were able to keep up with production before, why not now? It's not even only their high-end processors that are in short-supply, even their low-end value-oriented processors like i3-8100 or i5-8400 are not available. This doesn't sound like a high-demand supply shortage, it just sounds like just basic low yields to me. Do you think that maybe even their internal tinkering with 14nm is making things worse for them? Perhaps, 14nm++++ is not as good as 14nm+++? In the meantime, AMD is at 12nm and humming along, and ready to migrate towards 7nm within less than a year. Every manufacturer has a maximum threshold for producing a product. A bakery can only produce as many loaves of bread per day as they have ovens. They cannot exceed that threshold without investing more money when conjecturing long-lived increased demand. Without adding more plants, Intel cannot increase their volume. Adding a plant or extending an existing one costs a lot of money which is only be reasonably qualified for expense if demand is expected to continue indefinitly, not for a minor blip in demand. Demand has gone up and exceeded their manufacturing volume. A company can overbuild their plant with reasonable knowledge that demand will go up; however, if that fails then all the expenses to build a new plant, expand an existing plant, or re-tool a plant are wasted - and companies aren't in business to be altruistic to non-achieved planning goals just so they could've made more but didn't have to. The future can only be predicted, not observed (at which point it becomes history). Also, it isn't just about the CPU chips. Without the supporting chipsets, the CPUs isn't usable. Missing hardware means lack of support for, um, what those chipsets support. A car without tires isn't going anywhere. https://www.extremetech.com/computin...pu-prices-rise https://www.techradar.com/news/intel...-14nm-shortage Prices go up when there are shortages based on current demand. That's normal business everywhere. With less or same supply volume but with increased demand from more consumers clamoring for a product, what would you expect to happen to the salesman's price? You're old enough to have heard "supply and demand" but maybe you didn't understand it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capita...ply_and_demand |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Intel CPU prices going up?
On 10/15/2018 1:36 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
Every manufacturer has a maximum threshold for producing a product. A bakery can only produce as many loaves of bread per day as they have ovens. By that token, then Intel is one of the largest bakers ever. They cannot exceed that threshold without investing more money when conjecturing long-lived increased demand. Without adding more plants, Intel cannot increase their volume. Adding a plant or extending an existing one costs a lot of money which is only be reasonably qualified for expense if demand is expected to continue indefinitly, not for a minor blip in demand. Demand has gone up and exceeded their manufacturing volume. But that's not the case here. Demand hasn't gone up, it's stayed mostly the same, but they are having trouble supplying even the same number of chips they used to easily supply with previous generations. For the new 8-core i9-9900K, they have apparently only produced about 500 chips overall for the entire world! And so far no i7-9700K's at all! Add in the problems with producing even i3's and i5's, something is wrong, especially on a mature node like 14nm! I think it might have something to do with having to compete against AMD: AMD can put out a 6-core or an 8-core quite easily, it just puts two quad-core CCX's together; but Intel has to create a brand new single die. And the dies are much bigger, so yield must be lower? And today, there was a rumour that they had completely cancelled their 10nm program! Intel denied it later, but usually they don't bother to address rumours unless it really hit close to home. Yousuf Khan |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Intel CPU prices going up?
Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 10/15/2018 1:36 PM, VanguardLH wrote: Every manufacturer has a maximum threshold for producing a product. A bakery can only produce as many loaves of bread per day as they have ovens. By that token, then Intel is one of the largest bakers ever. Being largest doesn't mean infinite production capacity. They cannot exceed that threshold without investing more money when conjecturing long-lived increased demand. Without adding more plants, Intel cannot increase their volume. Adding a plant or extending an existing one costs a lot of money which is only be reasonably qualified for expense if demand is expected to continue indefinitly, not for a minor blip in demand. Demand has gone up and exceeded their manufacturing volume. But that's not the case here. Demand hasn't gone up, it's stayed mostly the same, but they are having trouble supplying even the same number of chips they used to easily supply with previous generations. For the new 8-core i9-9900K, they have apparently only produced about 500 chips overall for the entire world! And so far no i7-9700K's at all! Add in the problems with producing even i3's and i5's, something is wrong, especially on a mature node like 14nm! I think it might have something to do with having to compete against AMD: AMD can put out a 6-core or an 8-core quite easily, it just puts two quad-core CCX's together; but Intel has to create a brand new single die. And the dies are much bigger, so yield must be lower? You're obviously making guesses. Demand hasn't gone up despite all the news pundits saying otherwise. "Apparently" is another guess. "In July, during its Q2 conference call, CEO Robert Swan said: ´We are seeing demand signals in supply feasibility to deliver on our revised expectations. Our biggest challenge in the second half will be meeting additional demand, and we are working intently with our customers and our factories to be prepared so we are not constraining our customers˙ growth.ˇ No, I don't know everything about their market but it's obvious that you won't even check some of your assumptions. And today, there was a rumour that they had completely cancelled their 10nm program! Intel denied it later, but usually they don't bother to address rumours unless it really hit close to home. Come on back when rumor becomes fact. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Intel CPU prices going up?
On 10/23/2018 1:45 PM, VanguardLH wrote:
You're obviously making guesses. Demand hasn't gone up despite all the news pundits saying otherwise. "Apparently" is another guess. We all are, as Intel obviously won't tell us. Anything you or I say will just be guesses. No point in mentioning it even, as it's assumed. But we all have our years of experience to draw on, and our guesses can be somewhat accurate. Intel is having to produce six- and eight-core processors when it's used to producing only quad-core maximum. It produced a lot of good dies of quad-core, but a hex- or octa-core will have larger dies, and that would make the number of good dies lower. A die that is twice as big will result in an overall 75%-80% decrease in the number dies per wafer. That includes wasted space along the sides of the wafer. Whereas AMD is just continuing to produce quad-core dies all day long, and if it wants an octa-core, it just gives you two of them! Yousuf Khan |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Intel CPU prices going up?
Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 10/23/2018 1:45 PM, VanguardLH wrote: You're obviously making guesses. Demand hasn't gone up despite all the news pundits saying otherwise. "Apparently" is another guess. We all are, as Intel obviously won't tell us. Anything you or I say will just be guesses. No point in mentioning it even, as it's assumed. But we all have our years of experience to draw on, and our guesses can be somewhat accurate. Intel is having to produce six- and eight-core processors when it's used to producing only quad-core maximum. It produced a lot of good dies of quad-core, but a hex- or octa-core will have larger dies, and that would make the number of good dies lower. A die that is twice as big will result in an overall 75%-80% decrease in the number dies per wafer. That includes wasted space along the sides of the wafer. Whereas AMD is just continuing to produce quad-core dies all day long, and if it wants an octa-core, it just gives you two of them! Yousuf Khan I think the Ryzen is a single die with two CCX on it. So your yield is for an 8 core chips. https://wccftech.com/amd-zeppelin-so...4-cores-rumor/ Paul |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Intel CPU prices going up?
In article , Yousuf Khan
wrote: Intel's processor prices have been going up recently, rather than down. They're blaming it on production problems. Intel has been well known to be stuck on the 14nm node for a while now. Instead of going towards 10nm they just keep incrementing their 14nm with plus signs, what are they up to now, 14nm++++? Regardless, even at 14nm they were able to keep up with production before, why not now? It's not even only their high-end processors that are in short-supply, even their low-end value-oriented processors like i3-8100 or i5-8400 are not available. This doesn't sound like a high-demand supply shortage, it just sounds like just basic low yields to me. Do you think that maybe even their internal tinkering with 14nm is making things worse for them? Perhaps, 14nm++++ is not as good as 14nm+++? In the meantime, AMD is at 12nm and humming along, and ready to migrate towards 7nm within less than a year. intel is having a ****load of trouble getting to 10nm. meanwhile, 7nm parts are shipping from other fabs. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Intel cuts cpu prices 50%? | Joe_Z[_5_] | Overclocking | 5 | May 3rd 08 04:17 AM |
Intel now also drops prices by up to 40% | Jan Panteltje | General | 0 | April 23rd 07 06:34 PM |
When is the next fall in Intel processor prices due? | Matt U.K. | Homebuilt PC's | 7 | July 20th 05 09:23 AM |
intel prices | blackgold | Intel | 2 | November 4th 03 12:51 AM |
Intel cutting prices? | Fishface | Overclocking | 0 | October 12th 03 05:21 PM |