Submitted by Stiven_Crysis t3_10mfwtq in technology
_MoveSwiftly t1_j65phvr wrote
Reply to comment by pmotiveforce in Intel Posts Largest Loss in Years as PC and Server Nosedives by Stiven_Crysis
"Intel 7" but it's actually 10nm
"Intel 4" but it's actually 7nm
That's marketing, and he keeps lying about how well they're doing and refusing to acknowledge AMD because they're too high and mighty, until he got his nose bloodied a bit.
pmotiveforce t1_j65xpeg wrote
Rubbish. Formerly Intel's 10nm was e.g. closer to TSMC's 7. Feature sizes are not as simple as "Xnm, derp!"". Intel's new naming scheme more closely aligns with what TSMC/Samsung are using.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments