{"id":16187,"date":"2020-12-02T17:15:16","date_gmt":"2020-12-02T09:15:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ljdevice.com.tw\/?p=16187\/"},"modified":"2020-12-02T17:15:16","modified_gmt":"2020-12-02T09:15:16","slug":"apple-m1-intel-can-no-longer-squeeze-toothpaste-will","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ljdevice.com.tw\/en\/apple-m1-intel-can-no-longer-squeeze-toothpaste-will\/","title":{"rendered":"After Apple M1, Intel can no longer \u201csqueeze toothpaste\u201d at will"},"content":{"rendered":"

8 days ago<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

AMD and Apple have been very popular recently. AMD\u2019s Ryzen series chips are selling well. According to the latest data from the data research agency PassMark, in the comparison of the market share of AMD and Intel processors in the Q4 quarter of 2020, AMD accounted for the total share 37.8%, which is the first time this level has been reached in the past 14 years.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

And Apple\u2019s recently launched M1 chip, Geekbench multi-core running score surpassed the 16-inch MacBook Pro equipped with i9-9980HK processor.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

In contrast, Intel\u2019s image in the public opinion is somewhat embarrassing. In the past few years, because of the small performance improvement between multiple generations of CPU, it is more expensive than AMD\u2019s CPU, and it has been ridiculed by users as a \u201ctoothpaste factory\u201d.<\/p>\n

How did Intel, the former PC leader, fall behind?<\/p>\n

Step by step, step by step<\/p>\n

Compared with Apple\u2019s M1 chip and AMD\u2019s latest Ryzen chip series, Intel\u2019s most ridiculed is the backward CPU process. The Apple M1 chip has already used the 5nm process, and AMD\u2019s desktop-level processor Ryzen series has also used the 7nm process.<\/p>\n

On the other hand, Intel, although the low-power version of the 11th-generation Intel Core processor for notebook products has reached 10nm, the current high-performance desktop processors are still stuck at 14nm, and the 10nm desktop processors will be available in 2021. No wonder it was ridiculed by\u2019toothpaste\u2019.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

This is related to the tick-tock strategy implemented by Intel, which has been implemented by Intel since 2007. Tick and tock once a year are processes to reduce energy consumption, reduce heat generation, update processor architecture, and improve performance, respectively.<\/p>\n

In other words, it takes two years for the processor developed and produced by Intel to have a big performance improvement. The original model is still acceptable to most consumers. After all, most people\u2019s computers will not be replaced every year, but the transition is at 14nm. In the process of 10nm, this mode failed.<\/p>\n

Intel is too pursuing high transistor density during the development of the 10nm process stage. According to foreign media zdnet, the transistor density of Intel\u2019s 10nm products is even similar to that of TSMC\u2019s 7nm products. Such a high transistor density is not easy to achieve, which also leads to Intel\u2019s low yield rate in real mass production. As a last resort, it has to continue to optimize 14nm, and the Tick-tock mode is therefore invalid. The process of updating once every two years becomes For 3 years or even longer.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The reason why the low-power version of Intel\u2019s 10nm processor we are seeing is not too far apart from that of AMD\u2019s 7nm low-power version is that the transistor density of Intel\u2019s processors is high enough and single-core performance. Strong enough.<\/p>\n

In addition to the production yield problem, the IDM model that Intel insists on also has a certain impact on its entry into the 10nm process. In the semiconductor field, Intel is one of the few companies that design, produce, and sell itself.<\/p>\n