this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2023
0 points (50.0% liked)
Intel
24 readers
1 users here now
Rules
-
Be civil. Uncivil language, slurs, and insults will result in a ban. If you can't say something respectfully, don't say it at all.
-
No Unoriginal Sources, Referral links or Paywalled Articles.
-
All posts must be related to Intel or Intel products.
-
Give competitors' recommendations only where appropriate. If a user asks for Intel only (i.e. i5-12600k vs i5-13400?) recommendations, do not reply with non-Intel recommendations. Commenting on a build pic saying they should have gone AMD/Nvidia is also inappropriate, don't be rude. Let people enjoy things.
-
CPU Cooling problems: Just like 95C is normal for Ryzen, 100C is normal for Intel CPUs in many workloads. If you're worried about CPU temperatures, please look at reviews for the laptop or CPU cooler you're using.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
TSMC has had better low power performance but the difference isn't massive. I suspect the main reason is a) 18A is not ready for mass production until too late and b) limited 20A capacity coming online next year is needed for other products (remember intel has to ship absolute shitload of chips). So why not do it on TSMC if that is possible and the alternative is to delay the products to wait for capacity?
Edit: i'm not sure if 20A was again a more limited early version designed primarily for intel desktop products and 18A was supposed to be the long term version of the node with wider array of capabilities?
20A is essentially an early, incomplete release of 18A that can only be used on for the compute tiles. LNL has iGPU, NPU, and x86 cores all on the same tile, so 20A can't be used.
Intel 3 and 4 weren't designed with GPUs in mind either.