[stephenjudkins]

From what I've heard, using 50% as much power for the same performance as the previous generation still will not be sufficient to bring Intel's Atom performance/energy consumption ratio to that offered by ARM chips. However, it's a huge leap in the right direction. Add better-designed power-saving features on the next generation of Atom chips, and future process shrinkages, and it's easy to see ARM's lead getting chipped away until it's gone.

[ajross]

This is orthogonal. An ARM Cortex (or GPU, or whatever) on this process would see similar gains.

It's also worth pointing out that current Atoms in the market are still 45nm parts, not even 32nm. Intel, for obvious reasons, tends to prioritize production of high-margin desktop and server CPUs over low-margin embedded parts.

Really, this announcement isn't about ARM-based vs. Intel-based SoC designs. I think it's clear that Intel has some catching up to do there. This is about Intel cementing and extending its complete and total dominance of high end digital logic fabrication. At this point they look to be about a full two years ahead of everyone else. AMD, IBM, Samsung, TI, TSMC and the rest of that crew have to be more than a little worried.

Objectivity disclaimer: my wife is at Intel working on precisely this 22nm process. So I'm about as biased a source as you can find.

[tesseract]

> This is about Intel cementing and extending its complete and total dominance of high end digital logic fabrication.

Given that, (and given that Intel has been dominant in process technology for some time now) I've always wondered why Intel doesn't do fabrication for third party, high-performance/high-margin/high-power-budget products that don't directly compete with Intel's main CPU product line. Networking/telecom processors, top-end FPGAs, DSPs, and so forth. Is it just that they are at capacity making CPUs and don't see any need to get into that business? Or do they do it already and I'm just not aware?

[nitrogen]

They are going to fab some FPGAs for a company called Achronix: http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4210263/Intel-to-fab...

http://www.achronix.com/

I've worked with audio equipment that uses FPGAs, CPLDs, and DSPs for various purposes, and being stuck on relatively-ancient processes makes that equipment generate a lot more heat and fan noise than would be necessary with DSPs and FPGAs on a modern process.

[sliverstorm]

Indeed. ARM chips are not better made, they are better designed- at least in regards to low power. It's an architectural thing. This is very much like the old software rule; a good algorithm on slow hardware will often outperform a bad algorithm on fast hardware.

[6ren]

> An ARM Cortex (or GPU, or whatever) on this process would see similar gains.

...provided Intel grants the IP, know-how and equipment to its rival.

> dominance of high end digital logic fabrication

Disruptions typically begin at the low-end, with the disrupted incumbent earning great margins at the high-end - just before they get killed. Smartphones are the low-end. ARM is probably already too well established there for Intel to win it (with popular machines, OSs and applications dependent on ARM).

The danger to Intel is that as ARM improves in performance, it brings other benefits with it (eg. low power consumption; configurability), that are also valuable in high-end logic. Once ARM is performant enough, those server-farms could switch, to solve their heating/power problems.

But it's interesting that Intel hasn't made the low-end a priority, not applying their best process to it; maybe they have a reason to think they're safe.

[Palomides]

but surely it is patented to a crazy extent, and therefore we won't be seeing it hit ARM stuff unless Intel lets it? so I doubt we will see orthogonal gains immediately from it.

[glhaynes]

Saw a rumor recently that Apple would be getting Intel to fab ARMs for them. Seems unlikely, but could potentially give Apple a lead (for a while) in one more area of their vertical integration play.

[nextparadigms]

Atom is 2 generations behind in the manufacturing process compared to this. They'll barely start making them at 32 nm next year, and that will last for another 2 years.

[wmf]

Intel recently announced that they're going to catch up Atom (semi-misleadingly marketed as "faster than Moore's Law") so they're at 45 nm now, they'll release 32 nm Atom later this year and 22 nm Atom in early 2012.

[nextparadigms]

That's not what they meant. They meant that instead of doubling Atom in performance every 18-24 months(have they even done that so far?), they'll try to double it every 12 months, just like the ARM chips are currently doing.

They can't switch the manufacturing process every year.

[SlipperySlope]

Interesting that Intel is seeking to fabricate ARM chips for Apple. I presume that Intel is pitching their best lithography process tech, i.e. 22nm. If Intel wrests Apples ARM CPU fabrication business away from Samsung - who competes with Apple on smartphones - then Intel would become a world leader in ARM CPU fabrication and pay ARM plenty of licensing fees!

Hardly the end of the world for ARM.

[sliverstorm]

The risk would be once Intel is the world's source of ARM CPU's, suddenly ARM's biggest competitor has a chokehold on the market's access to their silicon.

It would basically come down to whether Intel chose to embrace ARM, or tried to use the new position to quietly strangle it.

[SlipperySlope]

A large number of foundries currently make ARM CPUs, and a number of companies make ARM CPUs for in-house manufacturing. Intel could not get an absolute monopoly but rather a technical superiority advantage such as it currently has over other x86 vendors.

It has been speculated in the financial press that Intel might try to offset its huge annual capital expenditures by offering as much as 20% of its fab capacity as foundry services.

[thebandrews]

Intel did ARM a while back and got out. Not sure what kind of license they still have.

[ephemient]

Wikipedia says "Intel still holds an ARM license even after the sale of XScale." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XScale

I don't know if it's true five years later now, though.