[formerly_proven]

> But some of the things Intel planned for 10nm turned out to be harder to get working correctly than EUV.

Is that actually true? The direct competitor to Intel 10nm is TSMC N7, which is an overall similar process - DUV, multiple patterning etc. -, achieves similar performance and power efficiency, and had a similar timeline to how the Intel process played out (as opposed to how it was originally scheduled). TSMC also only began using EUV for processes following N7.

[wtallis]

Don't indulge Intel's attempts to erase Cannon Lake from history. The 10nm that Intel shipped in 2019 was significantly scaled back from what they originally planned for their 10nm node, but was still a year later to the market than TSMC N7 and was never good enough to be competitive for desktop CPUs. By the time they had iterated enough to have a new process that could be used to offer faster desktop CPUs than their mature 14nm process, they decided to rename it to "Intel 7" and shipped it at the same time as TSMC N5 products (though still before AMD's N5 products).

[ryukoposting]

The Wikipedia article for Cannon Lake is a riot. Click the "Products" list to open it and... a table with one row.

[bgnn]

This. Intel 10nm and TSMC N7 aren't comparable in their development. Intel didn't simply scale down their 14nm but took a different parth. TSMC N7 is basically a scaling of their N16. These two processes are 90% comparable. Only base layers are slightly different. N5 is quite different compared to N7 due to new litho though.