bit-tech.net

Intel invests in 22nm fabs

Intel invests in 22nm fabs

Intel's commitment to fabrication on a 22nm process size looks set to cost the company $8 billion.

Intel has announced planned upgrades to its manufacturing facilities in the US, along with the opening of a brand-new fab in Oregon, as part of the company's commitment to producing 22nm processors.

According to chief executive Paul Otellini, the planned investment of between $6 billion and $8 billion 'reflects the next tranche of the continued advancement of Moore's Law and a further commitment to invest in the future of Intel and America.'

Otellini went on to claim that 'the most immediate effect of our multi-billion-dollar investment will be the thousands of jobs associated with building a new fab and upgrading four others, and the high-wage, high-tech manufacturing jobs that follow'

While the temporary 6,000 to 8,000 construction jobs associated with the Oregon project and the creation of between 800 to 1,000 permanent high-tech posts will be certainly welcomed, it's the technology that's the important thing - and Intel will be using the new and upgraded manufacturing facilities to produce its 'Ivy Bridge' processors, 22nm chips due to hit the mass market in 2011.

While firm details about Ivy Bridge have yet to appear, Intel is promising that the small process size will mean 'sleeker device designs, higher performance, and longer battery life at lower costs,' suggesting that the first 22nm processors will be aimed at the mobile and small-form factor markets.

Sadly, the new Oregon plant won't be getting in on the act for a while, with Intel stating that the D1X fab is 'scheduled for R&D start-up in 2013.'

Do you think that Intel's investment in 22nm technology is the way to go, or could the company have saved itself a whole lot of cash by farming the fabrication out to third parties? Share your thoughts over in the forums.

17 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
rickysio 20th October 2010, 11:59 Quote
Intel's probably been able to output good processors as they are familiar with their process's quirks well, unlike nVidia or AMD that needed to test TSMC's 40nm process...
ulfar 20th October 2010, 12:00 Quote
intel's response to amd?
would be great though if they could squeeze out enough juice from a 22nm to succesfully run a laptop. think of the battery time.
can't see why it would be a great addition to the mobile phone market as there already are a couple of phones out there with 1ghz processors.
V3ctor 20th October 2010, 12:36 Quote
The only price I want to know is the price of theese babies!! I hope AMD can do some competition to Intel, so that those babies can have a good price...
rickysio 20th October 2010, 13:00 Quote
Mobile = tablets?
Memnoch-fr 20th October 2010, 13:01 Quote
Intel are right in wanting control on manufacturing, the initial investment is higher, but you have full control on quality, minor changes can be made quicker, prototyping always easier. Good to see they could get it past the shareholders. I doubt you will see the difference in price.
ulfar 20th October 2010, 14:13 Quote
they'll also gain some rep+1 since they're creating new job opportunities and whatnot, that should increase sales as well /me thinks
Snips 20th October 2010, 16:54 Quote
Keep it coming Intel! They really have hit everything out of the park recently so whatever they do next will surely benefit us all.
MajestiX 20th October 2010, 17:59 Quote
pretty sure last time they outsource fab it turned into AMD, don't think they will let that happen again.
thehippoz 20th October 2010, 18:14 Quote
awesome
Sloth 20th October 2010, 20:25 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by ulfar
can't see why it would be a great addition to the mobile phone market as there already are a couple of phones out there with 1ghz processors.
That's never been a reason for anything to stop in the technology industry. Why not have a 2GHz processor in your phone? And why not make it dual core as well? More more more more.


As for the article, as cheesy and propaganda-ish as Intel's statement sounds (4 AMERIKUH), I'm glad they're pumping their money into more fabs, more research, and more jobs rather than pocketing all of their income just because AMD is still so far behind.
The_Beast 20th October 2010, 20:31 Quote
SWEEEEEEET!!!!!
maverik-sg1 20th October 2010, 20:57 Quote
For desktops the step from 32nm to 28 wont mean that much in performance gains unless the architecture is suitably well designed and improved upon compared to exisiting tech (lower power requirements is always good and this will bring that advantage).

32-22 will be a nice performance stepping and will include some really nice tech developments I suspect.

We need synergy between hardware and software advances.....

Still it's all wasted if the focus remains on cores and not Mhz unless the software and games developers start focusing on true 'multi core' capabilities as well as standardising on 64bit instead of 32.

If we talk PC games these will continue to be driven in thd mainstream by console designs, that is to say if next gen consoles remain 32bit and lack 4+ cores processing capabilities, PC games pioneering for multi core platforms will be the exception rather than the norm.

So my hope is that software/console and games developers all embrace multi core now, in preparation for the new hardware trends.
TSR2 20th October 2010, 22:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloth

As for the article, as cheesy and propaganda-ish as Intel's statement sounds (4 AMERIKUH)

That reminded me more of Catch-22, 'What's good for M&M Enterprises is good for the world'
Snips 20th October 2010, 22:05 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloth
As for the article, as cheesy and propaganda-ish as Intel's statement sounds (4 AMERIKUH), I'm glad they're pumping their money into more fabs, more research, and more jobs rather than pocketing all of their income just because AMD is still so far behind.

What Cheese? What Propaganda?

At least when they say they're doing something, the end result is they do it and a damn fine job at it.
Sloth 20th October 2010, 22:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snips
What Cheese? What Propaganda?

At least when they say they're doing something, the end result is they do it and a damn fine job at it.
TSR2 got it:
Quote:
Originally Posted by TSR2
That reminded me more of Catch-22, 'What's good for M&M Enterprises is good for the world'
When you have a phrase like "a further commitment to invest in the future of <company> and <home country and/or the world>" it's going to sound like cheesy propaganda, whether it's true or not, regardless of who's saying it. It's something I'd half expect to be a quote from Vault-Tec in a Fallout game.
Niftyrat 21st October 2010, 00:06 Quote
Development is always good and more speed always better, but until parallel programming actually allows full multiple core use I would love to see them move the 4 core processors on in raw speed and then let's hope that the rest of the systems catch up.
ulfar 21st October 2010, 14:42 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloth
That's never been a reason for anything to stop in the technology industry. Why not have a 2GHz processor in your phone? And why not make it dual core as well? More more more more.

what i meant was that when this hits the market (2011?) the processors that are currently being used will probably have clock speeds of well above 2 ghz, although i do agree that a dual or even quad core would be awesome in a phone =). perhaps one core dedicated as gpu?
blurring the line between phone and laptop (already done by palm a while ago).
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums