If you read between the lines, it's AMD's allocation of TSMC capacity that pushed nVidia out to samsung...

TSMC has to spit out Zen3, RX6000, plus the custom versions for XBX and PS5, all around the same time...

I was thinking this too - is this really just another TSMC victory - like it is with AMD on TSMC vs Intel still not making it to 10nm, and Apple making gains on A14 (soon to be compared VS intel no doubt) - it's the process that's driving efficiency for sure.

How much is this one really about TSMC 7nm vs Samsung 8nm?

This is on the same 7nm process as RDNA1 was, but with an over 50% (65% for the top-end 6900XT) performance/watt increases, so this absolutely isn't just about process (although having high yields is key to overall product success).

I'd say the crowning achievement for this architecture is the "Infinity Cache": https://twitter.com/Underfox3/status/1313206699445059584

"This dynamic scheme boosts performance by 22% (up to 52%) and energy efficiency by 49% for the applications that exhibithigh data replication and cache sensitivity without degrading the performance of the other applications. This is achieved at a area overhead of 0.09mm²/core."

See also this presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGIhOnt7F6s

I find it interesting that this isn't brought up more often. And it's also rather impressive that Intel isn't further behind.

Then again, I'm rooting for AMD all the way until they become the new evil.

> A14 (soon to be compared VS intel no doubt)

Isn’t A14 a “5nm” process chip? Why would it be compared to intel and their 14nm++++?

I mean it will be compared by Apple, when they launch their new apple silicon macs and want to show off how much faster their chips are than previous Intel - likely taking all the credit, when a large part is down to TSMC's 5nm process.

The 5nm process from TSMC could be less of a success, as say Anandtech editor on Twitter (his A14 review incoming) https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/jjwtjy/andrei_fan...