News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The numbers that explain Intel’s decline by wmf on Thursday November 24, 2022 @02:12PM (#33735146)
The equipment is a small part of the fab process; the materials and process steps are critical and every fab is a little different. For example, Intel has been using cobalt wires while others use copper; this may or may not have contributed to Intel's problems.
Re:The numbers that explain Intel’s decline by AnotherGoodName on Thursday November 24, 2022 @02:38PM (#33735379)
I do understand that but I still want to know some specific examples.

I'm expecting stories to come out at some point in the future of dysfunction that's preventing Intel from simply implementing similar processes as their competitors. And yes I understand the competitors probably have trade secrets but they've been at least a step behind in process for so long now. 14nm when others had 7nm and just starting 7nm when others have 5nm. Hell there's already some 3nm TSMC stuff coming. The whole ++++++++ debacle was ridiculous.

At this point there has to be some major dysfunction. Are there senior people there with pet projects and adamant viewpoints that can't change? I'm expecting something along the lines of an execs insisting that cobalt conductors and liquid pellicles are the only way despite competitors kicking their ass by doing it differently. And if there are such stories to be told I'm rather shocked that no one at Intel's addressing the issues.

There's probably a book to be written here, similar to the stories told about Atari and Apple dysfunctions back in the day.

Re:The numbers that explain Intel’s decline by wmf on Thursday November 24, 2022 @02:47PM (#33735458)
I wouldn't be surprised if they got stuck in a cycle of thinking that fixing the existing process would be faster than designing a "plan B" process.
Re:The numbers that explain Intel’s decline by xenadu02 on Thursday November 24, 2022 @03:08PM (#33735655)
They spent years being 1-2 process nodes ahead of everyone else with excellent execution. Anyone within the organization trying to sound alarm bells would have been silenced or ignored... after all they pulled the rabbit out of the hat so many times before, why would this one be different?

As for specifics I doubt we'll get many. Chip manufacturing is famously super-secretive and has a culture of not discussing the details - even for old process nodes.