Computing in the real world
SEARCH FOR: IN:
Guest  Level 00    Register Log in

News 

[PSUs]
Monday 29th January 2007
Intel's smaller chips won't hurt AMD 10:25AM, Monday 29th January 2007
News that Intel and IBM are set to move to even smaller manufacturing processes ahead of AMD is unlikely to yield any significant change in competition.

Chip maker Intel is set to adopt a new breakthrough in processor manufacturing technology more quickly than its rival AMD, but analysts say the advantage will only be temporary.

Like two superpowers announcing successful nuclear tests at the same time, Intel and IBM have both announced they had solved a vexing electricity leakage problem in microchips.

While hailed as the biggest breakthrough in transistor design in four decades, the advances do not alter the product roadmaps for the two companies, which call for their chips to shrink roughly every two years.

'It sounds more evolutionary to me rather than revolutionary,' said Eric Ross, an analyst with ThinkEquity Partners.

Intel, the world's biggest maker of microchips, said the advances will be used later this year when it shrinks existing chip designs to smaller dimensions, meaning they will run faster and use less power.

AMD, a research partner of IBM, is not expected to include the technology in its processors until 2008, coinciding with its next product shrink.

'Who are Intel's biggest competitors? Well it's AMD, and IBM on the server side, so it kind of evens out,' Ross said.

The transistor advance is the latest twist in the microprocessor industry, which has seen dramatic shifts in fortune over
 
 
ADVERTISEMENT
the past couple of years.

In the latest round, Intel is believed to be beating back AMD, which had been grabbing market share thanks to chips that were more powerful and efficient than Intel's.

The past year has been rough on Intel and AMD shares as a price war chews into profits and gross margins at both companies.

Intel shares, which closed at $20.53 on Friday, have fallen five per cent over the past year, versus a drop of nearly 60 per cent for AMD stock, which ended at $16.22.

Industry progress is guided by Moore's Law, the industry maxim laid down by Intel co-founder Gordon Moore in 1965 that the number of transistors on a chip doubles every two years or so.

The current cutting edge of chip production is based on a manufacturing process that etches circuits just 65 nanometres across - more than a thousand times thinner than a human hair.

Intel has long planned to begin making chips with 45 nanometre circuits later this year, and it said last week it has successfully produced working processors on that scale, putting it on track to meet its timetable.

But although the companies use Moore's Law as a guide, the shrinking process is far from automatic.

Each generation poses new challenges, and engineers are now dealing with such tiny sizes that they continually need to tweak basic elements of chip design.

The latest developments involve replacing a silicon-based material used in one layer of chips since the 1960s with a substance based on hafnium, an exotic metal used in the nuclear industry.

Ross said that although AMD has a much smaller research effort than Intel, its partnership with IBM had given it some tricks to keep it competitive.

'They are all planning several steps ahead,' Ross said. 'The interesting thing is that the shrinks are important, but they are only one part of the process technology.'

Submit to: Digg  |  Slashdot  |  Del.icio.us  |  Technorati

Related News


Buy Hitachi Products at PC World
Choose from a wide range of Hitachi internal hard drives, audio products and camcorders online at PC World.

Buy Hitachi Products at PC World
Choose from a wide range of Hitachi internal hard drives, audio products and camcorders online at PC World.
www.pcworld.co.uk/hitachi
Compare Broadband
Broadband?
Compare 50+ packages
Enter your postcode below:
Powered by:
Top 10 Broadband
Bookstore Top 5

Columns

Prolog:

There are lots of ways to save money, says Tim Danton, but it's the little things that count. › See full Opinion