Although it may not seem like it, investors or at least their advisers know the subject in which they move when they decide to invest in any of the three companies mentioned. The problem is that it is always debated which node is better and which is worse. We are not going to go into that now since we already discussed it at length at the time, but we are going to go into the fact that Intel is going to take the lead in this regard from a naming and marketing point of view.
Intel and its nanometers: you have to sell the idea and the product
In marketing they are very clear: the previous nomenclature was simple and understandable, but it did not reflect leadership nor was it representative of the progress that is taking place, as well as the fact that it seems to be continuously behind the competition.
The problem is that the names of the nodes do not reflect in any case the measurement of the transistor (something extremely debated) and this is due to the disparity of the meaning that each brand gives to its own. For example, if we talk about the new 10 nm of Intel, the reality is that they have nothing to do with the 10 nm of TSMC, but are even ahead of the 7 nm of the Taiwanese in many areas and something more. in density.
How do you sell to the less educated public that 10 is better than 7 in nanometers? Difficult task. The solution has been to change the nomenclature to try that the characteristics of the node are better represented by the technologies it obtains and vice versa.
The 10 nm will be the last with the old nomenclature
As usually happens in this type of decision, it must be taken into account that the breaking point has to be marked to start with the new strategy. This point is already taking place, since the last node with the old nomenclature will be precisely 10 nm. The rest of the future nodes logically also receive names: Intel 7, Intel 4, Intel 3 and Intel 20A.
Although the slide is self explanatory, we are going to clarify what was before and is now. Intel 7 would be the 10 nm SuperFin from before, Intel 4 would be equivalent to the old 7 nm while Intel 3 would be approximately 7 nm ++.
There are no certainties as such in many cases, since removing Intel 4 there are no exact references. Intel 20A for its part refers to the so-called «It was Angstrom»Of semiconductors, which we already discussed in depth and which basically wants to mark a change with the so-called GAA transistors, known by Intel as RibbonFET. Yes, not even the manufacturers agree on these technologies.
And what happens from there? The nomenclatures are in decline, where the next would be Intel 18A and for now the marketing of the company ends. As we see and saving the equivalences, it is a good job that will bring this whole world of transistors closer to and understand more people, both professionals and users, at least as soon as we learn about them.
