Lenovo is a huge player. This should be good for Intel in the long run.
They are breaking into smartphones with LTE capabilities starting with
one of the big players. This cannot be good for ARMH or even QCOM.
But it will only get better for Intel.
Certainly good news for Intel. But the devil is in the detail. Are these low end SoC's? If so, then both the application and baseband use ARM cores. Even if this a high end SoC, the baseband still uses an ARM CPU.
Lenovo has used Intel SoC's in mobile devices before, but dropped them. The thing to look out for, isn't if one or two phones use Intel SoC's, it's when a whole range of phones uses them.
A little competition won't hurt anybody. ARM won't get the benefit of having a decade to perfect it's technology in expensive consumer gadgets before mounting a stand against Intel. They are posing a challenge on day one. Intel knows how to respond to server competition.
I suggest you read the article.
Worth a read for anyone interested.
Introduction to ARM Servers
Intel does not have any competition whatsoever in the midrange and high-end (x86) server market". We came to that rather boring conclusion in our review of the Xeon E5-2600 v2. That date was September 2013.
At the same time, the number of announcements and press releases about ARM server SoCs based on the new ARMv8 ISA were almost uncountable. AppliedMicro was announcing their 64-bit ARMv8 X-Gene back in late 2011. Calxeda sent us a real ARM-based server at the end of 2012. Texas Instruments, Cavium, AMD, Broadcom, and Qualcomm announced that they would be challenging Intel in the server market with ARM SoCs. Today, the first retail products have finally appeared in the HP Moonshot server.
One for Wallis:
"First publically mentioned in April 2014, the Snapdragon 810 was positioned as Qualcomm's new flagship application processor and potential king of the hill in mobile SoCs. Now, eight months later we got to see how and if the 810 lived up to such a heady promise.
Prior to the official announcement rumors said the new part was running hot and its advanced memory controller was not working. So much for rumors. Last night I held two tablets and four phones with Snapdragon 810 chips in them, and they were cool, in every sense of the word. They drove a 4K (3840 x 2160) TV, took 4K videos, ran AAA games, and had at least a 5-inch HD displays -- finished, branded products just waiting to be released.
"Qualcomm claims the 20-nm node is more cost-effective than 28-nm HPM and about on par with the cost of 28-nm LP. The company also used the 20-nm process for its modem in the MDM9235, a category 6 LTE-Advanced cellular baseband, and the first 20 nm part with stacked memory."
Sure it is. Is that why Samsung is not foundrying the 20nm but is moving directly to FinFet?
I am not sure what you are saying?
Samsung is shipping two 20nm SoC today as part of its exynos family (depending who you listen too, they are also shipping 20nm parts for Apple). As a foundry, they have only really had 2 customers - Apple and themselves. Again, depending who you listen too, Samsung will move to FinFet next year.
Producing 1 or 2 chips that do not heat is likely. But mass production is a long long way from that.
? That Samsung SoC is in mass production.
Even Samsung's 20nm had lower clock speeds on its A15-A7 Octa compared to 28nm and yields are so bad apparently that it is not even bothering to offer it to foundry customers. All is not well in 20nm planar land and if TSMC are having problems as well with SD-810 MIA that has major implications for all their customers who happen to be the majority of foundry customers.
The fact remains that we have a real (as in shipping) 20nm implementation of the A57 today (at 1.9 GHz). By all accounts, it neither overheats or has battery issues (according to Sweepr over on the anandtech forums).
Given the above, I doubt that the A57 is the cause of the delays of the 810.
Now, you could be right, perhaps Samsung's 20nm process has yield issues and TSMC are having problems. ..
A57 looks too hot for planar 20nm
I doubt it's the A57, as she's fine on Samsung's 20nm process.
Possibly, but if VRZONE is correct, then (if they use SoFIA), it should have an x86 CPU and quickly migrated to 14nm which means not TSMC .... at least that is how it appears.
If this is Sofia, then yes, it's an x86 CPU in the app processor (my understanding is that it's still an ARM CPU in the modem). The first iterations are on TSMC until they are migrated to 14nm. The first iteration hasn't launched yet.
If it's the SoC used in the MICA (that Intel bracelet) then this (apparently) is still a ARM based CPU core.
[theblueredmonk: I recall that just last week you were very down on this one!]
I was down on the claim that Russ was making that new memory would drastically increase battery life. This is plainly false (given how little battery is used by RAM).
I have no doubt that Intel is working on new memory technologies.
[How many times have you said, "Intel (currently) does not have..." to later find that Intel does have. You are the poster boy for slow learner. ]
I've said it a few times and I can't think a time when I was wrong:)
The fact remains that Intel does not have the CPU/IP to compete in this $1 market. Quark and family are much, much to large.
thebrm: You should know by know that much of journalism, more so Internet blogging, has to do with sensationalistic and provocative headlines than solid content. If you don't, I really don't know what to say.
I pointed out that even I wasn't sure if I 'believed' the content. Although you don't like these guys, they do have more credibility than (say) Russ. Intel quitting mobile has been advocated by many Intel longs on other forums and is a legitimate argument.
Intel will not quit mobile. As "will_amd_yu" pointed out, the market has been commoditized and Intel, either directly or through Rockchip/Spreadtrum type of partnerships or both, will play a role in these markets. Intel's mantra is being paranoid which Paul Otellini ignored during his tenure.
"will_amd_yu also claims Intel wont play in this market. So what does will_amd_yu actually think?
So, explain to me again, why would Intel quit mobile?
As BK said, "We will not continue to accept a business with multi-billion dollar losses."
[Just for the record:
1.) I'm not going to repeatedly explain the workings of accounting/finance to you.
2.) Nor will I do your internet research or due diligence.
Now stop being an azzzhat if you can manage it.]
Says the guy who can't work out a percentage...
Intel (currently) does not have a CPU it can use in this space, which means it can't produce these $1 chips...
You can find them.
The china deal and Nokia deal are common knowledge and others will be announced.
A company does not spend over 5 billion dollars to get into phones and then drop out right when it is about to make huge gains.
I suggest you do some more DD on these 'deals'. SoFIA, is an interesting example and will be interesting to see how many devices it ends up in...
[Apparently no one ever taught you that revenue comes from price times volume. The volumes in the IoT will dwarf anything else in technological history. They will make smartphone volumes look like rounding errors.
After you take the junior college class on the Internet, try one on Beginning Finance and Accounting. And stop beating your wife.]
I was asking will_amd_yu to explain his contradiction.
But, as we're flirting again, do you think Intel want's to play in the $1 SoC market? What CPU do you think they will use?
Question: will_amd_yu thinks Intel doesn't want to play in the commodity phone market. What do you think?
In fact, it is just about to break into phones in volume in the next 6 months with a series of major deals which include China and companies there.
You want to list these deals?
Whatever dude... It wasn't Intel but that's where the industry was headed with the Chinese. Intel just accelerated the process.
That's more like it...
Actually, this market has always been very aggressive in pricing but what has changed recently is a rise in the middle/bottom end of the market.
Anyway enough of this nonsense. On to the next battle of IoT.
Do you know that the prices for IoT SoC's are much less than the for smart phones/tablets?
If Intel doesn't want to play in a $5 market why would they want to play in a $1 one?