|
Title: Did KnC make a mistake by choosing to go down the 20nm route? Post by: mackminer on January 16, 2014, 01:28:03 PM As far as I can see there are going to be lots of powerful machines out before, that will be more than 1TH.
Seems like there fucked to me....opinions? Title: Re: Did KnC make a mistake by choosing to go down the 20nm route? Post by: rext on January 16, 2014, 01:52:08 PM only time will tell, well as least they do deliver products that last.
Title: Re: Did KnC make a mistake by choosing to go down the 20nm route? Post by: Gator-hex on January 16, 2014, 02:39:04 PM A dedicated ASIC will always beat an FPGAtoASIC unless you go one node lower.
FPGAtoASIC is faster and easier to develop, gets you out before the competition, but costs more per chip. Just my suspicion. Not proof. ;) Title: Re: Did KnC make a mistake by choosing to go down the 20nm route? Post by: novello on January 16, 2014, 03:15:37 PM A dedicated ASIC will always beat an FPGAtoASIC unless you go one node lower. FPGAtoASIC is faster and easier to develop, gets you out before the competition, but costs more per chip. Just my suspicion. Not proof. ;) I'm sure I read somewhere a while back that the KNC solution is an FPGA conversion, and that would fit with it's power consumption. Going to 20nm at this time is a mistake - the process isn't fully 'productionised' yet and might take another 6 months before yields are stable. the NRE is truly horrendous and same for the wafer costs. You always pay a premium for the newest process. As a result, newer 28nm designs will easily beat their 20nm one in cost efficiency but since they've already sold a ton of them, I doubt very much that they'll care. Their customers might though. |