Redfire75369’s avatarRedfire75369’s Twitter Archive—№ 2,663

  1. Now, this is hilariously stupid. I'm not even going to share the article because that's how bad it is, you can find it on your own if you want. For some unknown reason, they think Intel 3 used to be 5nm, when its a plus of 7nm. 5nm became 20A, that's it. (1/3)
    oh my god twitter doesn’t include alt text from images in their API
    On twitter.com Twitter logo Redfire75369’s avatar ♻️ 1 Retweets ❤️ 15 Favorites Mood -3 🙁
    1. …in reply to @Redfire75369
      Correction: "Article", I shouldn't have called it one in the first place. Note: Initially, Intel 3 was 7nm++. A short while before Intel Accelerated, it was redefined as 7nm+ while 7nm and 7nm+ "merged" to form 7nm. That's why I'm not being specific about which plus it is.
      Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo Redfire75369’s avatar ❤️ 6 Favorites Mood 0
    2. …in reply to @Redfire75369
      On another stupid thing, they think that Diamond Rapids was initially planned for Intel 3, despite Intel clearly stating 20A would be well into production. Despite claiming DMR was 2025, they assumed it'd be Intel 3, purely since they thought it was what 5nm was. (2/3)
      Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo Redfire75369’s avatar ❤️ 9 Favorites Mood 0
      1. …in reply to @Redfire75369
        Despite having die shots from two sources (ISSCC Die Shots weren't out yet), they still insist its 18 cores. 18C UCC did exist at one point, but its been long canned. I don't expect UCC to come back with EMR, but 64C XCC is most likely happening. (3/3)
        oh my god twitter doesn’t include alt text from images in their API
        Permalink On twitter.com Twitter logo Redfire75369’s avatar ❤️ 8 Favorites Mood -6 🙁