Why did Nvidia go with 16nm instead of 14nm finfet?

Yields, probably

>>58466912
Wouldn't that have no difference as long as the chip has the same transistor count?

>>58466922
Not if the fab is more confident in its 16nm process than an untested 14nm process that might >1.4% them

That's just my speculation fyo

>>58466897
Cheaper manufacturing costs ? Who knows.

>>58466897
"16nm" and "14nm" are marketing bullshit anyway

>>58466897
Nvidia only designs chips, other companies produce them.

TSMC only does 16nm and they are the largest foundry worldwide. Until a year ago they were the company producing ALL GPUs for both Nvidia and AMD.

14nm is used by Intel and Samsung Semicoductor.
The chips for the 1050 (Ti) are made by Samsung. Samsung usually make small chips like SOCs for phones, they probably couldn't make the larger chips for 1060 and up without getting terrible yields.

>>58466955
Also the reason we were stuck on 28nm for so long was because TSMC were unable to move on to a smaller node.

Nvidia and AMD could easily design chips for 5nm but that's pointless if no one is able to actually produce these chips.

>>58466897
Because TSMC couldn't do better.

>>58466992
It's interesting to know.
Will we see 10nm by 2020 ?

>>58467149
7nm next year for mobile.

>>58467153
Noice.
Why don't we see better battery life with shrinking node ? It's like it will always be shit

>>58467149
Intels Cannonlake CPUs will be 10nm and should be released this year.

>>58467183
1. mobile
2. end of the year
3. shit yields broawdwell all over again, they didn't even announce cannonlake for desktop

>>58467153
I'm still in 2016 mindset, 7nm is this year
confirmed by glofo, samsung and TSMC
how extensive who knows, but they have test runs for full productions ready

>>58467181
Because every time they save power somewhere they do something dumb like putting a 4K screen on it so the battery still sucks

>>58467228
Rumour is that by any sane measurement GloFo and friends 7nm is basically 14nm+hype

>>58467242
so, exactly like intel

>>58467242
You're thinking of 10nm friendo.

>>58467149
>>58467183
Samsung is already mass producing 10nm. Starting with Snapdragon 835

Because stupid fucks gonna buy it anyway.

>>58467596
Samsung 10nm is an intermediate process. It more or less only reduces feature size on one axis and doesn't make a significant size difference to certain aspects like an SRAM cell. The only benefit is a minor reduction in power usage. Intel's 10nm is not a stopgap and much closer to what Samsung hopes its 7nm process will be.