Ondrej Holzman In the last ten years, Intel released new processors based on a "tick-tock" strategy, which meant a new generation of chips every year and at the same time their gradual improvement. However, Intel has now announced that it is ending this strategy. It could affect its customers, which include Apple.
Since 2006, when Intel introduced the "Core" architecture, a "tick-tock" strategy has been deployed, alternating the release of processors using a smaller production process (tick) and then this process with a new architecture (tock).
Intel thus gradually moved from the 65nm production process to the current 14nm, and since it was able to introduce new chips practically every year, it secured a dominant position in the consumer and business processor market.
Apple, for example, also relied on an effective strategy, which buys processors from Intel for all its computers. In recent years, however, regular revisions of Macs of all kinds have stalled, and currently some models are waiting for a new version for the longest time since their launch.
The reason is simple. Intel no longer has time to develop processors as part of the tick-tock strategy, so it has now announced the transition to another system. The Kaby Lake chips announced for this year, the third member of the 14nm processor family after Broadwell and Skylake, will officially end the tick-tock strategy.
Instead of two-phase development and production, when first came a change in the production process and then a new architecture, now a three-phase system is coming, when first you switch to a smaller production process, then the new architecture arrives, and the third part will be the optimization of the entire product.
Intel's change in strategy isn't too surprising, as it's becoming increasingly expensive and difficult to produce ever-smaller chips that are rapidly approaching the physical limits of traditional semiconductor dimensions.
We will see if Intel's move will ultimately have a positive or negative effect on Apple's products, but currently the situation is rather negative. For several months, we have been waiting for new Macs with Skylake processors, which other manufacturers offer in their computers. However, Intel is also partially to blame, as it is unable to produce Skylake and may not yet have all the necessary versions ready for Apple. A similar fate – i.e. further postponement – apparently awaits the above-mentioned Kaby Lake.
It is evident that technologically it is not possible to constantly reduce and thus change an expensive production process every year. But the question is why other manufacturers have these new Skylake processors in their notebook lineups, and Apple is on a waiting list, as are its customers waiting for a lineup upgrade. Personally, I am waiting for a Skylake processor for the Macbook 12″, because for the time being the first version of this macbook brought subjectively worse computing power than that offered in the MBA. The Macbook Pro has power to spare, but it is also bigger and heavier, in short, too robust a machine for me to lug around in my bag every day.
I, in turn, am waiting for Thunderbolt 3 and perhaps finally an external graphics GPU that would be used both for games and for work calculations when editing video/audio, etc. I hope it will finally come