• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Discussion Leading Edge Foundry Node advances (TSMC, Samsung Foundry, Intel) - [2020 - 2025]

Page 264 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
DisEnchantment

DisEnchantment

Golden Member
TSMC's N7 EUV is now in its second year of production and N5 is contributing to revenue for TSMC this quarter. N3 is scheduled for 2022 and I believe they have a good chance to reach that target.

1587737990547.png
N7 performance is more or less understood.
1587739093721.png

This year and next year TSMC is mainly increasing capacity to meet demands.

AnandTech Forums: Technology, Hardware, Software, and Deals

Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
www.anandtech.com

For Samsung the nodes are basically the same from 7LPP to 4 LPE, they just add incremental scaling boosters while the bulk of the tech is the same.

Samsung is already shipping 7LPP and will ship 6LPP in H2. Hopefully they fix any issues if at all.
They have two more intermediate nodes in between before going to 3GAE, most likely 5LPE will ship next year but for 4LPE it will probably be back to back with 3GAA since 3GAA is a parallel development with 7LPP enhancements.

AnandTech Forums: Technology, Hardware, Software, and Deals

Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
www.anandtech.com

1587739615344.png

Samsung's 3GAA will go for HVM in 2022 most likely, similar timeframe to TSMC's N3.
There are major differences in how the transistor will be fabricated due to the GAA but density for sure Samsung will be behind N3.
But there might be advantages for Samsung with regards to power and performance, so it may be better suited for some applications.
But for now we don't know how much of this is true and we can only rely on the marketing material.

This year there should be a lot more available wafers due to lack of demand from Smartphone vendors and increased capacity from TSMC and Samsung.
Lots of SoCs which dont need to be top end will be fabbed with N7 or 7LPP/6LPP instead of N5, so there will be lots of wafers around.

Most of the current 7nm designs are far from the advertized density from TSMC and Samsung. There is still potential for density increase compared to currently shipping products.
N5 is going to be the leading foundry node for the next couple of years.

For a lot of fabless companies out there, the processes and capacity available are quite good.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


FEEL FREE TO CREATE A NEW THREAD FOR 2025+ OUTLOOK, I WILL LINK IT HERE
 
Last edited:
Doug S said:
Well Intel has gone up a lot since the deal was announced. I bought $140K worth a few years back when it was $30, before it went down to $20. I considered cutting my losses but fortunately decided to ride it out since I've now doubled my money (on paper)
Click to expand...
you are bold to invest in it. Probably makes sense to sell at least half now that its profitable. I dont think their valuation is justified. But just like Tesla its all hope. if Musk keeps screaming terafab to his fans, its possible that Intel could go lot higher.
 
trivik12 said:
you are bold to invest in it. Probably makes sense to sell at least half now that its profitable. I dont think their valuation is justified. But just like Tesla its all hope. if Musk keeps screaming terafab to his fans, its possible that Intel could go lot higher.
Click to expand...
why not though it seems justified to me if they go like some decent % more over this than you can say that
1775839286346.png
 
511 said:
why not though it seems justified to me if they go like some decent % more over this than you can say that
View attachment 141562
Click to expand...
They are at negative FCF at the moment. DC revenue has cratered. so GM is also compressed. That is why their valuations dont make sense unless they show any signs of DC growth and GM improvements and of course show positive FCF.
 
trivik12 said:
They are at negative FCF at the moment. DC revenue has cratered. so GM is also compressed. That is why their valuations dont make sense unless they show any signs of DC growth and GM improvements and of course show positive FCF.
Click to expand...
DC revenue is going to rise due to CPU demand cause there is (made up) shortages GM Compression is partly due to 18A as well FCF well have to see.
 
511 said:
DC revenue is going to rise due to CPU demand cause there is (made up) shortages GM Compression is partly due to 18A as well FCF well have to see.
Click to expand...
We have to wait and see. Intel guidance also sucked. This has been going on for eons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 511
A source with knowledge of internal affairs stated, "The 2nm process yield is in the 50–60% range, with an average around 55%," adding, "The process is running, but it is still a long way from a stable mass production phase.

"The pace of yield improvement itself has been rapid. Samsung's foundry 2nm yields were reportedly stuck in the 20% range as recently as the second half of last year. Reaching the mid-50s in less than a year is assessed as technically reaching a level where the mass production line can be operated.

when factoring in losses from performance binning and packaging, the actual percentage of chips that can generate profit is estimated to fall as low as 40%.

An industry source said, "A yield in the 50% range only means the process 'runs' — it is not a stage where customers can entrust orders with confidence," adding, "It is a zone where both delivery and quality variability coexist."

By contrast, rival TSMC is reported to have secured stable yields of 60–70% for its 2nm process.

In practice, Samsung has secured some customer and internal volumes, but has yet to achieve results in winning key clients such as Apple, NVIDIA, and AMD. Notably, Qualcomm — a global mobile application processor (AP) company that had raised expectations for new orders — is also showing signs of returning to TSMC, citing process yield and stability concerns.

'AI6' advanced autonomous driving chip contracted with Tesla is scheduled for mass production this year, and the yield level achieved at the actual production milestone will be critical in determining profitability and supply stability.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2043501428560601208

mobile.busan.com

[단독] 삼성 파운드리 2나노 수율 55%…‘양산 60%’ 벽에 막혔다

삼성전자 반도체 공장이 있는 화성캠퍼스 전경. 삼성전자 제공. 삼성전자의 미래 핵심 동력인 파운드리 사업이 2나노(나노미터·1㎚는...
mobile.busan.com mobile.busan.com
 
marees said:
A source with knowledge of internal affairs stated, "The 2nm process yield is in the 50–60% range, with an average around 55%," adding, "The process is running, but it is still a long way from a stable mass production phase.

"The pace of yield improvement itself has been rapid. Samsung's foundry 2nm yields were reportedly stuck in the 20% range as recently as the second half of last year. Reaching the mid-50s in less than a year is assessed as technically reaching a level where the mass production line can be operated.

when factoring in losses from performance binning and packaging, the actual percentage of chips that can generate profit is estimated to fall as low as 40%.

An industry source said, "A yield in the 50% range only means the process 'runs' — it is not a stage where customers can entrust orders with confidence," adding, "It is a zone where both delivery and quality variability coexist."

By contrast, rival TSMC is reported to have secured stable yields of 60–70% for its 2nm process.

In practice, Samsung has secured some customer and internal volumes, but has yet to achieve results in winning key clients such as Apple, NVIDIA, and AMD. Notably, Qualcomm — a global mobile application processor (AP) company that had raised expectations for new orders — is also showing signs of returning to TSMC, citing process yield and stability concerns.

'AI6' advanced autonomous driving chip contracted with Tesla is scheduled for mass production this year, and the yield level achieved at the actual production milestone will be critical in determining profitability and supply stability.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2043501428560601208

mobile.busan.com

[단독] 삼성 파운드리 2나노 수율 55%…‘양산 60%’ 벽에 막혔다

삼성전자 반도체 공장이 있는 화성캠퍼스 전경. 삼성전자 제공. 삼성전자의 미래 핵심 동력인 파운드리 사업이 2나노(나노미터·1㎚는...
mobile.busan.com mobile.busan.com
Click to expand...
chip size is not known

https://twitter.com/x/status/2043522504715796768
 
Regarding all those yield issues I always wonder why customers do not opt for a different contract: Just pay only for yielded chips. Problem more or less solved for you. At least financially. If 60% yield also means unstable technical properties, then it might be a different story. But 60% yield should mean what it is: 60% of chips are functional. But not only functional: Parametric properties like frequency and power draw are also met. So the only pain point might be volume. If much gets scrapped, you get less chips. But as Samsung's chip manufacturing capacity is not saturated, that should not be an issue as well.
 
Last edited:
basix said:
Regarding all those yield issues I always wonder why customers do not opt for a different contract: Just pay only for yielded chips. Problem more or less solved for you. At least financially. If 60% yield also means unstable technical properties, then it might be a different story. But 60% yield should mean what it is: 60% of chips are functional. But not only functional: Parametric properties like frequency and power draw are also met. So the only pain point might be volume. If much gets scrapped, you get less chips. But as Samsung's chip manifacturing capacity is not saturated, that should not be an issue as well.
Click to expand...
even AMD & global foundries had a lot of tension in setting contracts. not easy to create such contracts, I guess

but Samsung probably has done such contracts in the past. maybe with Tesla too
 
Samsung has manufactured Nvidia 3000 GPUs and Nintendo Switch as well as IBM CPUs also Intel Motherboard Chipset is firmly at Samsung Foundry
 
marees said:
even AMD & global foundries had a lot of tension in setting contracts. not easy to create such contracts, I guess

but Samsung probably has done such contracts in the past. maybe with Tesla too
Click to expand...
I understand, that a foundry is not solely responsible for bad yield. Also a bad design can lead to bad yields. Therefore a foundry might have reservations towards such a deal. But if Samsung wants to get contracts, you have to offer something valuable for the customer. If Qualcomm now assumingly goes back to a very high demand TSMC node, it speaks volumes.
 
Guaranteed PPA and Volume is big thing even if it costs more you are not going to sacrifice your product for that
 
Guaranteed volume is exactly the thing I doubt regarding TSMC. Yes, TSMC is a very reliable partner. But can you really get the volume you want? There are other players with deeper pockets (Apple, Nvidia).
 
If you pay you surely can but if you are some small customer Samsung might be better but Qualcomm is not a small company by any means
 
No leading edge foundry in a high demand era is going to take on ALL the risk of production with an exclusively "known good die" contract typically. That's why it was such a big deal when TSMC entered into one in the beginning of the "3nm" era. Samsung is still somewhat early in the production ramp of their "2nm" family. It's going to take time, especially for them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top