Fractal Design Torrent Black RGB TG review
Core i9 12900K DDR4 3600 vs DDR5 5200 performance review
Corsair H150i Elite LCD review
Seasonic Syncro Q704 chassis + Connect PSU review
Fractal Design Ion+ 2 Platinum 860W PSU Review
Crucial P5 Plus PCIe 4.0 M.2 NVMe review
Fractal Design Lumen S28 RGB review (LCS)
WD Red SN500 NVMe SSD review
Core i9 12900K processor review
Core i5 12600K processor review
AMD might move to Samsung for 3nm fabrication due to TSMCs preference for Apple
AMD's current CPUs and GPUs are manufactured by the Taiwan-based semiconductor giant TSMC, however, the company might swing towards Samsung when it comes to producing 3nm chips.
TSMC is increasingly reserving more and more wafers for Apple who opened up a huge sack of cash to gain p[priority. And TSMC is doing exactly that, prioritizing reserving wafers created under future manufacturing methods such as 3nm, the amount of wafers left available for AMD seems to be insufficient in relation to demand. The corporation feels compelled to shift suppliers in order to meet their requirements.
This year TSMC reserved the majority of 5nm capacity to Apple as well
AMD is not the only business that is displeased with TSMC's resource allocation procedures. Qualcomm would be in a similar situation and would have participated in the discussions with Samsung to determine whether they could supply a number of chips greater than what TSMC could deliver, which, as in the case of AMD, was insufficient to meet the demand. of your clients. If Samsung Foundry, the division of the South Korean company in charge of semiconductor manufacturing, has sufficient capacity to meet the demands of AMD and Qualcomm, this transfer of two industry giants could result in a significant increase in the company's revenue as a result of the transfer of two giants. We do not know whether Samsung planned such a large amount of capacity for its 3nm chip factories as a result of not having a large number of clients, but we will undoubtedly learn more about this in the course of next year as more information becomes available. about these possible agreements, which is obviously a great mystery at least publicly.
For the time being, all of this information is based on hearsay though, so we recommend that you treat it with caution. According to official expectations, both AMD and Qualcomm will continue to collaborate with TSMC, however this report makes a lot of sense in light of recent actions by the Taiwanese foundry business to emphasize Apple, which is the company's most important customer.
AMD might detail new RDNA2 graphics card on March 5 - 01/30/2020 10:20 AM
On Financial Analysts Day AMD would share the first details about the new graphics cards that AMD has in the works. According to Mithun Chandrasekhar, the man behind Radeon product management, 'Big N...
AMD might have replaced 14nm Ryzen 5 1600 processors with 12nm 2600 ones - 12/27/2019 10:44 AM
Over the past few days some weird chatter has hit the web, AMD would be shipping 14nm Ryzen 1600 processors, however no based on the Zen+ architecture at 12nm. They have the same IPC as the 2600 but s...
AMD might launch its NAVI 10 next-gen GPU by June - 04/19/2019 08:40 AM
The year 2019 will be hugely important for AMD with ZEN2 and NAVI. A new rumor on the web indicates that AMD will launch its Navi 10 next-gen GPU in the Summer during E3. All eyes are on AMD, to take ...
Rumor: AMD Might Host Threadripper 2000 event in Scuderia Ferrari’s hometown Maranello - 06/30/2018 07:36 PM
A new rumor has surfaced on the web today, AMD would be celebrating it's one-year HEDT Threadripper release, with an event planned for Threadripper 2. This launch event would take place in Maranello,...
MSI and AMD Might Bring CPU + GPU + Mobo Bundle to market - 04/23/2018 02:48 PM
Interesting, MSI and AMD Might offer a Hardware Package slash bundle to the market. The bundle would include a motherboard, processor and graphics card. ...
alanm
Senior Member
Posts: 10660
Joined: 2004-05-10
Senior Member
Posts: 10660
Joined: 2004-05-10
#5966531 Posted on: 11/20/2021 09:58 AM
Chip production got overwhelmed when Apple shifted from Intel to TSMC a few years ago. That combined with other sectors (ie, automotive, telecom, industrial, etc) that now require far more than before.
Also keep in mind that production space is prioritized according to whoever pays the most for it. And Apple always comes out on top (at the expense of others). Thats why Nvidia had to place orders with Samsung for Ampere. Both Nvidia and AMD are nothing compared to the big boys Apple and Qualcomm who got 75% of TSMCs entire 5nm production. And that is why your next gen GPUs will shock you when you see the price. Apple played a big part in that.
Chip production got overwhelmed when Apple shifted from Intel to TSMC a few years ago. That combined with other sectors (ie, automotive, telecom, industrial, etc) that now require far more than before.
Also keep in mind that production space is prioritized according to whoever pays the most for it. And Apple always comes out on top (at the expense of others). Thats why Nvidia had to place orders with Samsung for Ampere. Both Nvidia and AMD are nothing compared to the big boys Apple and Qualcomm who got 75% of TSMCs entire 5nm production. And that is why your next gen GPUs will shock you when you see the price. Apple played a big part in that.
Denpepe
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Joined: 2021-02-04
Junior Member
Posts: 8
Joined: 2021-02-04
#5966569 Posted on: 11/20/2021 03:24 PM
In a way, it is.
See, designing CPUs for a company/process vs another for fabrication is entirely dependent on the tooling and libraries of that fab.
You can't design a CPU to be produced at one fab company (say, TSMC) then have another to also produce the same designs (say, Samsung) because their manufacturing processes, tooling and production lines are entirely different, as are the end-result characteristics of the chip such as trace width, electrical properties, trace pitch, etc.
That's why the libraries that chip designers use are based on where they are planning to have that specific design made: because the library helps account for all the characteristics of what the end product might look like coming out of the production line.
Then comes the steppings where you iterate on your design based on what came out of the initial run while updating the libraries to say "hey, when we designed this bit to look like this, this is how it comes out" so future designs on that same node are more refined.
This is why nvidia is going with Samsung for the consumer Ampere chips and TSMC for the professional chips: they saved the most efficient designs for the HPC sector.
tl;dr: You can't move a design from one full node to the next without updating the design, much less move it from one fab company to another without a complete overhaul of it.
addendum: I'm not saying AMD ISN'T producing producing a chip to be fabbed at Samsung, maybe they are. What I AM saying is that IF they are, that would pretty much be a new design based whatever version of Zen they choose for it.
As AMD is making both CPU's and GPU's and the GPU's seem to be in more short supply, AMD could keep their CPU's at TSMC and move GPU's to samsung like Nvidia did.
Even though Nvidia's earning call seems to confirm that they are making more cards then b4 while still beeing in short supply, AMD could increase their market chare in both segments by splitting manufacturing like this.
In a way, it is.
See, designing CPUs for a company/process vs another for fabrication is entirely dependent on the tooling and libraries of that fab.
You can't design a CPU to be produced at one fab company (say, TSMC) then have another to also produce the same designs (say, Samsung) because their manufacturing processes, tooling and production lines are entirely different, as are the end-result characteristics of the chip such as trace width, electrical properties, trace pitch, etc.
That's why the libraries that chip designers use are based on where they are planning to have that specific design made: because the library helps account for all the characteristics of what the end product might look like coming out of the production line.
Then comes the steppings where you iterate on your design based on what came out of the initial run while updating the libraries to say "hey, when we designed this bit to look like this, this is how it comes out" so future designs on that same node are more refined.
This is why nvidia is going with Samsung for the consumer Ampere chips and TSMC for the professional chips: they saved the most efficient designs for the HPC sector.
tl;dr: You can't move a design from one full node to the next without updating the design, much less move it from one fab company to another without a complete overhaul of it.
addendum: I'm not saying AMD ISN'T producing producing a chip to be fabbed at Samsung, maybe they are. What I AM saying is that IF they are, that would pretty much be a new design based whatever version of Zen they choose for it.
As AMD is making both CPU's and GPU's and the GPU's seem to be in more short supply, AMD could keep their CPU's at TSMC and move GPU's to samsung like Nvidia did.
Even though Nvidia's earning call seems to confirm that they are making more cards then b4 while still beeing in short supply, AMD could increase their market chare in both segments by splitting manufacturing like this.
H83
Senior Member
Posts: 3627
Joined: 2009-09-08
Senior Member
Posts: 3627
Joined: 2009-09-08
#5966576 Posted on: 11/20/2021 04:02 PM
Is outrageous at first sight but when we consider that it was Apple´s money that allowed to invest in better nodes, allowing them to surpass Intel and become the best foundry in the world, is not that shocking.
I´ve already said this several time, but Apple is much more than a customer to TSMC, they are their partners, in a certain and without Apple, TSMC wouldn´t be what it is today.
Like it or not, Apple deserves the special treatment it gets from TSMC.
The real problem lies in the lack of competition in the foundry business.
So true. But first Intel has to sort out all the mess in their own plants...
Apple's slice of the pie is outrageous. No wonder Apple has had no chip troubles, unlike everybody else. From what I've heard, Apple didn't manage to reserve as much from the production of a microfiber cloth factory, though.
Is outrageous at first sight but when we consider that it was Apple´s money that allowed to invest in better nodes, allowing them to surpass Intel and become the best foundry in the world, is not that shocking.
I´ve already said this several time, but Apple is much more than a customer to TSMC, they are their partners, in a certain and without Apple, TSMC wouldn´t be what it is today.
Like it or not, Apple deserves the special treatment it gets from TSMC.
The real problem lies in the lack of competition in the foundry business.
It'd be a good opportunity for Intel to make money, if they sold cpacity of their plants.
So true. But first Intel has to sort out all the mess in their own plants...
Kaarme
Senior Member
Posts: 2680
Joined: 2013-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 2680
Joined: 2013-03-10
#5966586 Posted on: 11/20/2021 04:57 PM
Is outrageous at first sight but when we consider that it was Apple´s money that allowed to invest in better nodes, allowing them to surpass Intel and become the best foundry in the world, is not that shocking.
I´ve already said this several time, but Apple is much more than a customer to TSMC, they are their partners, in a certain and without Apple, TSMC wouldn´t be what it is today.
Uhhuh... You are just describing "business as usual". When you buy a new car, it allows the car manufacturer to keep developing future cars, using the profit. If you don't buy a new car, the car manufacturer doesn't have money for anything. Even when you buy cheese, the dairy may be able to develop new milk products, to compete against other dairies. TSMC manufactures products for other companies, for profit, and that profit allows it to keep going. Sometimes technology companies do get money even from governments. If memory serves, the USA will help TSMC build the new fab in some state or another. This aligns with American national interest, despite TSMC being a foreign company, so it's apparently okay. Apple is just one technology company among many. People would still have every bit as many smartphones even if Apple had never entered the market. Apple computers are a niche product. Apple may be TSMC's single most important customer right now with really deep pockets allowing TSMC to invest more in development, but without Apple TSMC would still be roughly what it is today. Many other customers need and depend on the advanced nodes as well.
Is outrageous at first sight but when we consider that it was Apple´s money that allowed to invest in better nodes, allowing them to surpass Intel and become the best foundry in the world, is not that shocking.
I´ve already said this several time, but Apple is much more than a customer to TSMC, they are their partners, in a certain and without Apple, TSMC wouldn´t be what it is today.
Uhhuh... You are just describing "business as usual". When you buy a new car, it allows the car manufacturer to keep developing future cars, using the profit. If you don't buy a new car, the car manufacturer doesn't have money for anything. Even when you buy cheese, the dairy may be able to develop new milk products, to compete against other dairies. TSMC manufactures products for other companies, for profit, and that profit allows it to keep going. Sometimes technology companies do get money even from governments. If memory serves, the USA will help TSMC build the new fab in some state or another. This aligns with American national interest, despite TSMC being a foreign company, so it's apparently okay. Apple is just one technology company among many. People would still have every bit as many smartphones even if Apple had never entered the market. Apple computers are a niche product. Apple may be TSMC's single most important customer right now with really deep pockets allowing TSMC to invest more in development, but without Apple TSMC would still be roughly what it is today. Many other customers need and depend on the advanced nodes as well.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 1960
Joined: 2016-08-01
Well seems the glofo 's and tsmc's marketing worked miracles . Their 16 & 14 nm are actually in density very very close to their failed 20nm process that nobody used , the main difference is the use of finfet for marketing reason they named it lower . So neither the 7 or 5 or 3 are real nm . Now i have no idea if intel's 10 nm or 7 as they call it is inferior or superior to tsmc's n7+ but indeed their transistor density is really close with intel's 10nm . Nowadays talk of nm is pointless , so in my opinion is better to try and compare en with their density and this by it self is not enough but unless they fab the same thing on both fabs we can not compare directly.