Corsair M55 RGB PRO gaming mouse review
Promo: Windows 10 Pro for $13 With Office 2016 For $33
Lexar NM600 NVMe M.2. SSD (480GB) review
Tech preview: Radeon RX 5700 and 5700 XT
Tech preview: AMD Ryzen 3000 - 7nm ZEN2
Patriot Viper VPN100 M2 NVMe 512 GB SSD Review
Samsung 970 EVO Plus 2TB NVMe M.2. SSD review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - May 2019
Promo: URCDKey Summer Sale Windows 10 Pro for $11
DeepCool Matrexx 70 Chassis review
TSMC expects 5nm production in 2020
So the story goes like this, we'll see 16, 15 and 14nm solicon this year. Then in two years we'll see 7nm .. and two years later in 2020 we'll be at 5nm ! Man we are running our of scale, so after nanometer we'll enter picometer.
Anyway, TSMC will be ready to roll out its 5nm process technology two years after the launch of its 7nm node. Digitimes reports the following on the topic;
TSMC expects to start production of 7nm chips in the first half of 2018, said company co-CEO Mark Liu at a recent investors meeting. He did not specify whether the node would be ready for volume production or just risk production.
In addition, TSMC has been engaged in R&D for 5nm process technology for one year, said Liu, adding that the node will be ready for launch in the first half of 2020.
TSMC also revealed it will be ready to use extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography to make 5nm chips. "We've made significant progress with EUV to prepare for its insertion, likely in 5nm," Liu indicated.
As for 10nm, TSMC expects to qualify the node which will be ready for customer tape-outs in the first quarter of 2016, Liu said.
CC Wei, TSMC's other co-CEO, noted that TSMC's share of the 14/16nm foundry market segment will rise to more than 70% in 2016 from about 40% in 2015. TSMC's 16nm FinFET processes consisting of 16FF (16nm FinFET), 16FF+ (16nm FinFET Plus) and 16FFC (16nm FinFET Compact) will account for more than 20% of the foundry's total wafer revenues in 2016, Wei said.
The new 16nm FFC node, a low-power and low-cost version of TSMC's 16nm FinFET products, will be ready for volume production in the first quarter of 2016, Wei indicated.
Wei also disclosed TSMC is on track to move its integrated fan-out (InFO) wafer-level packaging technology to volume production in the second quarter of 2016. "We do not expect adoption by a large number of customers. However, we do expect a few very large volume customers," Wei said.
Apple is reportedly among the first wave of customers adopting the InFO packaging technology.
Kaarme
Senior Member
Posts: 1505
Joined: 2013-03-10
Senior Member
Posts: 1505
Joined: 2013-03-10
#5220629 Posted on: 01/19/2016 01:33 PM
They don't seem concerned at all, happily talking already about 7 and 5nm, despite the pioneer Intel encountering problems with 10nm.
They don't seem concerned at all, happily talking already about 7 and 5nm, despite the pioneer Intel encountering problems with 10nm.
FerCam™
Senior Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 2005-10-08
Senior Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 2005-10-08
#5220641 Posted on: 01/19/2016 02:33 PM
But there wasn't a quantum barrier somewhere in this scales (less than 10nm) because there was too few atoms to dope the semiconductor material as type N or P?
Will this be the new TSMC 20nm node?
But there wasn't a quantum barrier somewhere in this scales (less than 10nm) because there was too few atoms to dope the semiconductor material as type N or P?
Will this be the new TSMC 20nm node?
fantaskarsef
Senior Member
Posts: 10324
Joined: 2014-07-21
Senior Member
Posts: 10324
Joined: 2014-07-21
#5220647 Posted on: 01/19/2016 02:39 PM
Uhm, maybe it's just me, but do you guys really expect them to have it ready in 2020? Maybe they want to have it, but with low yields we're more likely to see anything with such a small scale being available in small numbers, and then they will sell it to mobile manufacturer probably. That's just what I think will happen, so don't panic.
Uhm, maybe it's just me, but do you guys really expect them to have it ready in 2020? Maybe they want to have it, but with low yields we're more likely to see anything with such a small scale being available in small numbers, and then they will sell it to mobile manufacturer probably. That's just what I think will happen, so don't panic.
labidas
Senior Member
Posts: 222
Joined: 2013-03-06
Senior Member
Posts: 222
Joined: 2013-03-06
#5220673 Posted on: 01/19/2016 03:32 PM
But there wasn't a quantum barrier somewhere in this scales (less than 10nm) because there was too few atoms to dope the semiconductor material as type N or P?
Will this be the new TSMC 20nm node?
http://www.kitguru.net/components/anton-shilov/samsung-vows-to-start-10nm-chip-production-in-2016-shows-first-wafers/
Guess it's been solved for 10nm. Bet afterwards they'll transition from SiO2 to SiGe. 7nm should give 50% perf over 10nm.
Who knows... there are even working 1.8nm carbon transistors. And beyond...
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-07/22/tiniest-processor-moores-law
But there wasn't a quantum barrier somewhere in this scales (less than 10nm) because there was too few atoms to dope the semiconductor material as type N or P?
Will this be the new TSMC 20nm node?
http://www.kitguru.net/components/anton-shilov/samsung-vows-to-start-10nm-chip-production-in-2016-shows-first-wafers/
Guess it's been solved for 10nm. Bet afterwards they'll transition from SiO2 to SiGe. 7nm should give 50% perf over 10nm.
Who knows... there are even working 1.8nm carbon transistors. And beyond...
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2015-07/22/tiniest-processor-moores-law
Backstabak
Senior Member
Posts: 356
Joined: 2015-11-13
Senior Member
Posts: 356
Joined: 2015-11-13
#5220675 Posted on: 01/19/2016 03:33 PM
Seems more like PR or wishfull thinking than anything. There is already a quantum effect below ~8 nm. But hey, if the'll make it work for large scale production I'll be only happy.
Seems more like PR or wishfull thinking than anything. There is already a quantum effect below ~8 nm. But hey, if the'll make it work for large scale production I'll be only happy.
SSD_PRO
Senior Member
Posts: 166
Joined: 2013-02-07
Senior Member
Posts: 166
Joined: 2013-02-07
#5220690 Posted on: 01/19/2016 04:12 PM
Now we just need to see actual tangible benefits of the silicon shrinks. Comparing the 32nm i7-2600K and 14nm i7-6700k doesn't yield much progress. Both are awesome CPUs but are limited in differences. Four cores eight threads on each. CPU's are basically the same in performance with the only significant improvements coming on the iGPU, instruction set, PCIe revision, and memory controller of the 6700K.
Well, I guess I kind of thought about it and those are a lot of changes...
Now we just need to see actual tangible benefits of the silicon shrinks. Comparing the 32nm i7-2600K and 14nm i7-6700k doesn't yield much progress. Both are awesome CPUs but are limited in differences. Four cores eight threads on each. CPU's are basically the same in performance with the only significant improvements coming on the iGPU, instruction set, PCIe revision, and memory controller of the 6700K.
Well, I guess I kind of thought about it and those are a lot of changes...
Lowice
Member
Posts: 44
Joined: 2014-01-24
Member
Posts: 44
Joined: 2014-01-24
#5220706 Posted on: 01/19/2016 04:54 PM
It's not that they can't produce it now, it's only because they want to make as much funny papir (money) as possible.. Hense that money slow down technology state.
****ing sad.
It's not that they can't produce it now, it's only because they want to make as much funny papir (money) as possible.. Hense that money slow down technology state.
****ing sad.
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 12110
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 12110
Joined: 2004-05-16
#5220715 Posted on: 01/19/2016 05:14 PM
It's not that they can't produce it now, it's only because they want to make as much funny papir (money) as possible.. Hense that money slow down technology state.
****ing sad.
I'm sorry but you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
I would slightly, somewhat, kind of agree with you with nearly every other industry. But chip fabrication? No.
Are these companies making money? Yes obviously, it is a business afterall and they have people to feed. Are they also at the complete forefront of the boundaries of physics? Absolutely. To the point where nearly all the friends I have who graduated with me from RIT (Rochester Institute of Technology) with MME degrees, are all perusing post-grad theoretical physics/particle physics because none of the companies doing this stuff will hire them without it.
Fabing is probably the only mass-scale industry where the application of quantum mechanics actually plays a role. Quantum effects don't start 8nm, they started years ago. They've been using FE tunneling in practical fab processes like NAND memory for years.
This isn't even to mention that companies like Intel, with $5B R&D budgets that are trying hard as hell to compete in the mobile sector, LITERALLY have the best engineers on the face of the planet working the problem. And even their stuff gets delayed for years at time. Or the fact that TSMC has lost several major contracts in the last few years, so why in gods name would they be slowing down when Samsung is already surpassing them?
The idea that they are milking money doesn't make sense from a technical perspective nor does it make sense from a business perspective. It's probably one of the most competitive sectors in computing, with companies like ARM/Intel/Samsung/TSMC/GF/Nvidia/AMD/Huawei/Mediatek and countless others are all trying to one up eachother.
It's not that they can't produce it now, it's only because they want to make as much funny papir (money) as possible.. Hense that money slow down technology state.
****ing sad.
I'm sorry but you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
I would slightly, somewhat, kind of agree with you with nearly every other industry. But chip fabrication? No.
Are these companies making money? Yes obviously, it is a business afterall and they have people to feed. Are they also at the complete forefront of the boundaries of physics? Absolutely. To the point where nearly all the friends I have who graduated with me from RIT (Rochester Institute of Technology) with MME degrees, are all perusing post-grad theoretical physics/particle physics because none of the companies doing this stuff will hire them without it.
Fabing is probably the only mass-scale industry where the application of quantum mechanics actually plays a role. Quantum effects don't start 8nm, they started years ago. They've been using FE tunneling in practical fab processes like NAND memory for years.
This isn't even to mention that companies like Intel, with $5B R&D budgets that are trying hard as hell to compete in the mobile sector, LITERALLY have the best engineers on the face of the planet working the problem. And even their stuff gets delayed for years at time. Or the fact that TSMC has lost several major contracts in the last few years, so why in gods name would they be slowing down when Samsung is already surpassing them?
The idea that they are milking money doesn't make sense from a technical perspective nor does it make sense from a business perspective. It's probably one of the most competitive sectors in computing, with companies like ARM/Intel/Samsung/TSMC/GF/Nvidia/AMD/Huawei/Mediatek and countless others are all trying to one up eachother.
Reardan
Senior Member
Posts: 286
Joined: 2014-09-21
Senior Member
Posts: 286
Joined: 2014-09-21
#5220731 Posted on: 01/19/2016 05:54 PM
I'm sorry but you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
I would slightly, somewhat, kind of agree with you with nearly every other industry. But chip fabrication? No.
Are these companies making money? Yes obviously, it is a business afterall and they have people to feed. Are they also at the complete forefront of the boundaries of physics? Absolutely. To the point where nearly all the friends I have who graduated with me from RIT (Rochester Institute of Technology) with MME degrees, are all perusing post-grad theoretical physics/particle physics because none of the companies doing this stuff will hire them without it.
Fabing is probably the only mass-scale industry where the application of quantum mechanics actually plays a role. Quantum effects don't start 8nm, they started years ago. They've been using FE tunneling in practical fab processes like NAND memory for years.
This isn't even to mention that companies like Intel, with $5B R&D budgets that are trying hard as hell to compete in the mobile sector, LITERALLY have the best engineers on the face of the planet working the problem. And even their stuff gets delayed for years at time. Or the fact that TSMC has lost several major contracts in the last few years, so why in gods name would they be slowing down when Samsung is already surpassing them?
The idea that they are milking money doesn't make sense from a technical perspective nor does it make sense from a business perspective. It's probably one of the most competitive sectors in computing, with companies like ARM/Intel/Samsung/TSMC/GF/Nvidia/AMD/Huawei/Mediatek and countless others are all trying to one up eachother.
TSMC, Samsung, Intel, Global Foundries, AMD all have the absolute best minds in their fields, the absolute best technology and resources and none of them are sure, or can agree, how much further down past 10nm we can even go. 5nm, if you allow no space between them, is 25 silicon atoms across. And you need billions of those to make a working chip.
This is not some regular day at the office, where you just fill in some spreadsheets and get your answer. This is: You fill out your spreadsheet, but pieces of ****ing Jimmy in Accounting's spreadsheet just show up in random cells on your screen because, today, Jimmy's spreadsheet decided they didn't like being cells and instead wanted to be waves.
These companies don't even have a material, currently, they can make small enough to even be a true 16 or 14nm transistor.
I'm sorry but you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
I would slightly, somewhat, kind of agree with you with nearly every other industry. But chip fabrication? No.
Are these companies making money? Yes obviously, it is a business afterall and they have people to feed. Are they also at the complete forefront of the boundaries of physics? Absolutely. To the point where nearly all the friends I have who graduated with me from RIT (Rochester Institute of Technology) with MME degrees, are all perusing post-grad theoretical physics/particle physics because none of the companies doing this stuff will hire them without it.
Fabing is probably the only mass-scale industry where the application of quantum mechanics actually plays a role. Quantum effects don't start 8nm, they started years ago. They've been using FE tunneling in practical fab processes like NAND memory for years.
This isn't even to mention that companies like Intel, with $5B R&D budgets that are trying hard as hell to compete in the mobile sector, LITERALLY have the best engineers on the face of the planet working the problem. And even their stuff gets delayed for years at time. Or the fact that TSMC has lost several major contracts in the last few years, so why in gods name would they be slowing down when Samsung is already surpassing them?
The idea that they are milking money doesn't make sense from a technical perspective nor does it make sense from a business perspective. It's probably one of the most competitive sectors in computing, with companies like ARM/Intel/Samsung/TSMC/GF/Nvidia/AMD/Huawei/Mediatek and countless others are all trying to one up eachother.
TSMC, Samsung, Intel, Global Foundries, AMD all have the absolute best minds in their fields, the absolute best technology and resources and none of them are sure, or can agree, how much further down past 10nm we can even go. 5nm, if you allow no space between them, is 25 silicon atoms across. And you need billions of those to make a working chip.
This is not some regular day at the office, where you just fill in some spreadsheets and get your answer. This is: You fill out your spreadsheet, but pieces of ****ing Jimmy in Accounting's spreadsheet just show up in random cells on your screen because, today, Jimmy's spreadsheet decided they didn't like being cells and instead wanted to be waves.
These companies don't even have a material, currently, they can make small enough to even be a true 16 or 14nm transistor.
Turanis
Senior Member
Posts: 1404
Joined: 2014-08-15
Senior Member
Posts: 1404
Joined: 2014-08-15
#5220733 Posted on: 01/19/2016 06:08 PM
Mark my words TSMC: Keep Dreaming!
After Intel will have 5nm maybe you,TSMC, are allowed to have 10nm.Untill then stay with 16nm.
Mark my words TSMC: Keep Dreaming!
After Intel will have 5nm maybe you,TSMC, are allowed to have 10nm.Untill then stay with 16nm.
umeng2002
Senior Member
Posts: 921
Joined: 2006-09-02
Senior Member
Posts: 921
Joined: 2006-09-02
#5220734 Posted on: 01/19/2016 06:11 PM
4-5nm then new materials to get higher frequencies?
What a world we live in when atoms are getting too big for us.
4-5nm then new materials to get higher frequencies?
What a world we live in when atoms are getting too big for us.
Toss3
Senior Member
Posts: 180
Joined: 2010-03-25
Senior Member
Posts: 180
Joined: 2010-03-25
#5220763 Posted on: 01/19/2016 08:06 PM
Gallium nitride.
Gallium nitride.
labidas
Senior Member
Posts: 222
Joined: 2013-03-06
Senior Member
Posts: 222
Joined: 2013-03-06
#5220827 Posted on: 01/19/2016 11:32 PM
TSMC, Samsung, Intel, Global Foundries, AMD all have the absolute best minds in their fields, the absolute best technology and resources and none of them are sure, or can agree, how much further down past 10nm we can even go. 5nm, if you allow no space between them, is 25 silicon atoms across. And you need billions of those to make a working chip.
This is not some regular day at the office, where you just fill in some spreadsheets and get your answer. This is: You fill out your spreadsheet, but pieces of ****ing Jimmy in Accounting's spreadsheet just show up in random cells on your screen because, today, Jimmy's spreadsheet decided they didn't like being cells and instead wanted to be waves.
These companies don't even have a material, currently, they can make small enough to even be a true 16 or 14nm transistor.
Any sources for these ludicrous claims or did you just made all that up??
TSMC, Samsung, Intel, Global Foundries, AMD all have the absolute best minds in their fields, the absolute best technology and resources and none of them are sure, or can agree, how much further down past 10nm we can even go. 5nm, if you allow no space between them, is 25 silicon atoms across. And you need billions of those to make a working chip.
This is not some regular day at the office, where you just fill in some spreadsheets and get your answer. This is: You fill out your spreadsheet, but pieces of ****ing Jimmy in Accounting's spreadsheet just show up in random cells on your screen because, today, Jimmy's spreadsheet decided they didn't like being cells and instead wanted to be waves.
These companies don't even have a material, currently, they can make small enough to even be a true 16 or 14nm transistor.
Any sources for these ludicrous claims or did you just made all that up??
BLEH!
Senior Member
Posts: 5855
Joined: 2010-10-17
Senior Member
Posts: 5855
Joined: 2010-10-17
#5220857 Posted on: 01/20/2016 12:50 AM
Wishful thinking, I thinking.
Wishful thinking, I thinking.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 222
Joined: 2013-03-06
Damn, this gets exciting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_nanometer
Will this mark the end of silicon chips? Or a whole new approach to making transistors?