AMD might move to Samsung for 3nm fabrication due to TSMCs preference for Apple

Published by

Click here to post a comment for AMD might move to Samsung for 3nm fabrication due to TSMCs preference for Apple on our message forum
#5966588
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/271/271560.jpg
Noisiv:

where are you getting all this? especially who paid to develop what... because first of all 1) I don't think that's how TSMC is functioning. Yes, a customer might pay for allocation. But TSMC invests their own money & resources into development of major nodes. Letting direct customers' invest their own money would be a bad business, because it would just dilute TSMC's profit. And especially so in a market with never-ending demand. But now I am speculating myself. 2) Which brings me to my 2nd point: Any contractual obligations are hidden behind thousands pages of mutual contracts and are not public. So again how do you know who paid what to develop what? 3) And even so, what's stopping Apple to pay even more to increase its primacy in high-demand market like wafers.
i'm in the industry and i read trade publications. every fab booking is news as there is an entire ecosystem dependent on it. wire bundlers especially, as they're where the silicon meets the socket AND the fabs do not bundle the wires to processors it takes tremendous lead time and engineering which is why this info is in the public domain. TSMC's client of record is Qualcomm and ARM manufacture is the starting point for everything TSMC. TSMC wanted/needed to get into the x86 business and they partnered with AMD, who needed a larger output at a lower node than GloFlo could do. this is all on record. Apple came next with radical new ARM designs. AMD partnered with TSMC from the beginning of Ryzen research before TSMC produced a single wafer from them AMD, Apple, and Qualcomm paid as much as the national government of Taipei to get 7nm fabs built and up to snuff. this is also a matter of record. AMD has had much more valuable input than any other company as they were in the fab business and had technical insights. so no, TSMC would not be in the market position they currently have without AMD. and FWIW both TSMC and Samsung are using the exact same American equipment in their fabs from Applied Materials.
#5966604
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/63/63215.jpg
Let's not piss in the wind either. The Apple M1/M1X is actually excellent, regardless of what you think of Apple. If my music software worked on it trouble-free I'd have no problems buying a macbook for music daw.
#5966632
data/avatar/default/avatar18.webp
@tunejunky 5nm: AMD has been given 1/10 of 5nm capacity of Apple. 7nm: Everything AMD is producing is coming from TSMC, and yet they have been given only somewhat more 7nm capacity than NV (which is using TSMC only for Pro GPUs) You claim AMD is hugely important to TSMC. Well fine. Because a) that's hard to argue against b) its vague, immaterial and inconsequential. Like Jensen and Morris Chang exchanging pleasantries about their personal and their companies special relations and then Jensen going to Samsung. In the end that AMD's importance translates in being given just enough 7nm capacity to be bombed by Nvidia. https://abload.de/img/upload_2021-11-20_20-bij2j.png And that's material.
#5966634
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/264/264593.jpg
All I'm seeing is about 3/4 of tsmc's output is goin to be apple and qualcomm products no wonder there's a shortage of pc products regardless of paid for privalige that's a market changing metric in itself and shouldn't be allowed but then again this is just tscms portfolio apple may not be using anybody else
#5966759
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/271/271560.jpg
Noisiv:

@tunejunky 5nm: AMD has been given 1/10 of 5nm capacity of Apple. 7nm: Everything AMD is producing is coming from TSMC, and yet they have been given only somewhat more 7nm capacity than NV (which is using TSMC only for Pro GPUs) You claim AMD is hugely important to TSMC. Well fine. Because a) that's hard to argue against b) its vague, immaterial and inconsequential. Like Jensen and Morris Chang exchanging pleasantries about their personal and their companies special relations and then Jensen going to Samsung. In the end that AMD's importance translates in being given just enough 7nm capacity to be bombed by Nvidia. https://abload.de/img/upload_2021-11-20_20-bij2j.png And that's material.
way to cherrypick data which does not include the CPU's (which vastly outsell gpus) i'm not talking about GPUs i'm talking total fab output. that's what is material and on topic
#5966767
data/avatar/default/avatar30.webp
tunejunky:

way to cherrypick data which does not include the CPU's (which vastly outsell gpus) i'm not talking about GPUs i'm talking total fab output. that's what is material and on topic
I am sorry If you think that I am cherry picking. Here... I made a chart. It's pretty self-explanatory. https://abload.de/img/xaadosk8b.png
#5966772
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/271/271560.jpg
Noisiv:

I am sorry If you think that I am cherry picking. Here... I made a chart. It's pretty self-explanatory. https://abload.de/img/xaadosk8b.png
yeah you just killed your own argument/statement re:Nvidia
#5966777
data/avatar/default/avatar14.webp
tunejunky:

yeah you just killed your own argument/statement re:Nvidia
What are you talking about? Look its pretty simple: Nvidia has been given 21% just for Pro GPUs. Meanwhile AMD has been allotted 27% to produce EVERYTHING they are selling. That looks like anything but AMD having some sort of special relations with TSMC. And that's in comparison with runaway Nvidia. Compared to Apple: They are given 1/10 of Apple's 5nm. What are you even arguing here? Or arguing against?
#5966845
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/79/79740.jpg
Noisiv:

What are you talking about? Look its pretty simple: Nvidia has been given 21% just for Pro GPUs. Meanwhile AMD has been allotted 27% to produce EVERYTHING they are selling. That looks like anything but AMD having some sort of special relations with TSMC. And that's in comparison with runaway Nvidia. Compared to Apple: They are given 1/10 of Apple's 5nm. What are you even arguing here? Or arguing against?
Apple was TSMCs main 7nm customer in the early stages of the node but moved off to 5nm. AMD also increased their 7nm due to spare capacity from Mediateks reduced orders (due to Huawei's penalization by U.S. regulations). If Apple had still been active on 7nm, they would have shrunk AMDs position drastically. But they are always one step/node ahead of the others due to $$$. They outbid everyone else for production space for newest nodes.They left 7nm behind to move forward. Thats why the others show larger positions on the 7nm chart. https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-overtakes-Apple-as-TSMC-s-main-7nm-customer.528532.0.html
#5966853
data/avatar/default/avatar39.webp
@alanm yeah of course. but tunejunky thinks AMD is the Apple (of TSMC's eye 😀) Despite AMD being given only few % more of 7nm than NV, yet AMD's entire product range (CPU/GPU/consoles) is on 7nm. Meanwhile runaway Nvidia has been 'punished' by being given 21% of 7nm for... wait for it... FOR ONE(1) chip, ie GA-100. And when I say 'punished' - remember those stupid early stories about TSMC punishing NV for going to Samsung 🙄 Some punishment - being given as much capacity for ONE(1) CHIP as their 'most valued partner' (AMD) has been given for their ENTIRE production.
#5966873
https://forums.guru3d.com/data/avatars/m/80/80129.jpg
Keep in mind Nvidia's Orin is 7nm, Quantum-2 is 7nm and I'm pretty sure Bluefield is 7nm as well. It's really hard to find data on Mellanox fabrication but most if it's competitors are on 7nm, so I assume their higher end switches are 7nm as well -- so it's more than just A100 but yeah.

Previous Page