Question: why wouldn't Samsung produce for example the next gen processors for AMD (let's exclude Intel since they have their own process and fabs)? I'm asking because they seem to be ahead of the curve when it comes to the fab process. Or am I mistaken?

xIcarus:

Question: why wouldn't Samsung produce for example the next gen processors for AMD (let's exclude Intel since they have their own process and fabs)? I'm asking because they seem to be ahead of the curve when it comes to the fab process. Or am I mistaken?

Samsung can, they fab processors for other companies - it's just that AMD is cozy with Global Foundries as they were once the same company. All the fabs are pretty close to one another now, the numbers don't really mean anything anymore - the pitch size/density/etc from Intel's 10nm/Samsung's 8nm TSMC/GF/s 7nm are all very similar. Intel is probably still in the lead though, 10nm keeps getting delayed but Intel doesn't do volume on a fab until it's confident the yields are really high. The other companies can't really afford to do that.

xIcarus:

Question: why wouldn't Samsung produce for example the next gen processors for AMD (let's exclude Intel since they have their own process and fabs)? I'm asking because they seem to be ahead of the curve when it comes to the fab process. Or am I mistaken?

Samsung and Global Foundries (AMD's spin off) had agreement to jointly produce next gen manufacturing technologies (14nm),later on GloFo decided to develop 7nm on their own with out Samsung.Now how they collaborate currently is question,but they probably have some kind a collaboration.So for Amd is same to work with GloFo or Samsung, but what is not same and to some degree (some would say greater and some lesser) we see that with Ryzen is the fact that they (AMD and Samsung) have different priorities.Samsung need low power technology for mobiles and Amd need high power for desktop CPU's .There is rumor that the reason AMD cannot clock RYZEN higher is the fact that 14nm they co-developed with Samsung is optimized for low power and not high clocks. So for Amd to go again with Samsung tech is not very lets say optimal.Yeah they would get great thermals and low consumption (as seen with Ryzen) but with limited clocks and extremely lousy thermals and consumption if they stray to far with design (VEGA).

fantastic news. this would lead me to assume the info from GloFlo (7nm node finalization) is indeed correct, as they had collaborated for some time. GloFlo has an exclusivity contract with AMD on 7nm's initial run, i hope they can keep up volume with high yields we've seen on Ryzen...especially since they'll have to split the runs between Navi and Ryzen 2. i suspect the initial Samsung run will be for themselves along with other South Korean manufacturers... i wonder when it will trickle down to AIB's

Denial:

Samsung can, they fab processors for other companies - it's just that AMD is cozy with Global Foundries as they were once the same company. All the fabs are pretty close to one another now, the numbers don't really mean anything anymore - the pitch size/density/etc from Intel's 10nm/Samsung's 8nm TSMC/GF/s 7nm are all very similar. Intel is probably still in the lead though, 10nm keeps getting delayed but Intel doesn't do volume on a fab until it's confident the yields are really high. The other companies can't really afford to do that.

kruno:

Samsung and Global Foundries (AMD's spin off) had agreement to jointly produce next gen manufacturing technologies (14nm),later on GloFo decided to develop 7nm on their own with out Samsung.Now how they collaborate currently is question,but they probably have some kind a collaboration.So for Amd is same to work with GloFo or Samsung, but what is not same and to some degree (some would say greater and some lesser) we see that with Ryzen is the fact that they (AMD and Samsung) have different priorities.Samsung need low power technology for mobiles and Amd need high power for desktop CPU's .There is rumor that the reason AMD cannot clock RYZEN higher is the fact that 14nm they co-developed with Samsung is optimized for low power and not high clocks. So for Amd to go again with Samsung tech is not very lets say optimal.Yeah they would get great thermals and low consumption (as seen with Ryzen) but with limited clocks and extremely lousy thermals and consumption if they stray to far with design (VEGA).

Certainly makes sense, thanks for the insight. I had a feeling it had something to do with AMD/GloFo once being the same thing.