Showing posts with label Nvidia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nvidia. Show all posts

Friday, July 12, 2013

Samsung 3rd Foundry Ranking, Soon 2nd?

Samsung is growing its foundry sales and looking to make microprocessors for companies that do not have their own fab lines ( Amazon, Sony and Nvidia ). Considering Samsung advances in foundry business in 2012 it is likely that Samsung will surpass GlobalFoundries in 2013 and be 2nd largest semiconductor foundry.

"dedicated semiconductor foundry capacity reached 150 thousand 300mm wafers per month in Q4 2012"

More about Samsung foundry business below.


Ron
Insightful, timely, and accurate semiconductor consulting.
Semiconductor information and news at - http://www.maltiel-consulting.com/
 

 
Samsung Electronics’ semiconductor division is currently the world’s third largest contract maker of chips, mostly due to the fact that it produces vast amounts of different application processors for Apple as well as its own consumer electronics divisions. However, as Apple is looking at different manufacturers and Samsung wants further grows, the company is eyeing other customers.
“Samsung is eyeing Amazon, Sony and Nvidia as customers to offset the lost volume caused by the Apple’s decision to reduce purchases,” a source with knowledge of the matter revealed to the Korea Times.
At present, Samsung is negotiating on a high level with Sony Corp. and Nvidia Corp., presumably over making their chips for smartphones, game consoles, tablets and maybe even personal computers in the future.
Amazon, which has yet to develop its own application processors for its tablets, smartphones and possibly e-book reading devices, has also talked to Samsung, but without any significant outcome, presumably because Amazon’s chip development is at its early stages.
“Samsung is entering a new chapter in logic chips. It is looking for companies with processor design technology, but without manufacturing facilities,” said one industry observer.
 
Samsung has competitive process technologies and vast production capacities to satisfy demands from even such huge clients as Apple. The South Korean company is among a few foundries in the world who has leading-edge manufacturing processes, including 32nm and 28nm, and which is on-track to start making logic chips using 20nm and 14nm in the coming year.
According to market tracker IC Insights, in 2012, Samsung almost doubled its foundry sales and surpassed UMC to become the third-largest IC foundry in the world, according to estimates by IC Insights market tracking firm. It is believed that the company’s dedicated semiconductor foundry capacity reached 150 thousand 300mm wafers per month in Q4 2012. Using an average-revenue-per-wafer figure of $3000, Samsung’s IC foundry capacity currently has the potential to produce annual sales of about $5.4 billion.

Monday, January 14, 2013

TSMC 28 nm Process Reverse Engineering

Chipworks has produced an interesting report with some good TEM crossections of the most advanced products of Nvidia, Altera, Xilinx, Qualcomm and others fabricated on TSMC 28nm process.


"The 28 nm generation was the first time TSMC used high-k metal gate (HKMG) transistors. The HP and HPL technologies feature HKMG transistors, while the LP uses conventional poly gates, with an ONO gate dielectric."



Ron
Insightful, timely, and accurate semiconductor consulting.
Semiconductor information and news at - http://www.maltiel-consulting.com/

Monday, November 26, 2012

Preview of 2013 ISSCC

ISSCC Full program

Some highlights from the upcoming ISSCC 2013



1. Revving ReRAMS, boosting memory bandwidth

2. Samsung big.little, but no Intel, Nvidia CPUs










ISSCC preview: Revving ReRAMS, boosting memory bandwidth

Brian Fuller 11/19/2012 9:05 AM EST

http://eetimes.com/electronics-news/4401652/ISSCC-preview--Revving-ReRAMS--boosting-memory-bandwidth

SAN FRANCISCO--Relentless scaling advances will highlight memory papers at February's International Solid State Circuits Conference here, but it may be break-throughs in off-beat memory architectures that raise a few eyebrows.
ISSCC, scheduled for Feb. 17-21, 2013 at the Marriott, features a slightly smaller percentage of memory papers than usual for the five-day affair (9 percent of the total is down from 10 percent this year and 10 pecent in 2011), but the topics are no less fascinating.

Memory subcommittee chair Kevin Zhang of Intel notes in his memory overview, "We continue to see progressive scaling in embedded SRAM, DRAM, and floating-gate based Flash for very broad applications. However, due to the major scaling challenges in all mainstream memory technologies, we see a continued increase in the use of smart algorithms and error-correction techniques to compensate for increased device variability."
Revving ReRAM


One of the standout papers for the memory sessions comes from Toshiba and Sandisk, who will describe a 32Gb ReRAM (Resistive random-access memory) test chip developed in 24nm process, with a diode as the selection device.

The allure of alternative non-volatile memories has been high cycling capability and lower power per bit in read/write but their densities don't compete with NAND flash. ISSCC organizers noted that the highest density for a single chip published at last year’s ISSCC is 64Mb for ReRAM and 8Gb for PRAM, while NAND can reach up to 128Gb.

The Sandisk-Toshiba test chip is a metal-oxide-based ReRAM is based on 24nm technology node with a diode as the selection device and a 2-layered architecture.....

2. Samsung big.little, but no Intel, Nvidia CPUs
Samsung will describe the first mobile applications processor to use ARM’s big.little concept....

Additional information

Ron Maltiel
www.maltiel-consulting.com

Monday, November 5, 2012

Inside Microsoft Surface and Amazon Kindle Fire HD

"One big winner with the Surface appears to be Samsung. With one key exception —building the main processor chips —Samsung has been pushed out of Apple's iPad and iPhone products. For the Surface, Samsung supplied the display, the memory chips and the battery, amounting to about $137, or about half of the $271 bill-of-materials (BOM) cost."

Ron
http://www.maltiel-consulting.com/





Two More Teardowns Look Inside Microsoft Surface and Amazon Kindle Fire HD
Arik Hesseldahl  November 6


You have to credit the folks over at research firm IHS, because, apparently, they’ve pulling a little bit of overtime. Along with the teardown of Apple’s iPad mini, the results of which they sent to AllThingsD yesterday, they also included their first looks inside Microsoft’s Surface and Amazon’s seven-inch Kindle Fire HD.


Let’s get to the Surface first. (That’s a picture of it taken apart, at right.) With a base price of $499 for a 32 gigabyte Surface without the Touch Cover accessory, IHS estimates that the cost of components used to build it amount to $271 for a starter 32GB model, without the cover. The main components include a Tegra 3 processor chip from Nvidia, and a display and memory chips from Samsung. (Of course, Microsoft is probably buying memory chips from more than one vendor.)

Analyst Andrew Rassweiler, who led the IHS teardown team, said that Microsoft is using the relatively low entry price as a base, in hope of enticing consumers to buy higher-end models with the Touch Cover and higher memory capacity. The Touch Cover, which my colleague Walt Mossberg liked in his review of the Surface, costs $120 when purchased separately, and is bundled with the higher-end models.

Rassweiler estimates the cost of the parts used to build the Touch Cover at about $16, making it appear to be pretty profitable. It contains chips from Atmel and Freescale Semiconductor, he says. “It’s a compelling accessory for users to have, and a great example of a way in which manufacturers get consumers interested with a base price, and hope they’ll impulsively opt for extra features that make more profit,” he told me. Accessories always have higher profit margins than the devices they are intended to be sold with, Rassweiler says, and protective cases for phones and tablets always tend to sell well.

One big winner with the Surface appears to be Samsung. With one key exception — building the main processor chips — Samsung has been pushed out of Apple’s iPad and iPhone products. For the Surface, Samsung supplied the display, the memory chips and the battery, amounting to about $137, or about half of the $271 bill-of-materials (BOM) cost.

Now, on to the Kindle Fire HD. (Seen in its exploded view at right; click to make bigger.) Recall that the last Kindle Fire to get the teardown treatment came in with a cost estimate of $202 (later revised down to about $187) against a retail price of $199, meaning that Amazon was close or near to losing money on the hardware, and was hoping to make it back on the sale of content from its digital store, and even on sales of physical goods from its retail store. One estimate earlier this year suggested that Amazon makes more than $100 off each Kindle Fire. It’s probably pretty close to breakeven, if slightly profitable this time around, Rassweiler told me. Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos has said the devices are sold at cost.

Like the old one, the new Kindle Fire HD sells for a starting price of $199, and carries a combined cost of components of $165, according to IHS estimates. Key suppliers are LG Display, which made the screen; Texas Instruments, which repeated its role as the supplier of the main processing chip, plus power and video chips; and Samsung, which provided the memory.

Monday, October 29, 2012

Microsoft Surface TearDown

"Prominent ICs chips on the Surface motherboard: 
  • Purplish-Blue (R26, G48, B231; #1a30e7): Marvell 88W8797-BMP2 wireless MIMO SoC
  • Greenish-Yellow (R228, G230, B74; #e4e64a): Micron 2RE22 D9QBJ 2 GB DDR3 SDRAM
  • Greyish-Red (R163, G50, B25; #a33219): Nvidia quad-core 1.4GHz Tegra 3 ARM-based microprocessor
  • Bluish-Green (R97, G171, B162; #61aba2): Texas Instruments TPS659110 power management IC
  • Brownish-Orange (R198, G112, B36; #c67024): Samsung KLMBG4GE4A eMMC 32GB NAND Flash
  • Pale Violet with a Trace of Mauve (R181, G92, B227; #b55ce3): Wolfson 8962E ultra low power stereo audio codec
  • Cypress Semiconductor CY8C20466A capacitive touchscreen controller
  • Atmel MXT1386 touchscreen controller
  • M430 G2402
  • 1600P E284A " (from iFixIt's and theregistry.co.uk)
 more at Latest Microsoft Surface TearDown




Ron Maltiel
http://www.maltiel-consulting.com/
  
 
 
Microsoft Surface Teardown


We got our hands on Microsoft's new Surface, and to its credit, it lasted a good twenty minutes before we decided to tear it open.
 
Step 1 — Microsoft Surface Teardown 
Is that the display assembly from a PC laptop? Nope, it's the new Microsoft Surface with Windows RT.
Notable tech specs:
  •  0.6" ClearType HD Display (resolution of 1366x768 pixels)
  • Quad-core NVIDIA Tegra 3 processor
  • 2 GB RAM
  • 32 or 64 GB flash storage
  • Wi-Fi (802.11a/b/g/n) + Bluetooth 4.0
  • 720p HD Front and Rear facing LifeCams
 
 
To give the Surface laptop-like connectivity, nearly every edge includes ports and buttons. They are (from left to right):
 
Magnetic charging, USB 2.0, and Micro-HDMI out on the right side
 Magnetic connection for the Touch Cover or Type Cover on the bottom
 Headphone jack and volume rocker on the left side 

Saturday, October 6, 2012

Semiconductor Foundries:Strong Q2, but Slowdown..

The article below discusses foundries' strong Q2  results, while predicting a slower Q3.

"Pure-play foundry semiconductor manufacturers enjoyed a robust second quarter thanks to enthusiastic consumer purchasing of wireless products like mobile handsets and tablets, but the industry is slowing down in the second half of 2012 as economic tremors roil the supply chain"

However, I wonder about the impact of the slow ramp-up of manufacturing wafers using the 28nm manufacturing process in Q2 and Q3. There is pent up demand for wafers built using the 28nm process which could impact Q4 (see April 2012 comments Qualcomm and Nvidia 28 nm Wafers? Shortage... and March 2012 comments Nvidia: TSMC 20nm Essentially Worthless). The lack of 28nm wafers negatively impacted Qulacomm, Nvidia and other companies.

Another potential upside for the second half of 2012 is the introduction of window 8 and its impact on demand for tablet computers.

Ron
http://www.maltiel-consulting.com/





Semiconductor Foundries Enjoyed Strong Q2, but Slowdown Looms


Global economic uncertainties and a wary buying public will dampen prospects until mid-next year

Len Jelinek October 2, 2012
Pure-play foundry semiconductor manufacturers enjoyed a robust second quarter thanks to enthusiastic consumer purchasing of wireless products like mobile handsets and tablets, but the industry is slowing down in the second half of 2012 as economic tremors roil the supply chain, according to an IHS iSuppli Semiconductor Manufacturing & Supply market tracker report from information and analytics provider IHS.

Revenue for pure-play foundry suppliers—companies whose entire business involves producing semiconductors for other firms—reached $7.8 billion in the second quarter, up 16 percent from $6.7 billion in the first quarter.

The second-quarter expansion will prove to be the strongest this year, as forecasts show a slowdown occurring during the next two quarters. Revenue of $8.3 billion is projected for the third quarter, equivalent to a weaker sequential growth of 8 percent. A seasonal decline of 5 percent in the fourth quarter then will follow, dropping revenue for the period to $7.9 billion.



The strong showing of the second quarter this year is atypical. Even though the third quarter is the largest revenue period for the foundry sector, a new pattern of manufacturing has emerged, with initial product shipments from foundry suppliers for new design wins now moving from the third quarter to the second. This shift is related to end suppliers introducing next-generation wireless products, like cellphones and tablets, earlier in the year in order to capitalize on sales during a longer period—one lasting three quarters, instead of the usual two quarter time frame that traditionally starts at the beginning of the second half.

As a result of the shift, foundry suppliers must start to adjust technology development and factory expansion plans to mirror these changes. Shipments in the third quarter are now also a direct reflection of second-quarter performance.


Impending Q3 concerns on the horizon

The third quarter this year, however, is when manufacturers can begin to anticipate a reduction in orders, IHS iSuppli predicts. While demand for advanced technology will continue to drive overall revenue growth within the industry, the effects of external influences—such as a deteriorating global economy—will start being felt. The financial issues in Europe, for instance, will leave their mark in Asia as well as North America, and shaky consumer confidence throughout the world will result in an uncertain outlook for holiday spending. The end result would be a greater amount of inventory left throughout the industry.

Questions also abound on whether consumers will be willing during the next few months to pay for the latest technology rollouts. Unlike last year when holiday shoppers were enticed to purchase lower-cost electronics resulting from excess inventory, this year will be different, with consumers seeing a complete set of new electronics offerings focused on mobile communications, including next-generation tablets, feature-rich smartphones and Ultrabooks with the soon-to-be-launched Windows 8 operating system.

And while the potential exists for increased sales in the second half, any projected upticks are likely to be insufficient to drive major revenue increases for foundry players. This is because any innovative products introduced at this time will be too late to have any tangible effect on revenue for the remainder of the year.

At the current production pace, foundry manufacturing run rates will be negatively affected through the first quarter next year lasting until the first half of the second quarter, IHS iSuppli believes. The industry will begin to recover after that, with the third quarter next year anticipated to grow by a sequential 10 percent.

Thursday, July 26, 2012

TSMC: Single-Customer (Apple? Qualcomm?) Fabs Make Sense



Would Apple, Qualcomm, or Nvidia step up and pay for some of the development and fab processing equipment costs? Apple could... considering their trouble with Samsung.

However, Apple is conservative and does not push process technology edge for their processors (see my May blog Apple's A5 Die Shrink, Improve Battery Life, Cut Cost )




Ron








TSMC says single-customer fabs make sense

http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4391104/TSMC-says-single-customer-fabs-make-sense
Peter Clarke

7/25/2012 10:50 AM EDT



LONDON – The world's leading foundry chip maker Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. is considering operating single-customer wafer fabs, according to chairman and CEO Morris Chang.



Chang, speaking to analysts on a conference call to discuss the company's second quarter financial results, said that the market is tending to produce fewer higher volume customers and some are so large they need their own dedicated fabs. This is despite the fact that, as a foundry TSMC, has risen on its ability to serve many customers from a single line.



"I think that they are going to be larger customers, and now it makes complete sense to dedicate a whole fab to just one customer and hold that – to hold fabs in fact to just one customer," Chang was reported as saying in a Seeking Alpha transcript of the question and answer session in the conference call.



Chang said TSMC would retain the ability to serve many customers but the presence of large customers that are getting bigger means "it makes sense that we dedicate a whole fab or even more than a whole fab to just one customer."



Qualcomm is one such very large customer. It has had problems in recent months getting as much supply of 28-nm CMOS from TSMC as it would like.



Chang did not mention Qualcomm explicitly but said that Taichung, where TSMC has its Fab 15, will be the source of the majority of TSMC's 28-nm CMOS whereas Tainan, home to Fab 14, will be the source of the majority of 20-nm planar CMOS and 16-nm FinFET CMOS.





Thursday, July 12, 2012

Intel, ASML: Higher Performance/ Lower Cost Edge

Intel's investment in ASML will increase Intel's process technology leads. Intel will have stronger ties to leading-edge lithography processes and to the next generation of 450mm wafer tools.

Some key points in the article are below:

" Intel can now force the game forward and even Apple will now have to consider how wise it is to hang back in older processes. Some amount of their processors will need to step up to the leading edge for cost and performance reasons. "

"every survivor going vertical, however now we are looking at two separate vertical models. There is the device vertical model with LCD screens, NAND Flash, enclosures etc.. that Apple and Samsung are very adept at. In last weeks blog I mentioned how Intel was funding Taiwanese panel makers to guarantee supply for ultrabook manufacturers (likely at the expense of AMD and nVidia). Now we have Intel letting the world know that being a MAN in the semiconductor industry requires owning more than just fabs. Real Men must now invest in the semiconductor R&D tool chain."

Ron




Intel Opens a New Front with ASML

www.semiwiki.com/forum/content/1458-intel-opens-new-front-asml.html?goback=%2Egde_30219_member_132694891

by Ed McKernan
Published on 07-10-2012 02:00 PM

Behind great humor often lies irony. In the midst of a struggle by the European Union to extract $1.3B from Intel in an ages old Anti-Trust case, the latter makes a strategic move to embolden the Dutch firm ASML to accelerate the development of 450mm and EUV and thus save a continental jewel. What now say EU? When disfunction and bankruptcy abound, beware the need of sovereigns to extract not pints but gallons of blood. Intel sees an end game at hand, not today but in just a couple of years and it plays into its plans to win all of mobile: including Apple and Samsung. They parry the EU assault with a massive $4B investment and prepare to watch the poker players ante up or fold.



Intel Always Fights a Multi-front war knowing that it eventually wears down the enemy. Please, please we don’t speak of enemies unless we are in the realm of politics! However, one should be aware that without TSMC there is no Qualcomm, nVidia, AMD, Broadcom, Marvell and the rest of the ARM camp (especially ARM). And what of Apple and Samsung, the two leaders of the mobile Tsunami who will have 80%+ of the Smartphone and Tablet market by the New Year? They will have a choice to make in which the first one who blinks will have the opportunity to be years ahead of the other.



It is simple mathematics. Assume, conservatively that Intel is two years ahead of TSMC. Now presume Intel, conservatively launches 450mm two years ahead of TSMC, then it is like a 4 year lead in process technology. Now input your die sizes and run the cost models. It is daunting having to stare up at the Matterhorn before the climb begins.



We have learned in the past 6 months that Smartphones and Tablets are demanding leading edge process technology (Qualcomm sold out this year on 28nm 4G LTE chips). This was the one doubt that I had as to whether Qualcomm, nvidia and the rest of the ARM camp were safe in the foundries at an n-1 node while Intel played catch up with a true low power processor and baseband functionality. Intel can now force the game forward and even Apple will now have to consider how wise it is to hang back in older processes. Some amount of their processors will need to step up to the leading edge for cost and performance reasons.



The news articles from yesterday stated that ASML was open to additional investments from other foundries (i.e. TSMC and Samsung). I can see Samsung stepping up. TSMC is an extension of Qualcomm, Broadcom, nVidia and others. They will likely have to devise new long-term agreements from their partners that requires them to pony up dollars for the ASML investment. Or alternatively does Qualcomm write a check to ASML?Does Apple?



The maneuvers lately point to every survivor going vertical, however now we are looking at two separate vertical models. There is the device vertical model with LCD screens, NAND Flash, enclosures etc.. that Apple and Samsung are very adept at. In last weeks blog I mentioned how Intel was funding Taiwanese panel makers to guarantee supply for ultrabook manufacturers (likely at the expense of AMD and nVidia). Now we have Intel letting the world know that being a MAN in the semiconductor industry requires owning more than just fabs. Real Men must now invest in the semiconductor R&D tool chain. The Question that Wall St. should ask is the following: What is the total value that will derive 4-5 years down the line from an investment in ASML’s R&D?





FULL DISCLOSURE: I am Long AAPL, INTC, QCOM, ALTR

Friday, June 29, 2012

Samsung, Qualcomm: New Foundry Business Model

See in two articles below the recent comments about the foundry business model. I explained some of the issues in my March 18, 2012 blog post - Moore's Law End? (Next semiconductors gen. cost $10 billion)


Additional articles included in recent blog posts

1. Nvidia #1 at TSMC Fab? Nvida has Priority for 28nm capacity
2. Nvidia: TSMC 20nm Essentially Worthless
3.Intel: "Fabless model collapsing". Is it correct?


Ron






Qualcomm Weighs Writing ‘Big Checks’ to Ensure Chip Access

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-06-27/qualcomm-weighs-writing-big-checks-to-ensure-parts-supply
By Ian King on June 28, 2012


Qualcomm Inc. Chief Executive Officer Paul Jacobs, girding against a shortage of chips, said he wouldn’t rule out owning a manufacturing plant or tapping the company’s cash pile to ensure access to needed parts.


Qualcomm is weighing different business arrangements with its suppliers and would consider “writing big checks,” Jacobs said yesterday at a briefing in San Diego, where the company is based.

“If that’s what it took in the future, I wouldn’t say no to that,” Jacobs said. Qualcomm would prefer to keep relying on other companies to make its chips, rather than building plants, he said.

“It’s not something that’s high on our list of things that we want to do. But I wouldn’t rule it out completely.”

Qualcomm is the biggest in a growing group of chip companies that focus on designing chips and leave the manufacturing to other companies, usually so-called foundries in Asia. As smartphone demand surges, parts suppliers are struggling to keep up. That has prompted electronics makers such as Apple Inc. (AAPL) (AAPL) to use cash payments to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars to secure their quota.

“The gut reaction of investors to Qualcomm building a fab would be negative -- it would be changing their business model,” said Daniel Berenbaum, an analyst at MKM Partners LLC. Using upfront payments to lock down supply from existing partners would be a “judicious use of cash,” he said.

Higher Orders

Qualcomm said earlier this year that earnings growth will be constrained because it can’t get enough chips from Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. The company had received more orders than anticipated for chips made with the most advanced manufacturing processes.

Jacobs said that while supply is improving and Qualcomm may be able to provide enough chips to match demand for phones by the end of the year, some customers will miss planned introductions of phones -- even as fresh orders for those chips roll in.

Jacobs also said yesterday that devices powered by Qualcomm’s Snapdragon processors will be available later this year, when Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) (MSFT) releases its Windows RT software. Snapdragon will run some of the thinnest and lightest computers available, he said.



Qualcomm is one of three chip companies partnering with Microsoft to develop devices using processors based on ARM Holdings Plc (ARM) technology. Microsoft is enabling ARM-based chips, which dominate mobile phones and are the heart of Apple’s iPad, in a computer operating system for the first time.

ARM Tablets

Nvidia Corp. (NVDA) (NVDA) and Texas Instruments Inc. (TXN) (TXN) are also working with Microsoft to deliver ARM-based computers and tablets. Intel Corp. and Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) (AMD), whose processors have traditionally run Windows computers, are working on a similar Microsoft touch-screen operating system.

Windows 8, for Intel and AMD chips, and Windows RT, for ARM-based chips, are Microsoft’s first computer operating systems designed for touch displays.


Qualcomm (QCOM) (QCOM) declined 0.9 percent to $54.41 at 9:36 a.m. in New York. Through yesterday, the shares were little changed this year.

Google Inc. yesterday said it will use a Tegra processor from Nvidia for its Nexus tablet computer based on an updated version of the Android software. That followed Microsoft’s choice of Tegra for its Surface tablet.

Qualcomm’s Jacobs said those decisions came before Qualcomm released an update to Snapdragon. That chip, with two processing cores, outperforms Tegra, which has four, he said.

Dual Core

“It was a timing thing,” he said. “Our dual core is better than their quad core.”



“Nvidia will let its design wins speak for themselves,” said Hector Marinez, a spokesman for the Santa Clara, California-based company.


Qualcomm is restructuring to form a parent company, which will include corporate operations and most of its patent portfolio, as well as a wholly owned subsidiary to operate research and development and run its products, services and semiconductor businesses, the company said in a statement today.

“Our internal reorganization will provide even greater protection for our industry-leading intellectual property portfolio as our products and services businesses seek to accelerate innovation and deliver our products to market quickly,” Jacobs said in the statement.




Samsung Semiconductor Calls for New Foundry Business Model.


Samsung Predicts Closer Collaboration Between Chip Designers and Foundries

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/display/20120626234631_Samsung_Semiconductor_Calls_for_New_Foundry_Business_Model.html

[06/26/2012 11:46 PM]

by Anton Shilov

As chips become more complex while process technologies thinner and trickier, it becomes harder for fabless chip companies and contract makers of semiconductors to interact and consequently ramp up production of new chips quickly. With the emergence of 450mm wafer production and FinFET transistors, the collaboration between foundries and clients should become different, believes Samsung Semiconductor.
"There is no doubt we are at a crossroads at the most advanced process technology nodes. In order to take positive steps forward, significant monetary and collaborative investments and resources are required from both the manufacturing and design sides of the equation," said Ana Hunter, vice president of Samsung’s North American foundry services.
Intel recently predicted that due to dramatically increasing complexities of semiconductors and process technologies the foundry model would collapse in the coming years and only integrated device manufacturers (IDMs) will be able to make leading-edge chips using leading-edge manufacturing technologies. Nonetheless, given the fact that contract makers of chips are increasing their purchases of manufacturing equipment, it appears that they do not believe in the collapse of the industry. In fact, since fewer companies going forward will be able to afford own fabs, it is clear that the amount of clients for foundries will increase.
Samsung Semiconductor thinks that a new approach to doing business is in order to stay competitive with pure IDMs. The foundry industry has taken huge strides on the ecosystem side to ensure that physical IP, libraries and design flows are all in place as a new process node comes online. That tight working relationship needs to be pushed beyond the partner ecosystem to include the customer’s design teams.



For faster product rollout and ramp to high-volume manufacturing at the most advanced process nodes, integrated relationships between the foundry and its strategic customers where quasi-IDM operating procedures are established is key to the health and growth of the foundry industry, believes Ana Hunter, who works with clients (such as Apple) of Samsung Semiconductor's U.S.-based unit on daily basis. Fabless companies and foundries need to collaborate on the factors that allow products to be manufacturable, crossing traditional customer and vendor barriers. In fact, this is already happening as leading fabless companies learn from experience that closer integration with foundry design flows and kits, starting very early in the development cycle, enables faster feedback and improvement to both the product design and the manufacturing process.
"The industry is at an inflection point and the model is changing. A more simulated IDM environment will allow fabless semiconductor companies to be more competitive at the advanced process nodes. As an IDM foundry, Samsung is keenly aware of the advantages that can be gained by this approach. We strive to deliver these benefits to our foundry customers," concluded Ms. Hunter.

Thursday, June 21, 2012

Status of China's Fabless Model

The large demand for smartphone chips in China will cause local Chinese design houses to grow faster in the next few years.


Ron












source: IC Insights






Is China's fabless model sustainable?

http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4375636/Is-China-fabless-model-sustainable?pageNumber=1
Junko Yoshida

6/19/2012 9:11 AM EDT



How many U.S. design engineers can name, say, the top 10 Chinese chip vendors destined to become their fierce competitors in three years from now? BEIJING -- Let’s face it. China’s IC industry still lacks its own superstars – equivalent to Intel, Qualcomm or Broadcom in the West – in terms of the scale, reach and quality these brands possess on the global market.

To belabor the point, how many U.S. design engineers can name, say, the top 10 Chinese chip vendors destined to become their fierce competitors in three years from now? The question is tough because Chinese fabless companies, while growing fast, are still small. Many also remain faceless.

In contrast, a Chinese executive based in Beijing, speaking with ee Times, rattled off Spreadtrum, RDA Microelectronics, GalaxyCore and GigaDevice as his “top four” picks among local fabless companies likely to become key players in the smartphone IC ecosystem. The executive, heading up a U.S.-based chip company’s R&D team, believes that will happen not within the decade, but in just a few years.


Is he right?
EE Times has talked to several movers and shakers in China’s semiconductor industry in recent weeks. While our investigation is still in progress, we’ll be reporting our ongoing findings in a two-part series. First, we examine the state of the Chinese fabless industry -- covering how they’ve gotten to where they are today. In part two, we discuss what Chinese semiconductor companies must do in order to cross the chasm – from local heroes in China to power players on the global stage.



On one hand, some multinationals like Synopsys (EDA vendor), VeriSilicon (“Design-Lite” service company) and ARM (IP supplier) are well positioned to leverage local engineering resources to respond to Chinese fabless companies’ always pressing (and almost impatient) need to get ahead more quickly.

On the other, Chinese startups, still in early days, lack a portfolio of their own IPs. Consequently, “they tend to compete on price with similar products in the same application fields,” observed Jian-Yue Pan, corporate vice president, Asia Pacific region of Synopsys.


Meanwhile, some China fabless are coming up with fresh ideas (i.e.Apexone), operating with an incredible work ethic and directing a fanatical focus on customer service (i.e. Awinic). Companies like RDA, Spreadtrum and Rockchip are growing like gangbusters.


It’s important to note that there is nothing monolithic about China or China’s fabless companies. Over the last two decades, a number of Chinese chip companies – some well known in the West – had distinct trajectories, with a full array of ups and downs. Some disappeared and others thrived, their fates depending on when each company was born, how it was managed, and whether the ecosystem in China was sufficient to spur growth.

Synopsys’ Pan turns out to be as good a student and observer of the Chinese semiconductor industry as any, since he has lived through the rise of the industry over the last 17 years while working at Synopsys in China.

Pan isn’t a returnee – like many other China fabless executives today who were born in China and came to the United States for graduate degrees, before going home again to help nurture the Chinese industry.

Pan is home-grown. He has worked his entire professional life in China, rather than in Silicon Valley, after graduation from the nation’s elite Tsinghua University in early the 1990’s.


Chinese fabless companies have come a long way


In the interview, Pan said, “A lot of things have happened. Over the last 17 years, we saw the rise of the Korean chip industry, and the decline of Japanese companies.” To illustrate the rise of the Chinese semiconductor industry, Pan divided the last 17 years in three periods: “incubation” (1995 – 2001); “breakthrough” (2001 – 2007); and “acceleration” (2007 – 2012).
Incubation

During the incubation period, virtually all the companies taking part in the Chinese semiconductor industry were state-owned. They were largely pushed, prompted and nurtured by Chinese government’s industrial policy and technology transfers from other countries including the United States, Europe and Japan.
During this period, the total revenue of the Chinese IC design houses was “less than $100 million,” according to Pan.


Nonetheless, several important milestones helped pave the way for the birth of the Chinese semiconductor industry. They include: the completion of technology transfer between Lucent and Huajing in 1997, allowing Huajing—located in Wuxi in Jiangsu Province—to start producing 6-inch CMOS wafers with 0.9 micron design rules. By 1999, SDRAM production started on the 8-inch wafer fab at HHNEC (Hua Hong NEC Electronics Co.) using a 0.35 micron process technology. These were days when few indigenous fabless companies existed in China. These fabs had to depend on the international semiconductor community for consumption, as well as for technical support.


But the most significant milestone of all during this period, according to Pan, was the emergence of the Chinese central government’s “Policy No. 18.” Put in place in July, 2000, the directive was a top-down order to “encourage the development of the IC industry in China,” explained Pan. Under Policy 18, the government offered favorable tax treatment to domestically produced IC chips, while providing heavy government investment in infrastructure, education and basic research.

As a result, seven state-owned incubation centers for IC design sprang up, with Synopsys coming out as one of the big beneficiaries. It turns out that the seven state-owned IC design centers standardized their design flow environment on Synopsys tools, making Synopsys the government’s favored tool designer.


Breakthrough

The following six years (2001 – 2007) is when the Chinese semiconductor industry saw a number of breakthroughs, fueled by the growth of the Chinese economy and adherence to Policy 18. Pan observed that in 2000, there were fewer than 100 fabless companies in China. But 2003, more than 450 fabless had vendors popped up. Also emerging was China’s strategic mimicry of the Silicon Valley model, using stock-based compensation to incentivize managers and engineers in high-tech companies.


In 2003, Hangzhou Silan Microelectronics Co., Ltd, popularly known as Silan Corporation, became the first IC vendor on the Shanghai Stock Exchange. Silan successfully made an IPO, initiated with 26 million shares of series A-stock
By 2006, both Vimicro International Corporation and Actions Semiconductor had gone through a rigorous IPO process and got listed in Nasdaq. In 2007, Spreadtrum went public and joined the Nasdaq club.


Acceleration

Pan now sees the Chinese semiconductor industry in its third phase, where everything is accelerating. There are five more Chinese companies on a wait-list to go public on Nasdaq.As of 2011, China had close to 500 fabless chip companies, with total revenue last year at “give or take, close to $10 billion,” Pan said.

Where do they go from here?
Over the last three years, “some startups – including GigaDevice, GalaxyCore, RDA and Rockchip – have grown very fast,” according to Datong Chen, co-founder and managing director of West Summit Capital in Beijing. There is no dispute about that
The question, however, is how sustainable it is for these companies to continue to grow so rapidly. How many more years can Chinese companies continuously keep gross margin low and perpetually work harder in order to bring down the cost of their products in hopes of beating out foreign competition?
In the top 20 fabless IC companies’ ranking for 2011 (put together by IC Insights), only two from China, HiSilicon and Spreadtrum, showed up.
Top 20 fabless IC companies in 201




source: IC Insights

Datong has experienced firsthand the rise of the Chinese chip industry, as he was the co-founder and CTO of Spreadtrum Communications. Prior to Spreadtrum, Datong was the co-founder and senior vice present for Omnivision, a leading developer of CMOS imaging sensor.

For Chinese fabless companies to sustain current growth, Datong said, “They need a bigger platform.” By “platform,” he means, “Money, a larger market size, and a bigger customer base.” Then, he added, “Of course, it’s better if they do IPOs – because that will allow them to get fair market value, it would make it much easier for them to do acquisitions, and they will get more trust from the market.”
The potential for Chinese fabless companies to reap greater rewards are already here, according to Allen Wu, president of ARM China. ARM-based SoCs, designed by Chinese fabless companies and shipped globally, jumped from 30 million units in 2007 to 615 million units in 2011.
And yet, Wayne Dai, president and CEO of VeriSilion, calls the Chinese semiconductor industry a “no-man’s-land of fabless companies.” He explained that most of the 400+ China fabless companies are living through a 'no man’s land,' which he describes "an inflection point for a start up’s life cycle.

In his view, "[Chinese fabless companies] are too big to be small, but too small to be big." In other words, "If they can’t continue to grow, evolving into firms that dramatically change their marketplace or define a new category, they have to either stay small or sell to a larger company. Otherwise, they are going out of business within the next two years."
In essence, most Chinese fabless companies remain too stubbornly small to exploit the market’s size. There lies the conundrum.
In part two of this article, we’ll discuss prescriptions—what steps Chinese fabless companies must take, and conversely, what actions multinationals should take to survive among all those Chinese go-getters.

Wednesday, May 9, 2012

Nvidia #1 at TSMC Fab? Nvida has Priority for 28nm capacity

"TSMC has given priority to Nvidia for 28nm capacity, according to industry sources" (see below).

Nvidia has been unsatisfied with TSMC's 28nm process
Photo: Monica Chen, Digitimes file photo


Complaining publicly did not hurt - see March 26, 2012 blog Nvidia: TSMC 20nm Essentially Worthless 


Ron





TSMC gives priority to Nvidia for 28nm capacity

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20120509PD211.html?mod=2
Monica Chen, Taipei; Joseph Tsai, DIGITIMES [Wednesday 9 May 2012]

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) has given priority to Nvidia for 28nm capacity, according to industry sources.
Since Nvidia has been unsatisfied with TSMC's 28nm process, while the company has also not refuted rumors that the company may cooperate with Samsung Electronics or Globalfoundries, TSMC, to sooth Nvidia, has put the GPU maker on its supply priority, allowing Nvidia to be able to release its 28nm GPUs on schedule in May and June.
The same situation has also happened previously with Qualcomm, which had said it would consider outsourcing orders to other wafer foundries, and successfully gained TSMC's promise for supply priority.
With both Qualcomm and Nvidia achieving supply priority from TSMC, players that are also waiting for TSMC's 28nm capacity, are expected to be affected.



Thursday, May 3, 2012

TSMC To Makes Processer Chip For Apple? Not so Quickly

DigiTime below states “Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company's (TSMC) plans to ramp up 20nm production ahead of schedule…to entice Apple”. TSCM already is having trouble processing enough 28nm wafers for their current customers, why would Apple want to give TSCM orders for the next generation 20nm process?

In addition, if we look at how Apple’s is handling the current A5 processor manufacturing. They currently use the 45nm process (New iPad-Teardown: Why Apple's A5X uses 45 nm). It indicates that Apple intentionally does not want to push the envelope of a new process technology at the same time that they are bringing up a new processor circuit. They prefers to use a more mature process while the pushing the limits on circuit design.

It is more likely that TSMC is more aggressive in developing the fab and the 20nm process just to enhance their market position relative to other foundry vendors for their current customers. See Nvidia: TSMC 20nm Essentially Worthless.
Another prespective is at TSMC has a “good chance” of winning Apple’s chip biz in 2014
Ron Maltiel


TSMC eyeing advanced process chip orders from Apple
Cage Chao, Taipei; Jessie Shen, DIGITIMES [Wednesday 2 May 2012]

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company's (TSMC) plans to ramp up 20nm production ahead of schedule have prompted industry sources to speculate that the foundry will be aggressively striving for CPU orders for future Apple devices.

The present 28nm shortage at TSMC makes it more unlikely that the foundry could attract orders from Apple, the sources claimed. TSMC currently is unable to provide sufficient capacity to its existing 28nm customers, the sources said.

With orders placed by Qualcomm, Nvidia, Broadcom, TI and AMD, TSMC meets less than 70% of 28nm chip demand at present, the sources pointed out. While having tight supply of 28nm capacity, TSMC now hopes an early investment in 20nm technology will help the foundry engage in collaboration with potential clients such as Apple in advance and ensure enough capacity to meet demand, the sources indicated.

The sources added TSMC stands a good chance of landing CPU orders from Apple in 2014.

With regards to the speculation, Digitimes Research analyst Nobunaga Chai commented that the fundamental issue will still be whether Apple would use a 28nm or 20nm process to build its next-generation processor, and choose TSMC as its contract manufacturer. If TSMC succeeds in grabbing CPU orders from Apple, the foundry's supply capability should not be a problem at all, Chai said.

Apple still uses 45nm to make its newest A5X, and has Samsung Electronics build the chips.

TSMC has revealed plans to invest about US$700 million in building a 20nm R&D line in 2012 – instead of its originally-planned 2013. Acknowledging that demand for 28nm manufacturing capacity from its mobile product IC customers has been higher than expected since the process ramp-up, the foundry finds it necessary to put its 20nm process into production ahead of schedule. Demand for 20nm will also first come from the mobile device sector, and order volumes are likely to be huge during the initial ramp-up stage – similar to the situation 28nm has, TSMC said at its recent investors meeting.

TSMC also indicated that the firm has accelerated its pace of 28nm capacity expansion. The foundry expects to have its supply of 28nm chips close to catching up with demand in the fourth quarter of 2012, and satisfy demand completely by the first quarter of 2013.


Thursday, April 26, 2012

Intel: "Fabless model collapsing". Is it correct?


Intel’s top process technology exec says the foundry model is collapsing.  A good manufacturing process is only one of the factors that leads to success in product and circuit strategies. Intel had been leading in manufacturing with the HKMG process since the 45nm process.

However, they were not able to use their manufacturing clout to lead in new areas such as the mobile phone microprocessor market.

TSMC, GlobalFoundries, and UMC will have to work closer with the fabless companies sharing resources and cost to address these challenges.


Ron Maltiel

Friday, April 20, 2012

Qualcomm and Nvidia 28 nm Wafers? Shortage...

Last quarter results from Qualcomm show again the impact of Moore's law breaking down. As detailed below, Qualcomm growth this quarter was limited by the supply of 28 nm wafers. Nvidia has been complaining about similar type of issues in the last few months.

It all is really tied to the bigger issues of increasing cost of developing and producing new process technologies. This fact is reducing the number of leading edge fabs.

Fabless companies to ensure their supply will need to share more of the development costs in order to gain higher priorities.



More information on foundries, fabs, and wafer supply is available at Forecasting Wafer Demand: Technology Migration, Bottlenecks (Link includes a chart of wafer demand by IC product type (i.e. DRAM, NAND, NOR, MPU, PLD, etc))

Ron Maltiel

Friday, April 6, 2012

TSMC 28nm Capacity Large Shortage

Nvidia has been concerned about their relationship with TSMC for awhile.

It seems that their yield for the 28 mm process is too low. There is a reasonable limit of how many additional wafers they should manufacture to cover shortfalls of good dies coming out of the fab.

Ron Maltiel



TSMC 28nm capacity in large shortage
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20120405PD218.html?mod=2
Monica Chen, Taipei; Adam Hwang, DIGITIMES [Friday 6 April 2012]

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company's (TSMC) 28nm foundry capacity has been drastically short of demand from Qualcomm, AMD and Nvidia mainly, but the shortage is expected to relax at the end of the third quarter of 2012, according to industry sources. Qualcomm, in view of the shortage, has shifted some orders to United Microelectronics, but has been unable to meet its clients' demand for processors for smartphones and tablet PCs, the sources indicated. AMD launched the 28nm-based Radeon HD 7970 in the first quarter of 2012, but has actually shipped a relatively small volume of the GPU due to TSMC's short 28nm capacity, the sources noted. Nvidia launched only one 28nm-based GPU, GeForce GTX 680, in late March and has had to delay the launch of Kepler series GPU models due to the shortage, the sources said.

While yield rates of its 28nm process are slowly improving, TSMC is conservative about expanding 28nm foundry capacity in order to maintain gross margins, partly accounting for the capacity shortage, the sources said. In related news, TSMC will start construction of the 5th-phase expansion of Fab 14, its 12-inch fab located at the Southern Taiwan Science Park, on April 9. TSMC's total foundry capacity in 2012 is expected to increase by 10% from 2011

Monday, March 26, 2012

Nvidia: TSMC 20nm Essentially Worthless

TSMC is having problems with 20nm process, while Intel and Samsung don't appear to have these problems.  Is running their own fabs giving Intel and Samsung key yield and cost benefits?


Ron Maltiel



Nvidia deeply unhappy with TSMC, claims 20nm essentially worthless

http://www.extremetech.com/computing/123529-nvidia-deeply-unhappy-with-tsmc-claims-22nm-essentially-worthless
By Joel Hruska on March 23, 2012
 
One of the unspoken rules of customer-foundry relations is that you virtually never see the former speak poorly of the latter. Only when things have seriously hit the fan do partners like AMD or Nvidia admit to manufacturing problems, and typically only after postponed launches and poor availability have made protestations that everything is fine unsustainable.


That’s why we were surprised — and our source testified to being stunned — that Nvidia gave the following presentation at the International Trade Partner Conference (ITPC) forum last November. Many of the company’s complaints regarding its current partnership with TSMC are exactly what you’d expect given the manufacturing problems the entire industry is facing. What’s surprising are Nvidia’s remarks concerning TSMC’s current cost curves and manufacturing ramps. This is normally the sort of information discussed quietly between a foundry and its customers or by the press with help from various anonymous sources. Discussing the problems publicly is a sign of just how frustrated the company has become.



Watch the underlines for emphasis

TSMC builds hardware for a huge number of companies, but those customers have very different needs and use a wide range of process technologies. Historically, Nvidia (and ATI/AMD) have been regular early adopters. The nature of graphics is that it can easily soak up new processes and the higher transistor counts they enable.



Kepler broke the exponential rise in transistors per GPU

The flip side of that situation is that companies like AMD and Nvidia have also been responsible for assuming the risks associated with “risk production” and footing a hefty bill for the privilege. As those risks mount and costs skyrocket, Nvidia is increasingly unhappy with being asked to shoulder the burden. Nvidia’s slides talk about the need for “real” understanding, compromises on “rough justice,” and a closer relationship that looks more like that of an IDM (Integrated Device Manufacturer). For those of you who don’t know the term, Intel is an IDM — it handles both manufacturing and design. AMD used to be.

When AMD spun GlobalFoundries off, one of the things GF promised to provide that would distinguish it from TSMC was high levels of IDM-style integration. At TSMC, the customization work that is available is highly monetized; specialized work is expensive and time-consuming. In reality, GF’s ability to provide the amount of IDM-like flexibility that it wanted to offer has been sharply constrained by the problems associated with Llano and Bulldozer; our sources tell us that the foundry devoted enormous resources to bringing AMD’s 32nm APU back on track.

According to Nvidia, the current model is unsustainable. Here’s the company’s projected analysis for transistor costs at current and new nodes.



As the process nodes shrink, it takes longer and longer for the cost-per-transistor to fall below the previous generation. At 20nm, the gains all-but vanish. Want to know why Nvidia rearchitected Fermi with a new emphasis on efficiency and performance/watt? You’re looking at the reason. If per-transistor costs remain constant, the only way to improve your cost structure is to make better use of the transistors you’ve got.

As for wafer costs, they’ve become part of the problem.


What this slide states — we can’t even call it a suggestion — is that smaller processes no longer improve yields by leading to a greater number of chips per wafer. Instead, the complexities and difficulties of manufacturing at the new process create a cost structure that provides precious little incentive to manufacture at the new process.

If openly criticizing a foundry partner is unusual, showing data that suggests that your foundry partner can’t provide a cost-effective strategy for building hardware at next-generation process nodes is… a few steps past that point. The recent launch of the GTX 680, and that card’s trifecta of price/performance/power-efficiency actually strengthens the impact of this data. NV would’ve had a good idea how the GK104 was shaping up when it spoke at ITPC in November; this isn’t a case where a company is angry about the performance of a particular part and looking for someone to blame.

Again, follow the underlines.

The GK104 is great, but it doesn’t change the nature or severity of the underlying problems. As for whether Nvidia’s unhappiness with TSMC heralds a potential alliance with GlobalFoundries, we’re dubious. Not only has GF only recently ironed out its own 28nm issues, the nature of the foundry business doesn’t allow for quick shifts. Indeed, part of the reason that manufacturers like TSMC have historically exercised such control over their partners’ PR releases is because once you’ve committed to a foundry, you’re locked in for a substantial period of time. The fact that there’s now two foundries available with cutting-edge technology doesn’t change that, and the Common Platform Alliance favored by IBM, Samsung, and GloFo only mitigates some of the problems with moving a design from foundry to foundry, it doesn’t remove them.

The real question, at least for TSMC’s other customers, is whether the graphs and charts Nvidia has shown are specific to the company’s own products or reflect universal trends. There’s good reason to suspect the latter; Nvidia may have had more trouble than some of TSMC’s other customers, but our analysis of semiconductor industry roadmaps revealed a great deal of uncertainty about the road forward. Nvidia opted to aggressively optimize GK104 precisely because the old strategy of bolting on more cores and ratcheting up transistor counts isn’t sustainable.

Further evidence for the accuracy of NV’s presentation comes, ironically, from the company’s primary GPU competitor. At AMD’s Financial Analyst Day, CEO Rory Read made a point of saying that the company no longer intends to aggressively transition to new process nodes given the diminishing marginal returns from doing so.

Change the color scheme, and Nvidia’s graphs could’ve dropped right into AMD’s presentations in early February.

Nvidia’s willingness to stand up and talk about these problems is an “Emperor’s new clothes” sort of moment. The long-term repercussions, if any, are still unclear.