Does Samsung now also produce its own masks for EUV? TSMC apparently has been doing so for over two years, and that has been cited as one of the reasons they stayed almost a full generation ahead of Samsung, at least when it comes to the respective nodes' efficiency and density.
As of now, ASML is the only company that has/claims to have usable EUV pellicles (tech is transferred to Mitsui, a major pellicle maker); however, that's just getting started. EUV up to now has used unprotected masks (reticles), i.e. without pellicles. See this for some information: https://semiengineering.com/euv-pellicles-finally-... I am asking because TSMC was, apparently, quite successful at making their own EUV masks, which are also discussed to be superior to whatever Samsung is buying from a third party. And that gives TSMC a significant leg up in the quality and performance of their nodes.
Funny? You're not even beating a dead horse anymore; A year ago it was already pulp, now you're just wacking the grass where it was.
Intel walked into TSMC and bought most of their 3nm capacity. That's what Intel will have in 2022. They took it to the chin and are now paying their way into being competitive with AMD again.
Yep, my mistake. By now I should be used to "tech websites" citing rumours as facts until the last paragraph where they say "All of this was just claimed to be true by unnamed sources".
They donot all measure the same way.. intel 10nm is closer to 7nm TSMC. I think samsung is a bit behind TSMC. But yes.. Intel like a lot of other technology, got overtaken by MBAs with their internal politics.
Can someone confirm those numbers? Looks like PR exaggerating stuff tbh, I mean almost 50% less area or 40% less power from 10LPP to 7LPP is a big jump that IIRC didn't translate to final products. At least not with the 9825
Those number were published in 2019. Now in 2021 on Samsung's site the numbers were changed to +10% performance, -20% energy, -25% area Even Andrei pointed this out on Twitter.
So, now Samsung is slipping on process technology. Was this due to being too aggressive in shrinking things? Or maybe any process they ship will sell out, so they don't have to try? Or, was it that they wanted a special version for their division so they could be ahead of the game on purpose? Or maybe it's really really expensive to produce on so no one is buying it?
It feels like SS is running down the same path as INTC. You get someone in charge who cannot keep their mouth shut, who feels it's important to announce things and make claims three years in advance, and slowly the disasters pile up. Marketing claims two years ago start driving the process refinement because "we can't back down" and instead of changing direction to a more helpful track, the hole keeps being dug deeper.
cf how little TSMC say, and (in public) only what they are very sure of. You'll notice how Apple behaves the same way (and has regretted it most of the times *cough* AirPower *cough* that, for god knows what reason, they felt compelled to behave otherwise).
This is one reason I find it hard to take Intel's "comeback" seriously. They CONTINUE to behave just like before, shooting off their mouths, making grand promise about what they will be doing five years from now (followed by the inevitable "scratch that, new date is" cf SPR right now). Just STFU!!! Create an INTERNAL plan, change it as soon as, and as frequently as, necessary, and stop telling the entire damn world whatever grand ideas you cooked up after a late night bong session.
I really hope Samsung manages to get their GAAP working proper and also their 3D stacking. Similar appliers to Intel 7nm SF and even more 5nm Nanoribbon...
It would be bad for customers if Apple, Qualcomm, Medietek, AMD and Nvidia all have to put their top notch designs on TSMC!
Now that Pat is back, the R&D pipeline is getting fixed quickly.
There's D1X (and Mod2, and Mod3) which is a massive facility where the development is done. Even with this massive powerhouse of a facility, Intel is still trying to do development on seven radically different production processes while at the same time acting as the only volume supplier of current gen parts. It's simply to much mud in the water to get things done like in the olden days.
Oh, that is great because in revenue terms Intel is going backwards.
Gelsinger must be saving up his impact on revenues for 2022 because IC Insights (using preliminary numbers) has Intel down 1 percent in its revenue position in 2021 compared to 2020. And, that is in a year in which the top 25 semiconductor companies experienced a combined revenue growth of 26%. Intel and Sony were the only semiconductor companies in the top 25 to experience revenue declines.
Actually, I am glad Intel is now being managed by someone who can see what dire straights Intel is in. Still, I'm not sure that the talent pool at Intel will be deep enough to pull it out of the death spiral that terrible management has put it in. Intel, with very serious competition coming from AMD and Apple, has now had to partially abandon its market segmentation shenanigans and actually offer good chips at relatively modest prices - that is the simplest thing that Intel has most fervently sought to avoid. The reduced margins that this entails probably won't kill Intel but the likelihood of getting a better CPU, GPU or APU from AMD, for an equivalent outlay, might.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
32 Comments
Back to Article
eastcoast_pete - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
Does Samsung now also produce its own masks for EUV? TSMC apparently has been doing so for over two years, and that has been cited as one of the reasons they stayed almost a full generation ahead of Samsung, at least when it comes to the respective nodes' efficiency and density.name99 - Saturday, July 10, 2021 - link
I believe you mean pellicles, not masks.dotjaz - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
No. They don't, no EUV pellicles are in use on any mass produced nodes.eastcoast_pete - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
As of now, ASML is the only company that has/claims to have usable EUV pellicles (tech is transferred to Mitsui, a major pellicle maker); however, that's just getting started. EUV up to now has used unprotected masks (reticles), i.e. without pellicles. See this for some information:https://semiengineering.com/euv-pellicles-finally-...
I am asking because TSMC was, apparently, quite successful at making their own EUV masks, which are also discussed to be superior to whatever Samsung is buying from a third party. And that gives TSMC a significant leg up in the quality and performance of their nodes.
eastcoast_pete - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
To add: I wonder how not having suitable EUV masks contributes to the delays in GAA designs going live?Machinus - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
2022 Samsung: 3nm2022 Intel: 13nm
shabby - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
Intel does have 10nm now with ice lake sp, just nothing for the desktop.Machinus - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
So? My post isn't funny because technically there is some 10nm floating around somewhere?shabby - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
Yes...grant3 - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
Was it meant to be funny? I thought you simply were unaware that Intel has been shipping 10nm parts to consumers for a while now.Machinus - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
No, not really...it's so bad that they fired their CEOmovax2 - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
Tiger Lake 10 nm runs hotter than TSMC 7 nm . Neither it's faster. So joke still appliesWereweeb - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
Funny? You're not even beating a dead horse anymore; A year ago it was already pulp, now you're just wacking the grass where it was.Intel walked into TSMC and bought most of their 3nm capacity. That's what Intel will have in 2022. They took it to the chin and are now paying their way into being competitive with AMD again.
melgross - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
No, they didn’t.Wereweeb - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
Yep, my mistake. By now I should be used to "tech websites" citing rumours as facts until the last paragraph where they say "All of this was just claimed to be true by unnamed sources".ballsystemlord - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
[Citation needed.]Machinus - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
Please go to a store and buy some 10nm. I'll wait.eek2121 - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
Intel has been shipping 10nm parts in volume for several months now.mr_fistur - Saturday, July 10, 2021 - link
HAHAHA NICE ONE YOU TOTALLY GOT INTEL WITH THAT JOKESpunjji - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
It's not funny because you don't need to exaggerate that much for comedy value when the reality is already quite painful.movax2 - Monday, July 12, 2021 - link
the thing about Intel 10nm is that it runs hotter than TSMC 7nm. So, kinda not so real neither performant 10nm.FreckledTrout - Friday, July 16, 2021 - link
I like how you state that so matter of fact. There is nothing showing Intel's 10nm "runs hotter".sharath.naik - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
They donot all measure the same way.. intel 10nm is closer to 7nm TSMC. I think samsung is a bit behind TSMC. But yes.. Intel like a lot of other technology, got overtaken by MBAs with their internal politics.dudedud - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
Can someone confirm those numbers?Looks like PR exaggerating stuff tbh, I mean almost 50% less area or 40% less power from 10LPP to 7LPP is a big jump that IIRC didn't translate to final products. At least not with the 9825
high3r - Saturday, July 10, 2021 - link
Those number were published in 2019. Now in 2021 on Samsung's site the numbers were changed to +10% performance, -20% energy, -25% areaEven Andrei pointed this out on Twitter.
https://www.samsung.com/semiconductor/sustainabili...
Matthias B V - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
It usually never does: Those numbers are peak.In most designs you will see less.Especially density scales bad on cache heavy designs as analog and cache scales really bad...
ballsystemlord - Friday, July 9, 2021 - link
So, now Samsung is slipping on process technology.Was this due to being too aggressive in shrinking things?
Or maybe any process they ship will sell out, so they don't have to try?
Or, was it that they wanted a special version for their division so they could be ahead of the game on purpose?
Or maybe it's really really expensive to produce on so no one is buying it?
name99 - Saturday, July 10, 2021 - link
It feels like SS is running down the same path as INTC.You get someone in charge who cannot keep their mouth shut, who feels it's important to announce things and make claims three years in advance, and slowly the disasters pile up. Marketing claims two years ago start driving the process refinement because "we can't back down" and instead of changing direction to a more helpful track, the hole keeps being dug deeper.
cf how little TSMC say, and (in public) only what they are very sure of.
You'll notice how Apple behaves the same way (and has regretted it most of the times *cough* AirPower *cough* that, for god knows what reason, they felt compelled to behave otherwise).
This is one reason I find it hard to take Intel's "comeback" seriously. They CONTINUE to behave just like before, shooting off their mouths, making grand promise about what they will be doing five years from now (followed by the inevitable "scratch that, new date is" cf SPR right now).
Just STFU!!! Create an INTERNAL plan, change it as soon as, and as frequently as, necessary, and stop telling the entire damn world whatever grand ideas you cooked up after a late night bong session.
Matthias B V - Sunday, July 11, 2021 - link
I really hope Samsung manages to get their GAAP working proper and also their 3D stacking. Similar appliers to Intel 7nm SF and even more 5nm Nanoribbon...It would be bad for customers if Apple, Qualcomm, Medietek, AMD and Nvidia all have to put their top notch designs on TSMC!
FreckledTrout - Tuesday, July 13, 2021 - link
I agree. I also hope Intel gets there act together as well. The last thing we need is a long term fab monopoly/duopoly.JKflipflop98 - Monday, July 19, 2021 - link
Now that Pat is back, the R&D pipeline is getting fixed quickly.There's D1X (and Mod2, and Mod3) which is a massive facility where the development is done. Even with this massive powerhouse of a facility, Intel is still trying to do development on seven radically different production processes while at the same time acting as the only volume supplier of current gen parts. It's simply to much mud in the water to get things done like in the olden days.
Pat is taking care of that problem.
ChrisGX - Sunday, January 2, 2022 - link
Oh, that is great because in revenue terms Intel is going backwards.Gelsinger must be saving up his impact on revenues for 2022 because IC Insights (using preliminary numbers) has Intel down 1 percent in its revenue position in 2021 compared to 2020. And, that is in a year in which the top 25 semiconductor companies experienced a combined revenue growth of 26%. Intel and Sony were the only semiconductor companies in the top 25 to experience revenue declines.
Actually, I am glad Intel is now being managed by someone who can see what dire straights Intel is in. Still, I'm not sure that the talent pool at Intel will be deep enough to pull it out of the death spiral that terrible management has put it in. Intel, with very serious competition coming from AMD and Apple, has now had to partially abandon its market segmentation shenanigans and actually offer good chips at relatively modest prices - that is the simplest thing that Intel has most fervently sought to avoid. The reduced margins that this entails probably won't kill Intel but the likelihood of getting a better CPU, GPU or APU from AMD, for an equivalent outlay, might.
https://www.icinsights.com/data/articles/documents...
https://www.icinsights.com/news/bulletins/Annual-R...