This doesn't mean we need to wait 18A process to see silicon manufactured for defence. Right now the 7nm process (N4) is thinked for foundry activities, it is TSMC 4nm class so perfect for defence needs. About the IP ecosystem, TSMC have not it, still manufacture for USA defence. Honestly we don't know much things about this topic, it is not unlikely that right now Intel is manufacturing something on 10nm for military, after all a 7nm foundry class process is not irrelevant in a situation of severe chips shortage, with TSMC that barely can ship enough 7nm wafers to satisfy the minimum request of customers.
Of course not, today many semiconductor products even from civilian companies (like FPGAs) are used by the defense industry. The idea of this deal is to assure that the US defense sector will have locally manufactured chips in the future. The reason for locally is there are concerns that any military skirmish in South Korea or Taiwan will cut off the US from crucial chips supply for its defense industry which is so depended on those chips. So the big picture is self reliance in terms of advanced wafers production.
There's only one company on the planet that makes the machines these guys need to use to make the chips. ASML in the Netherlands Are the planning to jump the queue for ordering machines as they are pre-ordered for years in advance already, or have they ordered already ?.
@Ubiqutious Intel along with TSMC and Samsung funded the development of EUV (link below) and have had orders in the queue for years. Both ASML ability to deliver and Intel's delayed needs had pushed most of the production to TSMC and Samsung, but with ASML's production rising and Intel ramping up production of it's EUV process, Intel will be receiving a much larger number of machines going forward.
Note these investments were by way of purchasing stock and all three companies have since sold most if not all of these shares...and made huge gains on them.
Here we go…. Now we know the real reason Intel formed IFS, so they can get a giant government bailout in the form of the DoD. I can’t think of any worse to partners to screw over the American taxpayer. The whole reason all the defense electronic companies failed or got consolidated is that the DoD doesn’t actually buy anything anymore. That $1 trillion is trapped in never ending bureaucracy and DARPA boondoggles. It’s just engineering welfare at this point. It’s going to be interesting to see if Intel can make a fab work making fighter components the DoD will only buy a 1000 of for the life of the program. Meanwhile TSMC will be dialing in their process with 50 million Apple chips. Then taxpayers will get to pay commercial companies to suffer through using IFS.
I didn't even think this perspective, good one. Makes a lot of sense. I think they have a ton of cash so they even threw money at TSMC for their collaboration plans on the IDM2.0 strat. Simply make Taiwan a political card in the big equation for the Intel corp and the DoD involvement on top of the Semiconductor leadership.
Absolutely beats me how Intel from leader in x86 processor and Node design went from hero to absolute garbage zero. Greedy execs, incapable board of directors, and politics (poor politics in CA state ?). Shame.
Bad CEO and board. I've not seen external politios cited as a reason for Intel's woes, they just pulled a Boeing and shot themselves in the foot repeatedly.
I don’t know the answer to that question but the fact we’re having this discussion points to insignificance of defense acquisition to commercial companies. It’s not a major driver in their decision making based solely on market opportunities. They’re going to have to come at them with a big carrot or a big stick.
Both TSMC and Global Foundries are building new fabs in the United States. They are doing this because of government subsidies to do so. It isn't just the DoD that is worried about access to silicone that is made in the US. The fact that factories are stalled all over the country from making automobiles is concerning to much the the US government. But, the DoD has LOTS of money to through around. The DoD makes up about 1/6 of the federal budget, according to the CBO. That is a lot of money to throw at problems, it is also the area that is most likely to get what it wants out of Congress.
This isn't just a US thing, the EU is concerned as well. They are trying to promote new fabs there as well.
Looking from the software side of things, DoD has been pursuing COTS angles where ever possible to cut the costs over the recent decades. As I'm looking at these political tensions from the outside and avoid reading certain publications, I don't get exposed to the fearmongering related to these geopolitical issues though. The issue of increasingly impatient China aside, there is still the oldest and the original reason for the global distribution of semiconductor manufacturing capability, that is the nature itself who doesn't care about our ideologies, nationalities or aspirations.
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
19 Comments
Back to Article
A5 - Monday, August 23, 2021 - link
Looking at that roadmap, it seems obvious for there to be new generations of the EMIB/Foveros packaging techs by then, too.I'd assume part of this agreement is development of mil-spec (shock tolerance, temp range, etc) advanced packaging methods?
Gondalf - Monday, August 23, 2021 - link
This doesn't mean we need to wait 18A process to see silicon manufactured for defence. Right now the 7nm process (N4) is thinked for foundry activities, it is TSMC 4nm class so perfect for defence needs. About the IP ecosystem, TSMC have not it, still manufacture for USA defence.Honestly we don't know much things about this topic, it is not unlikely that right now Intel is manufacturing something on 10nm for military, after all a 7nm foundry class process is not irrelevant in a situation of severe chips shortage, with TSMC that barely can ship enough 7nm wafers to satisfy the minimum request of customers.
Eliadbu - Monday, August 23, 2021 - link
Of course not, today many semiconductor products even from civilian companies (like FPGAs) are used by the defense industry. The idea of this deal is to assure that the US defense sector will have locally manufactured chips in the future. The reason for locally is there are concerns that any military skirmish in South Korea or Taiwan will cut off the US from crucial chips supply for its defense industry which is so depended on those chips. So the big picture is self reliance in terms of advanced wafers production.Manish_mv - Sunday, August 29, 2021 - link
I think it is a right move by US. Move of going into Afghanistan was not :)Ubiqutious - Monday, August 23, 2021 - link
There's only one company on the planet that makes the machines these guys need to use to make the chips. ASML in the Netherlands Are the planning to jump the queue for ordering machines as they are pre-ordered for years in advance already, or have they ordered already ?.https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/asml-is-...
ilt24 - Monday, August 23, 2021 - link
@Ubiqutious Intel along with TSMC and Samsung funded the development of EUV (link below) and have had orders in the queue for years. Both ASML ability to deliver and Intel's delayed needs had pushed most of the production to TSMC and Samsung, but with ASML's production rising and Intel ramping up production of it's EUV process, Intel will be receiving a much larger number of machines going forward.https://www.forbes.com/sites/jimhandy/2012/08/27/w...
Note these investments were by way of purchasing stock and all three companies have since sold most if not all of these shares...and made huge gains on them.
https://www.eetimes.com/intel-again-cuts-stake-in-...
flgt - Monday, August 23, 2021 - link
Here we go…. Now we know the real reason Intel formed IFS, so they can get a giant government bailout in the form of the DoD. I can’t think of any worse to partners to screw over the American taxpayer. The whole reason all the defense electronic companies failed or got consolidated is that the DoD doesn’t actually buy anything anymore. That $1 trillion is trapped in never ending bureaucracy and DARPA boondoggles. It’s just engineering welfare at this point. It’s going to be interesting to see if Intel can make a fab work making fighter components the DoD will only buy a 1000 of for the life of the program. Meanwhile TSMC will be dialing in their process with 50 million Apple chips. Then taxpayers will get to pay commercial companies to suffer through using IFS.nandnandnand - Monday, August 23, 2021 - link
The new Intel backdoors will be extra shiny.Oxford Guy - Monday, August 23, 2021 - link
They’ll look nice adjacent to AMD’s, Apple’s, and so on. A whole happy family.Silver5urfer - Monday, August 23, 2021 - link
I didn't even think this perspective, good one. Makes a lot of sense. I think they have a ton of cash so they even threw money at TSMC for their collaboration plans on the IDM2.0 strat. Simply make Taiwan a political card in the big equation for the Intel corp and the DoD involvement on top of the Semiconductor leadership.Absolutely beats me how Intel from leader in x86 processor and Node design went from hero to absolute garbage zero. Greedy execs, incapable board of directors, and politics (poor politics in CA state ?). Shame.
Lord of the Bored - Tuesday, August 24, 2021 - link
Bad CEO and board. I've not seen external politios cited as a reason for Intel's woes, they just pulled a Boeing and shot themselves in the foot repeatedly.Samus - Thursday, August 26, 2021 - link
It's amazing what bad leadership and management (CEO & BoD) can do to a company. Just ask HP.FullmetalTitan - Thursday, August 26, 2021 - link
Three words:Management
Management
Management
danjw - Monday, August 30, 2021 - link
Intel's problems come from putting business people in charge of an engineering company.Oxford Guy - Monday, August 23, 2021 - link
The corporate-government complex wasn’t invented yesterday.This is how it is.
Speedfriend - Monday, August 23, 2021 - link
You dont think perhaps that there are devices that the DoD would order in the millions..flgt - Monday, August 23, 2021 - link
I don’t know the answer to that question but the fact we’re having this discussion points to insignificance of defense acquisition to commercial companies. It’s not a major driver in their decision making based solely on market opportunities. They’re going to have to come at them with a big carrot or a big stick.danjw - Monday, August 30, 2021 - link
Both TSMC and Global Foundries are building new fabs in the United States. They are doing this because of government subsidies to do so. It isn't just the DoD that is worried about access to silicone that is made in the US. The fact that factories are stalled all over the country from making automobiles is concerning to much the the US government. But, the DoD has LOTS of money to through around. The DoD makes up about 1/6 of the federal budget, according to the CBO. That is a lot of money to throw at problems, it is also the area that is most likely to get what it wants out of Congress.This isn't just a US thing, the EU is concerned as well. They are trying to promote new fabs there as well.
TeXWiller - Monday, August 23, 2021 - link
Looking from the software side of things, DoD has been pursuing COTS angles where ever possible to cut the costs over the recent decades. As I'm looking at these political tensions from the outside and avoid reading certain publications, I don't get exposed to the fearmongering related to these geopolitical issues though.The issue of increasingly impatient China aside, there is still the oldest and the original reason for the global distribution of semiconductor manufacturing capability, that is the nature itself who doesn't care about our ideologies, nationalities or aspirations.