Why is TSMC not explaining in front of the US Congress why TSMC failed to anticipate the actual demand for its CoWoS IC packaging services. And this is a prime example of why IBM second sourced it supply contracts so as not to be dependent on a single source for that.
It's too late for any RDNA4 Multi-GCD based high end GPUs that required TSMC's CoWoS packaging as that's been put off in favor of MI300 being prioritized for the limited CoWoS services, as the markups for Mi300 more than justifies AMD making that business decision! But TSMC's cost AMD revenues there from not having any high end RDNA4 GPU offerings this generation.
The Chips Act does have a stress on funding IC Packaging as one of the areas to be funded for R&D development of Standardized forms of IC Chiplet packaging that the entire industry utilizes. But the US/World regulators need to be at TSMCs neck there for underestimating the demand to that CoWoS capacity that's totally controlled by TSMC and so many in the computing market dependent on only one IC packaging supplier!
They are needing to get TSMC on the Hot Seat ASAP because TSMC's mistake has caused Business losses/disruptions. And TSMC's pretty much a Natural Monopoly, which in and of itself is not illegal! But when some Monopoly's business decisions can so affect a larger market place via TSMC's supply chain Monopoly Market Share then Congress needs to hold hearings to find out what went wrong at TSMC to cause that CoWoS capacity issue that's so affected that AI and GPU market and other accelerators and products that depend on TSMC's CoWoS IC Packaging services!
CoWoS is not the ideal solution for a gaming-oriented Multi-GCD design... AMD needs to modify its data processing structure to eliminate the need for inter-chip communication.
CoWoS is TSMC's IC packaging solution that goes along with TSMCs IC diffusion solutions but that CoWoS is limited to only ICs diffused at TSMC's Foundries.
I'd look at Intel's IC/Tiles/Chiplets Packaging solutions that Intel Fabs will be certifying for any clients regardless of if they us Intel's IC diffusion services or not. And Intel fabs diffuses parts of Meteor Lake's IC/Tiles in house with some diffused at TSMC as well so Intel's IC chip packaging IP is already certified for ICs diffused by TSMC and IC diffused at Intel Fabs!
The US Chips Act needs to fund some Industry Standard Chiplet packaging solutions for the current disaggregated MCM/Module based processor designs as that's what all processors will be based on where systems are made up of multiple ICs fabricated of whatever process node best suits that to be packaged together on modules to produce working SOCs/Processors for whatever end use!
> Why is TSMC not explaining in front of the US Congress why TSMC failed to anticipate the actual demand for its CoWoS IC packaging services. Because TSMC is not an American company, so it can tell congress to go and pound sand?
TSMC is doing business in the US and even has a Fab Located in Arizona and any Corporation doing business in the US with US companies can get called before congress and any corporation(Foreign or Domestic doing any US business) can have their license to do business with US companies or consumers revoked!
See the US Commerce Department and the laws and regulations that it can enforce and look at some Peoples Republic of Chinese Companies currently after Congress enacted additional measures for that!
P.S. Telling the US Congress to Pound Sand is the same as telling a US Judge to do the same with the subpoena powers that the US Congress has.
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
8 Comments
Back to Article
FWhitTrampoline - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 - link
Why is TSMC not explaining in front of the US Congress why TSMC failed to anticipate the actual demand for its CoWoS IC packaging services. And this is a prime example of why IBM second sourced it supply contracts so as not to be dependent on a single source for that.It's too late for any RDNA4 Multi-GCD based high end GPUs that required TSMC's CoWoS packaging as that's been put off in favor of MI300 being prioritized for the limited CoWoS services, as the markups for Mi300 more than justifies AMD making that business decision! But TSMC's cost AMD revenues there from not having any high end RDNA4 GPU offerings this generation.
The Chips Act does have a stress on funding IC Packaging as one of the areas to be funded for R&D development of Standardized forms of IC Chiplet packaging that the entire industry utilizes. But the US/World regulators need to be at TSMCs neck there for underestimating the demand to that CoWoS capacity that's totally controlled by TSMC and so many in the computing market dependent on only one IC packaging supplier!
PeachNCream - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 - link
"Why is TSMC not explaining in front of the US Congress why TSMC failed to anticipate the actual demand for its CoWoS IC packaging services."Because Congress didn't ask probably.
FWhitTrampoline - Wednesday, May 22, 2024 - link
They are needing to get TSMC on the Hot Seat ASAP because TSMC's mistake has caused Business losses/disruptions. And TSMC's pretty much a Natural Monopoly, which in and of itself is not illegal! But when some Monopoly's business decisions can so affect a larger market place via TSMC's supply chain Monopoly Market Share then Congress needs to hold hearings to find out what went wrong at TSMC to cause that CoWoS capacity issue that's so affected that AI and GPU market and other accelerators and products that depend on TSMC's CoWoS IC Packaging services!Terry_Craig - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 - link
CoWoS is not the ideal solution for a gaming-oriented Multi-GCD design... AMD needs to modify its data processing structure to eliminate the need for inter-chip communication.FWhitTrampoline - Wednesday, May 22, 2024 - link
CoWoS is TSMC's IC packaging solution that goes along with TSMCs IC diffusion solutions but that CoWoS is limited to only ICs diffused at TSMC's Foundries.I'd look at Intel's IC/Tiles/Chiplets Packaging solutions that Intel Fabs will be certifying for any clients regardless of if they us Intel's IC diffusion services or not. And Intel fabs diffuses parts of Meteor Lake's IC/Tiles in house with some diffused at TSMC as well so Intel's IC chip packaging IP is already certified for ICs diffused by TSMC and IC diffused at Intel Fabs!
The US Chips Act needs to fund some Industry Standard Chiplet packaging solutions for the current disaggregated MCM/Module based processor designs as that's what all processors will be based on where systems are made up of multiple ICs fabricated of whatever process node best suits that to be packaged together on modules to produce working SOCs/Processors for whatever end use!
eldakka - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 - link
> Why is TSMC not explaining in front of the US Congress why TSMC failed to anticipate the actual demand for its CoWoS IC packaging services.Because TSMC is not an American company, so it can tell congress to go and pound sand?
FWhitTrampoline - Wednesday, May 22, 2024 - link
TSMC is doing business in the US and even has a Fab Located in Arizona and any Corporation doing business in the US with US companies can get called before congress and any corporation(Foreign or Domestic doing any US business) can have their license to do business with US companies or consumers revoked!See the US Commerce Department and the laws and regulations that it can enforce and look at some Peoples Republic of Chinese Companies currently after Congress enacted additional measures for that!
P.S. Telling the US Congress to Pound Sand is the same as telling a US Judge to do the same with the subpoena powers that the US Congress has.
Threska - Wednesday, May 22, 2024 - link
"...and any corporation(Foreign or Domestic doing any US business) can have their license to do business with US companies or consumers revoked!"TikTok says Hi.