Discussion Leading Edge Foundry Node advances (TSMC, Samsung Foundry, Intel) - [2020 - 2025]

Page 69 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

DisEnchantment

Golden Member
Mar 3, 2017
1,747
6,598
136
TSMC's N7 EUV is now in its second year of production and N5 is contributing to revenue for TSMC this quarter. N3 is scheduled for 2022 and I believe they have a good chance to reach that target.

1587737990547.png
N7 performance is more or less understood.
1587739093721.png

This year and next year TSMC is mainly increasing capacity to meet demands.

For Samsung the nodes are basically the same from 7LPP to 4 LPE, they just add incremental scaling boosters while the bulk of the tech is the same.

Samsung is already shipping 7LPP and will ship 6LPP in H2. Hopefully they fix any issues if at all.
They have two more intermediate nodes in between before going to 3GAE, most likely 5LPE will ship next year but for 4LPE it will probably be back to back with 3GAA since 3GAA is a parallel development with 7LPP enhancements.


1587739615344.png

Samsung's 3GAA will go for HVM in 2022 most likely, similar timeframe to TSMC's N3.
There are major differences in how the transistor will be fabricated due to the GAA but density for sure Samsung will be behind N3.
But there might be advantages for Samsung with regards to power and performance, so it may be better suited for some applications.
But for now we don't know how much of this is true and we can only rely on the marketing material.

This year there should be a lot more available wafers due to lack of demand from Smartphone vendors and increased capacity from TSMC and Samsung.
Lots of SoCs which dont need to be top end will be fabbed with N7 or 7LPP/6LPP instead of N5, so there will be lots of wafers around.

Most of the current 7nm designs are far from the advertized density from TSMC and Samsung. There is still potential for density increase compared to currently shipping products.
N5 is going to be the leading foundry node for the next couple of years.

For a lot of fabless companies out there, the processes and capacity available are quite good.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


FEEL FREE TO CREATE A NEW THREAD FOR 2025+ OUTLOOK, I WILL LINK IT HERE
 
Last edited:

SiliconFly

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2023
1,541
897
96
Again, that is load of nonsense. Why not go along Your pseudo logic a bit further and shout "Zen4 is area INEFFICIENT, lets retire it in favour of Zen4C, a new pinnacle of efficiency on TSMC 5nm".
Oh wait, so now your core has actual requirement to clock 6ghz? What about other possible requirements like including full width AVX512? 1024bytes per clock from L1D? are they invalid cause You believe so?
You should mind your language. Or pls go and shout that nonsense to AMD yourself.
 

A///

Diamond Member
Feb 24, 2017
4,351
3,158
136
No, you started off talking about Intel’s Fabs vs TSMC. Let’s keep things in context here. If Zen 4 were on N7, it would consume more power than Raptor Lake. Zen 4 230W -> Raptor Lake 253W is only 10% additional power.
I did, but I never mentioned a specific processor for Ryzen. Again, litho is one part of the equation. Poor design choice is poor design choice is poor design choice. To drive it further home, a poor design is a poor design and no advanced litho will save it.
 

trivik12

Senior member
Jan 26, 2006
335
309
136
We will not see any other chip on N3B right. Would have been interesting to see Ryzen on it to see how far dense node could have helped in a non TDP constrained chip. We are unlikely to see N3E desktop before end of next year considering Apple will have 1st dibs for A18.
 

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
5,064
8,032
136
Would have been interesting to see Ryzen on it to see how far dense node could have helped in a non TDP constrained chip.
Not really. Density is always relaxed for high frequency designs. If only the TDP constrain is removed the chip's max achievable frequency would still be constrained by the density. This is also why having alternate density optimized cores makes sense, those increase density and efficiency at lower frequency at the cost of max achievable frequency. It's a trade off.
 

maddie

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2010
4,881
4,951
136
We will not see any other chip on N3B right. Would have been interesting to see Ryzen on it to see how far dense node could have helped in a non TDP constrained chip. We are unlikely to see N3E desktop before end of next year considering Apple will have 1st dibs for A18.
It's only about a 6% density difference between N3B and N3E. Versus N5, They are 1.7X & 1.6X for logic. Not exactly a huge difference.
 

Geddagod

Golden Member
Dec 28, 2021
1,296
1,368
106
Isn't Intel 4 going to be the hardest jump Intel will have to do in their 5 node roadmap? I doubt Intel 20A is much of a density jump over Intel 3, though adding BSPD and GAAFET are major challenges (however BSPD is also getting derisked on Intel 3 internally), and Intel 3 and Intel 18A just seem like refinements over the previous "node".
 

Geddagod

Golden Member
Dec 28, 2021
1,296
1,368
106
TSMC 2nm delayed into 2026?




Good news for Intel 18A if true.
TSMC denied those rumors, and also TSMC 2nm HVM was announced to be in 2025, but very likely it would have been very late 2025. I can see TSMC "stretching the truth" about entering HVM manufacturing for 2nm late 2025 if the delay (if the delay even exists, which TSMC denied) is only like a quarter or maybe two.
I'm giving TSMC the benefit of the doubt, esp since I've given Intel's foundry benefit of the doubt on their own fabs as well lol
 

Dayman1225

Golden Member
Aug 14, 2017
1,158
992
146
11 years would go back the introduction of 22nm FinFET based products. So I have no idea what Intel means by "the last decade".
22nm was Intel best ever yielding node so I’m assuming that’s why it’s not on the graph.
Is Intel's 14nm considered as this or previous one?
'cos if they are comparing to their 10nm woes, that very simple to do lol
I’m confused, you see that 14nm is on the photo, correct?
 

eek2121

Diamond Member
Aug 2, 2005
3,100
4,398
136
Gonna call shens unless this is them validating their yieldable die strategy.

Now will we see 1+0+2 Meteor Lake?
It is believable as Intel 4 is using EUV. IIRC TSMC reported something similar with N7+/N6 and also N5.

That is why I am surprised Intel 4/3 isn’t longer lived. Seems like they aren’t using it long enough to break even on development costs. Also, yes, I am aware of IFS plans. Still…
 

Dayman1225

Golden Member
Aug 14, 2017
1,158
992
146
Either that or Intel is just playing a shell game with that statement, and yields/performance characteristics on Intel 4 are bad enough that they're gonna sweep it under the rug and pretend like it never happened. It's easier for them to bugfix it, rename it Intel 3, and move on to that (and even Intel 3 won't be showing up in any known Intel consumer products).
Yields on Intel4 is pretty good, Intel 3 is an extension of Intel4 with additional libraries and will be a long life node for Intel and foundry customers
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
22,065
11,693
136
Yields on Intel4 is pretty good

We'll never know since Intel is mothballing it immediately after Meteor Lake.

, Intel 3 is an extension of Intel4 with additional libraries and will be a long life node for Intel and foundry customers

How many Intel products will there be on Intel 3 besides Granite Rapids and Sierra Forest? Intel may schlep it to IFS2.0 customers, sure, but it sure looks like they're ready to move past that one pretty quickly as well for their own stuff.