• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Discussion Leading Edge Foundry Node advances (TSMC, Samsung Foundry, Intel)

Page 14 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Thala

Golden Member
Nov 12, 2014
1,289
597
136
I know sometime they can peak 7w or 9w but average power consumption is way below that most of time 3w to 4W.

And in mobile there is soc not just cpu and Gpu, it need to power modem, bluetooth, wifi and other things, so that 5W envelope include things like that.
3W-4W is total system power (not just only the SoC) including the modem, screen etc. under sustainable conditions. For example the Samsung Galaxy S21 Ultra is drawing less than 3W system power - with screen brightness set to minimum.
Andrei did publish some peak and sustained values for different phones last year here
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and hemedans

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
10,507
4,469
136
If I'm correct at what you're referring to, ain't that just the contact which energizes the gate?
The gate is wrapped around the channel between source and drain if that is what you are referring to. The gold colored area.

If you mean the blue pillar thing, that looks like the gate contact attaching to the poly.
I think you are both right. Thinking about it last night, I was wondering how a single channel device can drive enough current for HP logic. So, maybe this is for LP devices?
The second graphic says 'beyond nanosheet' - so IBM must be projecting forward something like 5 years or more. Clearly, well, to me, an R&D project at this point.

Seems to me that stacking nanosheets will be the better solution for sometime to come. High NA EUV will allow a reduction in dimensions like 'active width' with more (vertical) nanosheet stacks.
 

eek2121

Golden Member
Aug 2, 2005
1,541
1,621
136
I know sometime they can peak 7w or 9w but average power consumption is way below that most of time 3w to 4W.

And in mobile there is soc not just cpu and Gpu, it need to power modem, bluetooth, wifi and other things, so that 5W envelope include things like that.
I am aware. However, typical power consumption for even laptop chips is pretty low. We are talking about peak GPU performance. My point is that RDNA2 cores @ 1.9 GHz are completely doable assuming a competent process is used. Samsung, of course, wanted to use their own process, which has a long history of heat and power issues. That is a big reason why NVIDIA's current gen cards have such a high TDP and use so much power.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97

Doug S

Senior member
Feb 8, 2020
948
1,429
96
Qualcomm would be a great customer win. Intel can't afford to discount much, IMHO. Plus, as soon as Intel offered the 'real' price on the next chip, QCOM would jump to Samsung. The hard part is the time it would take for Intel to ramp up their foundry. Look how long it took TSMC - and the switch by Apple from Samsung was the catalyst that really got TSMC onto a good cutting edge cadence. IIRC, Apple started out by buying up all TSMC's risk wafer production. Deal of the century to jump start TSMC.

Do you have a reference for that? I'm not sure how that would even work, since Apple went sole source with TSMC for A8 on 20nm then dual sourced A9 on 16FF TSMC / 14nm Samsung. I always thought that was weird, as would think that the way Apple would switch suppliers would want to dual source for a year or two, not fully switch then switch back to dual source then fully switch again - unless A8 was dual sourced but Apple's deal with Samsung allowed them to take zero wafers and when TSMC was able to provide enough volume so too bad for Samsung.
 

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
10,540
2,648
136
Do you have a reference for that? I'm not sure how that would even work, since Apple went sole source with TSMC for A8 on 20nm then dual sourced A9 on 16FF TSMC / 14nm Samsung. I always thought that was weird, as would think that the way Apple would switch suppliers would want to dual source for a year or two, not fully switch then switch back to dual source then fully switch again - unless A8 was dual sourced but Apple's deal with Samsung allowed them to take zero wafers and when TSMC was able to provide enough volume so too bad for Samsung.
The A9 dual source was more about GloFo but that part ended up not happening.
 

Exist50

Senior member
Aug 18, 2016
441
424
136
We are not talking typical power consumption but thermal dissipation capacity under full load, which for phones is 3-4W at system level (including the screen).
Phones can definitely dissipate more than 3-4W total under full load. 5W is a good estimate for the SoC alone.
 

Thala

Golden Member
Nov 12, 2014
1,289
597
136
Phones can definitely dissipate more than 3-4W total under full load. 5W is a good estimate for the SoC alone.
This is not the case - 5W would be close to impossible to sustain. You can refer to Andrei's system power measurements, where for instance the Galaxy S21 goes down to a sustainable 2.8-2.9 W (Snapdragon 888) and 3.7-4W (Exynos) system power - not even close to 5W - let alone when looking at only the SoC.
What makes you think that the upcoming Samsung Galaxy could achieve a revolutionary thermal dissípation capabilities such that the SoC could sustain 5W?
 
Last edited:

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
10,507
4,469
136
Do you have a reference for that? I'm not sure how that would even work, since Apple went sole source with TSMC for A8 on 20nm then dual sourced A9 on 16FF TSMC / 14nm Samsung. I always thought that was weird, as would think that the way Apple would switch suppliers would want to dual source for a year or two, not fully switch then switch back to dual source then fully switch again - unless A8 was dual sourced but Apple's deal with Samsung allowed them to take zero wafers and when TSMC was able to provide enough volume so too bad for Samsung.
Sorry, don't know when Apple started buying out risk wafers. Pretty sure I read it on these forums, or from a link posted in CPU&O.
 

Roland00Address

Platinum Member
Dec 17, 2008
2,069
179
106
Do you have a reference for that? I'm not sure how that would even work, since Apple went sole source with TSMC for A8 on 20nm then dual sourced A9 on 16FF TSMC / 14nm Samsung. I always thought that was weird, as would think that the way Apple would switch suppliers would want to dual source for a year or two, not fully switch then switch back to dual source then fully switch again - unless A8 was dual sourced but Apple's deal with Samsung allowed them to take zero wafers and when TSMC was able to provide enough volume so too bad for Samsung.
Apple switched once again exclusively to TSMC not just due to the superior process but because of the packaging technology allowing to put the ram directly on top of the soc allowing a thinner device and half a dozen other benefits.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY