Actually not phisically building the fabs would stop them from expanding at the rate needed to accommodate Intel, as that would proceed quickly enough.How long would it take for TSMC to increase their capacity enough to handle what Intel would require?
12 months? 18 months? 24 months? 36 months?
You mean like how Intel has a fab in China for their NAND, and has two assembly sites in China for their processors? All the semiconductor companies that run their own fabs are multinational and have fabs in various countries including but not limited to just China.There are certainly a Taiwanese company first and most but that doesn't mean they are immune to not leaking trade secrets specially if they operate in China and have staff in the country. I have a suspicion multinational companies are easier to exploit.
Semiaccurate writes about something horrible happening at Intel causing another server CPUs delay. It is so horrible that the author is worried that Intel may not survive. Has anybody some clue about what is happening?
My point to it was that TSMC is pretty much established their capacity for 5nm and 3nm. 5nm is spooling up and their 3nm factory has already broken ground (and I am sure some area's like their development parts are already up and running). So besides moving to TSMC 7nm in their designs (different then their 14nm), TSMC is already prepped and far a long on another 2 nodes. Not really trying to get into the Intel vs. everyone elses node size debate.t isn’t necessarily the case that TSMC is that many nodes ahead of Intel since the numbers (like 14 nm, 7 nm, etc) are completely meaningless from both companies; they are really just names. You would need to compare specific specs from both processes to see how they compare. intel had the process lead for a long time when competing with AMD/Global Foundries. They aren’t going to have that going forward since TSMC has a massive portion of the market. They have the money and resources to push the process tech, so I don’t really expect intel to take the lead again. They may have some advantages in doing being both the designer and the fab, but TSMC has just a massive portion of the market, so that may not be a big enough advantage going forward.
Wait to see the Xe MCM chips, before saying something bad and not good happened to XCC Xeon.Semiaccurate writes about something horrible happening at Intel causing another server CPUs delay.
Semiaccurate writes about something horrible happening at Intel causing another server CPUs delay. It is so horrible that the author is worried that Intel may not survive. Has anybody some clue about what is happening?
Semiaccurate writes about something horrible happening at Intel causing another server CPUs delay. It is so horrible that the author is worried that Intel may not survive. Has anybody some clue about what is happening?
According to wikipedia 8 "fabs" at 3 places. I put fabs in quotes since only one of them appears to be dedicated to 14nm? Intel's problem is that their fabs are a moving target. They don't build a 22nm fab and that is it, but they are constantly convert existing fabs. In the last couple years they botched that process several times, converting to the non-working 10nm too early, then reverting that etc.Intel cannot keep up with demand for their 14nm chips. How many Intel fabs are producing 14nm chips - 7, 8?
You are completely correct. Nobody can save Intel from themselves, they have to do that on their own either way.Yet somehow TSMC is going to come to their rescue. Are people here high? This is just the most absurd speculation I’ve seen in a while. The capital costs and time to build would be preposterous.
Semiaccurate writes about something horrible happening at Intel causing another server CPUs delay. It is so horrible that the author is worried that Intel may not survive. Has anybody some clue about what is happening?
Ajay - I do not know the current output and yields of various production processes from various Intel fabs, do you? One large fab making wafers on a modern process which works could be a huge help in my opinion, your opinion may differ.
About the Semiaccurate secret article - I found out that you need to pay 1000 dollars per year to read those articles. Is anybody really paying this sort of money???
According to Wikipedia there are 12 Fabs for logic wafers (excluding RP1). I think 3 of those are doing 10nm. That leaves up to 9 doing 14nm. I would think one or two of those are already being converted to 7nm.According to wikipedia 8 "fabs" at 3 places. I put fabs in quotes since only one of them appears to be dedicated to 14nm? Intel's problem is that their fabs are a moving target. They don't build a 22nm fab and that is it, but they are constantly convert existing fabs. In the last couple years they botched that process several times, converting to the non-working 10nm too early, then reverting that etc.
You are completely correct. Nobody can save Intel from themselves, they have to do that on their own either way.
It'd be better to fab the server wafers at TSMC then to lose all the market share to AMD and ARM.
You may want to look up what the T in TSMC stands for.
Is the current Intel a proof of this? 🤔
I understand Intel's struggles with 10nm brings pessimistic expectations of their future nodes, but Intel also happens to be the only company capable of coming back.
So they already have TSMC's knowledge then as well as all of apples, amds and qualcomms, so why would they care about intels?You don't know the mainland Chinese very well. I guess all the intellectual property theft the world over doesn't have tentacles in Taiwan.......
The scary thing is that (as Ajay mentioned) they are spending a ton on buybacks. They might simply not have the funds to "come back" since they are spending it all on propping up the stock. A single fab is like a couple billion.
And if they did as the person presumes, then China's offerings in the mobile market would be as good as Apple's, except they're not. I love Android, but even I know the quality differences are still day and night. Samsung is close, but Android is no iOS. In the same light you could argue China may already have its tentacles in US based businesses with high yield IP.So they already have TSMC's knowledge then as well as all of apples, amds and qualcomms, so why would they care about intels?
7nm most certainly isn't doing well. Process node development happens concurrently, and when the extend of the issues with 10nm became clear (which for me was in spring 2018 with the launch of Cannon Lake) I fully expected it to be quickly replaced by 7nm. But that has not happened, instead Intel's dry spell with funny filler products pretending to be real deals continues.Well, not going to expect that scenario unless Intel also completely manages to mess up 7nm.
7nm most certainly isn't doing well. Process node development happens concurrently, and when the extend of the issues with 10nm became clear (which for me was in spring 2018 with the launch of Cannon Lake) I fully expected it to be quickly replaced by 7nm. But that has not happened, instead Intel's dry spell with funny filler products pretending to be real deals continues.
I don’t know how you can be so sure of that. 7nm doesn’t use SAQP, which is one of the biggest problems with 10nm DUV. I believe by now, that Intel has learned what it needed to from other aspects of the 10nm node. Node implementation is incrementally dependent with multiple teams in different stages of research and development. If spending on EUV equipment doesn’t go way up over the next 18 months - that would be very bad news.7nm most certainly isn't doing well. Process node development happens concurrently, and when the extend of the issues with 10nm became clear (which for me was in spring 2018 with the launch of Cannon Lake) I fully expected it to be quickly replaced by 7nm. But that has not happened, instead Intel's dry spell with funny filler products pretending to be real deals continues.
In theory, Intel could adapt their 14nm and maybe even 10nm to another fab's node. This isn't a simple processor and does take a decent amount of time, not to mention a lot of money. I feel it would be like the Sandy Bridge Costa Rica debacle.
And if they did as the person presumes, then China's offerings in the mobile market would be as good as Apple's, except they're not. I love Android, but even I know the quality differences are still day and night. Samsung is close, but Android is no iOS. In the same light you could argue China may already have its tentacles in US based businesses with high yield IP.