Article: Intel Opens Door to Contract Chip Manufacturing

[Idontcare]

Intel Opens Door to Contract Chip Manufacturing

The company earlier this week said it would make a line of FPGA (field-programmable gate array) products for Achronix Semiconductor using its upcoming 22-nanometer manufacturing process. Intel will start manufacturing chips for laptops, desktops and servers using the 22-nm products later next year.

"We are ... open to adding other customers beyond Achronix," said Bill Kircos, an Intel spokesman, via e-mail on Tuesday. He declined to say when the company would start signing up other customers.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/209573/intel_opens_door_to_contract_chip_manufacturing.html

Not what TSMC and GloFo wanted their 22nm customers to hear.

 

[EliteRetard]

I want an FPGA DOS console that can rock all my old games. Stupid Windows POS...

 

[magreen]

Not what TSMC and GloFo wanted their 22nm customers to hear.

Interesting. Do you think this is in response to GloFo making itself available to produce chips for others besides AMD? Has GloFo actually landed any non-AMD clients?

edit: I see the article mentions GloFo as a possible model for Intel, that Intel's seeing what GloFo saw 6 years ago that you need to fill the fab to make the ever-incresing fab investment worthwhile. But still... has GF landed any customers?

 

[Idontcare]

Glofo bought Chartered Semi so they now have plenty of customers (they just aren't leading edge, think 65nm and 90nm).

I really don't know how to interpret this at the moment to be honest, it is kinda shocking and out of character for Intel.

 

[schenley101]

Isn't it only for one very small company? I bet Intel is using this as a trial run for reconfigurable logic etc for future processors. Intel will probably just buy them if it pans out.

 

[magreen]

Glofo bought Chartered Semi so they now have plenty of customers (they just aren't leading edge, think 65nm and 90nm).

I really don't know how to interpret this at the moment to be honest, it is kinda shocking and out of character for Intel.

Huh. Ok, but those older process customers wouldn't help fill the new fab.

The only thing I can think of is that they're planning for 10 years in the future. That as fab investment costs rise exponentially, the only economic way to keep Moore's law going is to add more customers.

 

[IntelUser2000]

...a change from the company's policy of serving only itself through its factories.

Why do the writers think this is totally new for Intel? Don't they remember that Intel used to fab for HP's PA-RISC and also EV6?

 

[Idontcare]

Isn't it only for one very small company? I bet Intel is using this as a trial run for reconfigurable logic etc for future processors. Intel will probably just buy them if it pans out.

"We are ... open to adding other customers beyond Achronix," said Bill Kircos, an Intel spokesman

Why do the writers think this is totally new for Intel? Don't they remember that Intel used to fab for HP's PA-RISC and also EV6?

Those were more or less forced arrangements as required by the DOJ and FTC.

The "news" here isn't the technical details of "a 3rd party IC is in an Intel fab" but rather the "news" here is the spirit behind the inclusion of Achronix into their 22nm fab process as well as overtly stated fact that this is not intended to be an exclusive arrangement.

That's what has people are perking their ears up. What is this harbinger of?

I wonder if just for shibs-and-giggles if AMD has since asked Intel to provide them a quote for producing their CPU's on Intel's 22nm process tech

 

[evilspoons]

I want an FPGA DOS console that can rock all my old games. Stupid Windows POS...

One word: DOSBox.

 

[taltamir]

additional article: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/other/...re_22nm_Chips_for_an_Independent_Company.html

intel has the worlds best fabs, always has... this allowed them to survive competition with superior architectures in the past (although now they have the best fabs AND best architecture for CPUs)

leasing said capacity makes a lot of sense, there are many applications that are not competing with them in any way shape of form, this is one of those. It doesn't compete with intel, yet utilizes their fab capacity (providing another source of income), there is no reason NOT to do this on intel's part.

I have seen the theory that intel also benefits because this technology will push TV, internet, and other technologies further, which further increases demand for intel's core products. I think this is a legitimate theory as well.

One word: DOSBox.

dosbox FTW!

 

[cbn]

It will be interesting to see what customers they take and what kind of chips they will be making on these 22nm fabs.

I was surprised to see Intel move to "quad core" as the default CPU for Sandy Bridge. What is the growth rate for consumers that need "quad core" compared to a fabs ability to double the number of quad core consumer chips on a wafer every two years?

 

[taltamir]

What is the growth rate for consumers that need "quad core"

everyone needs quad core, no exceptions. many individual programs might not be able to utilize a quad core, but everyone uses at least 1 program that can, and then there is multi tasking...

 

[cbn]

everyone needs quad core, no exceptions. many individual programs might not be able to utilize a quad core, but everyone uses at least 1 program that can, and then there is multi tasking...

Not everybody.....Grandmas on their laptops, non IT people.... some kids. Most of those people would probably never realize they had a quad core in their machine.

With that being said I wouldn't be surprised if Ivy Bridge quad core laptops have great turbo modes in them (so they feel like an even faster dual core most of the time.)

 

[taltamir]

Not everybody.....Grandmas on their laptops, non IT people.... some kids. Most of those people would probably never realize they had a quad core in their machine.

Yes everybody! all of those people need quad cores. Why? because quad cores will provide a superior, faster, smoother experience.
You think just because someone is old / young / computer illiterate that they like waiting forever for tasks to complete?
heck, I find that those people need it the MOST because if they are sitting there waiting for something to load they get bored and start doing bad things... like running it again and again because "maybe it didn't get it the first time" or cutting the power because "it is frozen" (it isn't).

Every old person and child and computer illiterate I know can tell when his/her computer is faster slower. And none of them should be trusted with a slow computer because of the damage they do when forced to wait (and then I have to fix said damage).

Example... windows starts installing a windows update automatically... the computer feels slow... so they cut the power in the middle of the patching process, corrupting windows files. Yes, this actually happened. When asked why did they cut the power despite being repeatedly told not to ever do so? well... no reply...
heck, Worse I had was:
Me: It seems you have a virus, I will come by tommorow to fix it... until then, whatever you do, do NOT go to your bank website and log in or it could steal your password and money.
Computer illiterate: ok
Next day I found out that they went online and did their online banking... because "I needed to and its not like did any harm".

You have both too much and too little faith in people... too little faith in their ability to tell the difference in speed or ability to multi task (and by multi task I mean having a minimized game running, 10 excel / word / powerpoint documents open, dozens of web pages, and several other productivity programs running at once; I even saw some run multiple games at once (run one game, minimize it, run another game)... And too much faith in their ability not to break their computer.

 

[cbn]

Yes everybody! all of those people need quad cores. Why? because quad cores will provide a superior, faster, smoother experience.
You think just because someone is old / young / computer illiterate that they like waiting forever for tasks to complete?
heck, I find that those people need it the MOST because if they are sitting there waiting for something to load they get bored and start doing bad things... like running it again and again because "maybe it didn't get it the first time" or cutting the power because "it is frozen" (it isn't).

Every old person and child and computer illiterate I know can tell when his/her computer is faster slower. And none of them should be trusted with a slow computer because of the damage they do when forced to wait (and then I have to fix said damage).

Example... windows starts installing a windows update automatically... the computer feels slow... so they cut the power in the middle of the patching process, corrupting windows files. Yes, this actually happened. When asked why did they cut the power despite being repeatedly told not to ever do so? well... no reply...
heck, Worse I had was:
Me: It seems you have a virus, I will come by tommorow to fix it... until then, whatever you do, do NOT go to your bank website and log in or it could steal your password and money.
Computer illiterate: ok
Next day I found out that they went online and did their online banking... because "I needed to and its not like did any harm".

You have both too much and too little faith in people... too little faith in their ability to tell the difference in speed or ability to multi task (and by multi task I mean having a minimized game running, 10 excel / word / powerpoint documents open, dozens of web pages, and several other productivity programs running at once; I even saw some run multiple games at once (run one game, minimize it, run another game)... And too much faith in their ability not to break their computer.

My dual core computer runs super smooth with only 2GB of memory. The only time I notice a slow down is when I try to open a particular Firefox bookmark I have that has 60+ tabs or when a website itself has a slowdown (eg, Checking California Election results last night).

However, I don't do some of the gaming and simultaneous multi-tasking you are mentioning. Wouldn't that be a small part of population that does that?

EDIT: Maybe a higher supply of cheaper mobile quad cores will bring growth to the computer training and software industry? I am certainly not against that.

 

[taltamir]

However, I don't do some of the gaming and simultaneous multi-tasking you are mentioning. Wouldn't that be a small part of population that does that?

I have no idea what percentage does that, I know people who do but that is just conjecture.

as for open a browser with 60 tabs... yes, both firefox and chrome have the ability to reopen previously opened tabs and the ability to bulk open a directory full of links, and both browsers can use a quad core to speed it up.

 

[aka1nas]

My dual core computer runs super smooth with only 2GB of memory. The only time I notice a slow down is when I try to open a particular Firefox bookmark I have that has 60+ tabs or when a website itself has a slowdown (eg, Checking California Election results last night).

However, I don't do some of the gaming and simultaneous multi-tasking you are mentioning. Wouldn't that be a small part of population that does that?

EDIT: Maybe a higher supply of cheaper mobile quad cores will bring growth to the computer training and software industry? I am certainly not against that.

Grandma and your stereotypical computer-illiterate cousin need a quad core even more than we do to keep all the malware and voluntarily installed crapware from bogging down their machine.

 

[taltamir]

Grandma and your stereotypical computer-illiterate cousin need a quad core even more than we do to keep all the malware and voluntarily installed crapware from bogging down their machine.

*facepalm: I completely forgot about the malware! well, and crapware in general... Every single time I go to fix someone's computer they have at LEAST 4 separate "toolbar" addons for IE and about 30 always running background programs... definitely need more cores and more ram.

 

[acx]

Fixed R&D costs of developing new nodes are going up. Intel can amortize that cost over more chips if it can sell manufacturing to others. Economies of scale can drive costs down further for Intel. Intel already makes a lot of chips so it can afford to spend $10 billion on developing a new node but what if it costs $20 billion to evolve beyond 22nm or 5-10 years down the road when they may need to evolve beyond silicon manfacturing as we know it? Plus, any chance Intel can get bigger puts them in a better position vs Samsung.

 

[magreen]

Fixed R&D costs of developing new nodes are going up. Intel can amortize that cost over more chips if it can sell manufacturing to others. Economies of scale can drive costs down further for Intel. Intel already makes a lot of chips so it can afford to spend $10 billion on developing a new node but what if it costs $20 billion to evolve beyond 22nm or 5-10 years down the road when they may need to evolve beyond silicon manfacturing as we know it? Plus, any chance Intel can get bigger puts them in a better position vs Samsung.

Damn right. And there's 9 years of lurking to back that up.

 

[SickBeast]

IMO it would be hilarious if Intel manufactured CPUs for AMD, or even GPUs for NV. Wouldn't they have to do it under anti-trust laws? (provided that they opened themselves up to contracting out manufacturing)

 

[cbn]

IMO it would be hilarious if Intel manufactured CPUs for AMD, or even GPUs for NV. Wouldn't they have to do it under anti-trust laws? (provided that they opened themselves up to contracting out manufacturing)

I think that would be awesome if AMD produced products through Intel's fabs....but how expensive are these advanced nodes going to be?

 

[Idontcare]

IMO it would be hilarious if Intel manufactured CPUs for AMD, or even GPUs for NV. Wouldn't they have to do it under anti-trust laws? (provided that they opened themselves up to contracting out manufacturing)

Yes absolutely...maybe.



Whatever terms and conditions they open up for customers A, B, and C they make themselves potentially liable if they refuse to offer the same to customer D.

That means they can't credibly offer customers A, B, and C a price of say $5k/wfr but tell customer D they have to pay $20k/wfr if customer D happens to be fabless and operating on the hairy edge of collapse in a duopoly.

But the flipside of the equation is would customer D really be comfortable having their products fabbed in their competitors fab? The competitor would know the yields, the product mix, the roadmap, etc...you leave yourself entirely open for being beaten to the punch in the markets at every turn in such a scenario.

So it'll never happen just because of the practical side of the issues involved.

But if I were managing AMD's foundry contracts and negotiations I'd definitely ask Intel for a formal quote if for no other purpose than to go back to GloFo or TSMC and say "what say you to a little re-negotiation of the terms of our 22nm/20nm contracts with an eye towards you being a skosh more aggressive in securing my business...".

 

[IntelUser2000]

The competitor would know the yields, the product mix, the roadmap, etc...you leave yourself entirely open for being beaten to the punch in the markets at every turn in such a scenario.

I don't know how US laws dictate such scenarios, is that even allowed for the foundry to do?

We do have such scenarios happening in the near future possibly. If say Qualcomm goes to Samsung to fab their smartphone chips, Samsung would then know the details. What happens then?

 

[Idontcare]

I don't know how US laws dictate such scenarios, is that even allowed for the foundry to do?

We do have such scenarios happening in the near future possibly. If say Qualcomm goes to Samsung to fab their smartphone chips, Samsung would then know the details. What happens then?

The onus to prove that the conflict of interest is minimized or altogether eliminated is obviously a burden shouldered by the business that is soliciting customers.

In Samsung's case if behooves them to implement a "firewalled" internal business entity with enough transparency to the customer (qualcomm) as to effect confidence in said customer that their fears/concerns are mitigated. Otherwise Samsung loses business opportunities for failing to do so.

In the case of Samsung they actually manage their foundry fabs separate from their internal business fabs. Different fabs, different organization, different people, etc.

Its not a legal requirement, its a common-sense business necessity.

I do not know how Intel is going to manage their 22nm aspirations.

At TI we simply did not, and when Cyrix elected to use TI as their 486 chip foundry it was to their (Cyrix's) detriment because we most certainly took their chip design and produced our own competing version (worked for AMD and Intel, so why not TI and Cyrix, right?) of it.

That was why Cyrix moved to IBM and ST for their 5x86 chips if you were curious. Another historical tidbit...Cyrix itself was formed by ex-TI engineers, I guess they assumed everyone at TI took the same ethics courses they took before leaving TI? (its sad really, I make light of it because there's really nothing else to say about the despicable situation from that time)