Sorry, I don't have a link. However this is something I was very curious about so I asked friends within the industry who would know. They have all said that it is LPP.
Do you have a link to proof of this? I'm not even sure Samsung has LPP at all otherwise AMD would be using them earlier than GlobalFoundries instead of later, wouldn't they?
Not what I know of so I disagree. 8890 and 820 should be the first LPP parts.That's not what several independent industry sources have told me.
As the story goes, Samsung basically used A9 as its yield learning vehicle for 14LPP (Exynos 7420 was used for LPE).
Not what I know of so I disagree. 8890 and 820 should be the first LPP parts.
I suppose we will agree to disagree
Thevenin from SA forums says 14LPP was going to be released a few months before Iphone 6s launched. Not enough time to bake A9 on LPP process. From what i know, 16FF from TSMC is still not the plus version.
We once desagreed when i told you that AMD would have no trouble fabbing samples at Samsung in the waiting of GF being ready.
I also told you that Apple s does not use LPP since it s too leaky, with the possibility that if it s a LPP variant then it s a high threshold voltage variant wich is not representative at all of the exact process that will be used by AMD.
So If i were you i would be more cautious before keeping doing such random statements..
Ah, 14nm LPP is too leaky for A9 but it's all good for Exynos 8890 and Snapdragon 820? OK then
It's LPE.
Those who have some logic have long deducted that LPP advantage over LPE is a paltry 15% better perf/watt, wich means that the transistors (trans)conductance has been increased by the same amount.
What matters actualy is that the second grade speed wise of LPP has already roughly 20% better perf/Watt (at 2.4GHz) than Intel s fastest 14nm and that the faster variant should increase this advantage.
Would love to know what´s the actual difference between the two (other than the 15% advantage quote from Samsung itself).
double post. Is there no delete option?
Well, from a report I read earlier this year said the 7420's yields were over 50% at the end of last year and 70% during the first quarter 2015. If anything the 7420 was a yield learning vehicle for 14 LPE (and whatever else).That's not what several independent industry sources have told me.
As the story goes, Samsung basically used A9 as its yield learning vehicle for 14LPP (Exynos 7420 was used for LPE).
Samsung said:14LPP (Performance boosted edition) is the 2nd FinFET generation which the performance is enhanced up to 10%. 14LPP is the single platform for every application designs with the improved performance for computing/Network designs and the lowered power consumption for Mobile/Consumer designs. 14LPP will be the main process technology offering in 2016 and after.
Well, from a report I read earlier this year said the 7420's yields were over 50% at the end of last year and 70% during the first quarter 2015. If anything the 7420 was a yield learning vehicle for 14 LPE (and whatever else).
From the links prtskg provided above:
The underlined part is hard to square with the claim that A9 is produced on 14 LPP. I would presume the first parties have a correct knowledge on such matters and I see no reason as to why Samsung would lie about it. (I won't bother with the claim that the A9 is Samsung's vehicle for learning 14 LPP)
The same iPhone that was supposed to get a sapphire screen? Not everything Apple wants turns into product particles, so let's not use that as an argument.I will say though that we are talking about Apple and its flagship iPhone that will likely generate >$100 billion in revenue over its lifetime. Who do you think pushed Samsung and TSMC to develop 14 LPP and 16FF+, respectively?
100% unsubstantiated claim.
Sorry, I don't have a link. However this is something I was very curious about so I asked friends within the industry who would know. They have all said that it is LPP.
Two of those links are by the same author who just speculates and the third one actually quotes Chipworks as it being LPE and 16FF+.Based on _your_ knowledge? Sorry abwx, your credentials are 0. That's why people tend to ask you for facts...that you cant deliver.
Hints that they are using LPP as well as TSMC is using 16FF+:
http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...may-have-made-a-huge-mistake-in-having-s.aspx
https://benchlife.info/problem-might-not-from-samsung-a9-soc-maybe-is-apple-issue-10242015/
http://www.nasdaq.com/article/3-imp...bring-to-the-a10-processor-next-year-cm543646
They have far more SoCs that they don't talk about. There's also other vendors using 14nm. In any case based on info here it's 2:0 in favor of LPE and that LPP is indeed at 2016 node. 16FF+ will still be slightly better than 14LPP but the differences will be smaller it'll not be worthy of argument.Considering how Samsungs own 2016 Exynos lineup only contains 1 14nm product and 2 28nm products. I think its safe to say their process is anything but ground breaking.
You won't get an official statement from either of them.
They have far more SoCs that they don't talk about. There's also other vendors using 14nm. In any case based on info here it's 2:0 in favor of LPE and that LPP is indeed at 2016 node. 16FF+ will still be slightly better than 14LPP but the differences will be smaller it'll not be worthy of argument.