Not necessarily apples to apples speed.
Not necessarily apples to apples speed.
This may be the case some of the time, but you seem to be using this as a hasty excuse to brush a potentially valid point aside.Right, you know there's something to it when a certain element pulls the "not optimized right" card.
Very optimistic. Let's just pretend 20nm doesn't exist and no money has been spend developing the technology (). Let's also pretend is doesn't take more than half a year to get big volumes out of a new node into the market.
Supposedly gf has started the same
Well it's a start. Is it just me or has GF floundered for lack of a better word since they became GlobalFoundries? Seems like they never have their **** together.Probably at 10% yield .
Well it's a start.
But who's gonna pay for $1000+ chips ?
Well it's a start. Is it just me or has GF floundered for lack of a better word since they became GlobalFoundries? Seems like they never have their **** together.
10-20% yield is awful. I love how Intel was derided for its 14nm issues when its yields were probably north of 50% last year. Still not good enough for high volume at the margins Intel likes, but miles ahead of the foundries.
Probably at 10% yield .
Does anyone have actual sources for info on GF and Intel 14 nm yields, or are you just guessing?
There is anticipation of some minor ramp that were aware of in the fourth quarter. There is capacity in place currently. We have equipment that has been relegated to the 14 and 16 nanometer note, primarily 14. And so at this time we have capacity in place to take care of that need as they begin to ramp slowly. So we dont see a significant ramp in Q4 in FinFETs. We see that occurring later or in 2015 and its really hard to project when. The current anticipation is theyre all being overly optimistic as to when theyre going to solve their problems. But the yields on the major companies right now is in the 10% to 20%. And so it's not giving them much indication as to when theyll grow that problem, that area. So it appears to me right now and the problems arent really consistent in one area. They vary in the processing and possibly design.
With the FinFET yield issue of 16/14 nanometers; it appears that this device design will be problematic for insertion in mobility products in 2015. Our current outlook for this product like is flat to slight growth in 2015. As to laser annealing, our latest information on the industry is that foundry producers are at best seeing yields in the low double-digits for logic devices. They are investigating if the problems are process or design related. Current ramp plans have been announced for early to mid-year 2015.
Does anyone have actual sources for info on GF and Intel 14 nm yields, or are you just guessing?
GF: We haven't even seen their 20nm node, so why would it be better than Samsung's?
As for Intel's 14nm, they had to catch up to 22nm, which is their highest yielding node ever.
So I'd say it was around 80%.
Well is ss process. Who says its better or worse? Nobody knows anything about ss 14nm yield.
As for Intel as they dont have any competition surely they will optimize for yield.
That can change and they can change their priorities if it suits them.
The graphs really illustrate how secret yield key numbers is.
What Intel was trying to communicate was that 14nm was controlled and on track. We know it was not that easy. No wonder with tech this complicated.
There is anticipation of some minor ramp that we’re aware of in the fourth quarter. There is capacity in place currently. We have equipment that has been relegated to the 14 and 16 nanometer note, primarily 14. And so at this time we have capacity in place to take care of that need as they begin to ramp slowly. So we don’t see a significant ramp in Q4 in FinFETs. We see that occurring later or in 2015 and it’s really hard to project when. The current anticipation is they’re all being overly optimistic as to when they’re going to solve their problems. But the yields on the major companies right now is in the 10% to 20%. And so it's not giving them much indication as to when they’ll grow that problem, that area. So it appears to me right now and the problems aren’t really consistent in one area. They vary in the processing and possibly design.
Samsung just wants to beat its chest and claim that it beat TSMC to FinFETs, IMO.
The (likely) truth is stupid? Oh boy.Sorry. But how stupid is that for a story??
It's not nonsense -- it's just about only logical way to interpret Samsung's public statements that Arach was referring to (and you've not presented a logical alternative here). The only reason why you want it buried is because it disagrees with your preexisting biases.Can we please burry this rambling nonsense.
Not all too coincidentally, Samsung stands to benefit financially by downplaying their yield issues.Ss process can be anything (but 10-20% seems reasonable at this time imo).
But Samsung is not there to "beat its chest" make "claims" or "beat" to be first. Thats just projection of own feelings. Samsung are there to make a profit. Samsung is nothing but a money machine. Its vision is money. Its soul is money.
A very likely projection, that you are discarding simply because you don't want it to be true. This is intellectually dishonest, and you should hold yourself to higher standards.We could all be robots and Samsung wouldnt care.
I dont know how ss will earn on their process dev and would gladly know as asked before, but this is absolutely the most far out reason and nothing but a projection.
The (likely) truth is stupid? Oh boy.
It's not nonsense -- it's just about only logical way to interpret Samsung's public statements that Arach was referring to (and you've not presented a logical alternative here). The only reason why you want it buried is because it disagrees with your preexisting biases.
Not all too coincidentally, Samsung stands to benefit financially by downplaying their yield issues.
A very likely projection, that you are discarding simply because you don't want it to be true. This is intellectually dishonest, and you should hold yourself to higher standards.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_honesty
Samsung have said zero about their yields now.