Interesting. This was Brian Krzanich comment on 450mm in the Q3 earnings call in October:
Oh, and 450mm has been pushed out another 5 years - https://www.semiwiki.com/forum/content/3241-intel-450mm-delayed-until-2023.html
Timothy Arcuri - Cowen and Company
Got it, great. So just to be specific on the timing on 450, nothing has changed there?
Brian Krzanich - Chief Executive Officer, Director
So let me answer that one. We have not changed our timing. We are still targeting the second, latter half of this decade. We continue to see great value in 450. It brings tremendous economic value to everybody who participates in it. We continue to work with our partners. We are here part of the joint development program in New York, continuing to work on 450. We continue to work with our partners, especially TSMC and Samsung and we are still targeting the back half of this decade. This is a long 10-year program when you really take a look at it. So I think you will get mixed signals throughout those 10 years, take a look at the long-term trend and then really start to understand the economic value here and you will see we will get there in the end.
Now that I think of it, it doesn't make sense at all. Altera wouldn't spend hundreds of millions, just to throw it all down the drain.intel has denied it. interesting
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/03/05/did-intel-lose-altera.aspx
I think we established that Daniel Nenni has no credibility. There's a lot of interesting articles on the site. It is sponsored by TSMC, but from what I've seen, the garbage has always come from Dan. Digitimes, on the other hand, is a well-known pile of crap.I thought we already established that semiwiki got no credibility.
The rumor came in December. Charlie Claims he had heard it for weeks prior, so it's possible this all happened not long after that earnings call.Interesting. This was Brian Krzanich comment on 450mm in the Q3 earnings call in October:
The rumor came in December. Charlie Claims he had heard it for weeks prior, so it's possible this all happened not long after that earnings call.
My link -Paul Farrar, general manager of the G450C consortium, said early work has demonstrated good results and that he sees no real barriers to implementing 450mm wafers from a technical standpoint.
The first interesting information from the conference floor was that 450mm is being pushed out. What I heard is that with low fab utilization and the empty fab 42 shell, Intel has pulled all of their resources off of 450mm. Intel was one of the key players pushing 450mm and the comments I heard were 450mm wont be this decade with 2023 as the new introduction date for high volume manufacturing. Some equipment companies appear to be putting 450mm equipment development on hold.
Look what else that guys says in the article. He thinks 50% yield rate is bad for a new node. The yield rate typically ramps from 30% - 70%, and only reaches 80% on a mature yield, so 50% would be well above average for a new node.intel has denied it. interesting
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/03/05/did-intel-lose-altera.aspx
50% is bad. That's a pretty awful yield. There isn't a single person that could tell you with a straight face that TSMC's 20nm, or any process, is ready for HVM with a yield at 50%.Look what else that guys says in the article. He thinks 50% yield rate is bad for a new node. The yield rate typically ramps from 30% - 70%, and only reaches 80% on a mature yield, so 50% would be well above average for a new node.
I wouldn't take website too seriously, they seem to like talking a lot about stuff they don't really understand.
Witeken.
Your link -
My link -
No it's not. 30% is about average for a new node:50% is bad. That's a pretty awful yield. There isn't a single person that could tell you with a straight face that TSMC's 20nm, or any process, is ready for HVM with a yield at 50%.
Not coincidentally, there are a dearth of devices built on TSMC's 20nm process. It's not ready for prime time, which is exactly what he's stated.
As Gartners Johnson noted, 30% yield problems at advanced nodes is hardly unusual. In fact some of the large complex die that appeared at 28nm node were rumored to have production yields in the 40% range.
The empty fab 42 is irrelevant. And I'm not sure why a low fab utilization at 1 point in time would impact such a long-term project.
"It boils down to better capital utilization," Mulloy said.
You are arguing something completely different than what was being argued here:No it's not. 30% is about average for a new node:
http://semiengineering.com/non-visual-defect-inspection-inspection-tech-tomorrow/
Again your link points out the reason.
Intel does not have the bottomless pockets you believe they have. They have to pick and choose their targets far more wisely than they have been doing up till now.
My point was that website is indeed run by fools. Take anything you read there with a pinch of salt.You are arguing something completely different than what was being argued here:
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2014/03/05/did-intel-lose-altera.aspx
No it's not. 30% is about average for a new node:
http://semiengineering.com/non-visual-defect-inspection-inspection-tech-tomorrow/
They're obviously not making test chips at this stage. The known products at the moment are A8 and the gobi modem.Which hints at why a non-specific "50% yield rate" figure is completely worthless. If they're getting a 50% yield rate on 500mm^2 monstrosities then they're doing awesome! But if they're getting a 50% yield rate on, say, the 40.3mm^2 SRAM test chip that they provided information on about a year ago then they're not doing so great. (The difference being a minimum of roughly 60 defects per wafer at a 500mm^2 die size versus around 750 at a 40.3mm^2 die size - yes, there can be an order of magnitude difference in defect density while still maintaining a "50% yield rate".)
They're obviously not making test chips at this stage. The known products at the moment are A8 and the gobi modem.
A bit off topic, but I'm thrilled that Sony's out of the PC market. What terrible laptops.
A question regarding the rumors about the delayed 450 mm EUV to 2023, if this is indeed the case then Moore's law is completely thrown out of the window unless we find a new material and quickly, right? I mean, Moore's law is already slowing but can you even hit 7 nm before the end of the decade without the 450 mm EUV?