---- The economics of 20nm /14nm foundry process will be equally sobering... 1.7 increase of 20nm litho cost compared to 28nm means - that guy and other ARM suckers still believe ARM can manufacture "cheaply".... According to Barclay 80% of Intel's 22nm equipment is extendable to 14nm - TSMC will spend a huge chunk on capex ----
A key function of fab engineering teams is tool selection. Are you implying that TSMC and others are inferior to INTC in identifying toolsets that deliver on cost, performance, and lifecycle? What evidence do you have to support this claim?
[He's not implying anything of the sort. Can't you read? He's saying that Intel has a 22nm /14nm foundry process that allows them to use 80 percent of equipment from 22nm on the 14nm process and ARM doesn't have the same 20nm/14 process. Because they don't have any 20nm/14nm process. ARM has to spend huge Capex to get to Intel's level. And it will take at least 4 years...]
--- ARM has to spend huge Capex to get to Intel's level. ----
Capex huh? So ARM has fabs now? And last I checked TSMC buys tools to meet demand and technology requirements. How exactly does that differ with INTC's approach? I hope semi-equip-junkie can respond with clarifications, since your comments make no sense. And what's with the name calling... you sound like a kid.
" I hope semi-equip-junkie can respond with clarifications, since your comments make no sense."
I highly recommend to study how BRCM, Marvel and NVDA feel / think about 20nm economics.
There are 3 CEO's that don't believe 20nm foundry process can provide ROI justifying to go to 20nm - even Jacobs is skittish about future nodes..
And last I checked TSMC buys tools to meet demand and technology requirements.
They certainly do and I rspct TSMC...however there is always a faster gun...
several years ago there was talk that TSMC would fab Atom chips for Intel -
Intel decided to pull out because Intel decided to protect its (gate last) IP -otherwise Intel would have transfered its Gate Last IP to TSMC
Intel and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. will collaborate on Atom chip production, the companies announced Monday.
Intel chip technology
For its part, Intel is eying big markets--such as smartphones--where it is currently not a player, but TSMC is. "Many of our customers already had an existing IP (Intellectual Property) infrastructure on TSMC that they would like to take advantage of as they ramp Atom-based products. That's essentially what the agreement is about," said Anand Chandrashekar, senior vice president at Intel, speaking Monday morning in a joint Intel-TSMC conference call. Atom is currently the most widely used processor in Netbooks.
1)Intel plans its fab spending based on reusability in future nodes. If others are reacting to problems and switching from planor to finfet on an adhoc basis this will not happen.
2) Intel customizes its tools. They guide manufactureres to base requirement but than adjust and customize in the fab. They will not even let the manufacturers look at these customizations. So no the Intel tools are really not a choice on the market.
I seriously doubt TSMC does fab process planning on an 'adhoc basis' or that they are unable to implement in-house changes to equipment when they identify an optimization that the tool vendor is not aware of. I know INTC has superb engineering, but that does not mean you can discount the capabilities of the process teams at other companies.