AMD turns TSMC into a CPU manufacturing giant

Quote:

---

News that AMD has taken a big step to outsource its manufacturing to TSMC and that wafer testing for SOI mass production has begun made waves yesterday.
...
The closer relationship between AMD and TSMC isn’t a surprise as the two companies last year signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with AMD with the explicit goal to outsource the manufacturing of AMD processors.
...
However, the simple fact that TSMC is jumping on the SOI train, as opposed to simply remaining a bulk production facility, is probably the most significant news between AMD and TSMC so far.

---

Theo Vatich

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/37423/118/

While I am not surprised at this. ATI's chips were made their, and if can be done more efficient and cheaper, then it is a smart move for AMD. But I remember reading that TSMC would be handling their new Fusion platform. I guess time will only really tell.

Not this again. AMD is not going to outsource CPU production. It makes no sense on many levels. Firstly, TSMC is likely not capable of producing an AMD CPU their process is not advanced enough. And if TSMC does upgrade their tooling to do it, the end product would very likely end up worse, higher power, lower clocks etc.

Secondly, by producing the CPU at TSMC, AMD would probably make less per processor.

What this is really about is Fusion. AMD is going to have the GPU part of fusion fabbed by TSMC. The first real fusion product will be a side by side die arrangement, the GPU portion minted by TSMC, the CPU portion by AMD. The two are then slapped onto a single substrate.

Would this will allow to rush Shanghai?
[edit: likely not]

Dont know if outsourcing CPU's are feasible, but the TSMC 55nm process has been very very good for ATI as far as I can tell

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eleeter

Not this again. AMD is not going to outsource CPU production. It makes no sense on many levels. Firstly, TSMC is likely not capable of producing an AMD CPU their process is not advanced enough. And if TSMC does upgrade their tooling to do it, the end product would very likely end up worse, higher power, lower clocks etc.

Secondly, by producing the CPU at TSMC, AMD would probably make less per processor.

What this is really about is Fusion. AMD is going to have the GPU part of fusion fabbed by TSMC. The first real fusion product will be a side by side die arrangement, the GPU portion minted by TSMC, the CPU portion by AMD. The two are then slapped onto a single substrate.

---

But what AMD out sources there lower end stuff. Nothing high end, but it will allow them to free up more fab space? Just a thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vengance_01

But what AMD out sources there lower end stuff. Nothing high end, but it will allow them to free up more fab space? Just a thought.

---

fab 36 isnt running at full capacity yet and according to amd fab 38 is unequipped and not producing any chips at all. so i dont think that they outsoure anything at all, this has to be related with fusion ;)

With all this nonsense blogging that you can read these days I was fortunate to stumble upon wise words of Adam Curtis, and put them in my new sig!

For Crying out loud TSMC jus recently showed great breakthrough in bulk technology , and by many analyst their 40nm tech is in pair with what Intel's got in their 45nm HighK… why on earth would they go for SOI, when AMD's 45nm tech could very well beswan song of this great tech?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eleeter

Not this again. AMD is not going to outsource CPU production. It makes no sense on many levels. Firstly, TSMC is likely not capable of producing an AMD CPU their process is not advanced enough. And if TSMC does upgrade their tooling to do it, the end product would very likely end up worse, higher power, lower clocks etc.

Secondly, by producing the CPU at TSMC, AMD would probably make less per processor.

What this is really about is Fusion. AMD is going to have the GPU part of fusion fabbed by TSMC. The first real fusion product will be a side by side die arrangement, the GPU portion minted by TSMC, the CPU portion by AMD. The two are then slapped onto a single substrate.

---

1. TSMC process technology is way ahead of AMD, launches faster and matures earlier. And, TSMC will not upgrade their tools for AMD specifically as AMD's volume is fairly small compare to other semiconductor giants such as Texas Instruments and Qualcomm.

2. AMD could make more as TSMC's quality control is top notch vs. big variances at AMD's own fab.

3. Mounting/stacking SOI and CMOS die isn't as easy a task as you would imagine.

Size does matter in the manufacturing business, and the only guys that could afford to charge forward and lead in manufacturing technologies are Intel, Samsung and TSMC. IBM/Hitachi could have patents but that's only paperwork. AMD? Nowhere on the map.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vitaminc

1. TSMC process technology is way ahead of AMD, launches faster and matures earlier. And, TSMC will not upgrade their tools for AMD specifically as AMD's volume is fairly small compare to other semiconductor giants such as Texas Instruments and Qualcomm.

2. AMD could make more as TSMC's quality control is top notch vs. big variances at AMD's own fab.

3. Mounting/stacking SOI and CMOS die isn't as easy a task as you would imagine.

Size does matter in the manufacturing business, and the only guys that could afford to charge forward and lead in manufacturing technologies are Intel, Samsung and TSMC. IBM/Hitachi could have patents but that's only paperwork. AMD? Nowhere on the map.

---

1. While TSMC can hit the shrink nodes a bit quicker, performance wise I recall TSMCs significantly poor performing (parametrically) than AMD's.

2. Not certain myself, I have not seen any company publish quality control data (i.e. yields).

3. This is an interesting proposition, at first thought -- just knee-jerk thoughts -- SOI would be somewhat difficult to implement in a 3D stacked arrangement simply because SOI requires fairly rapid thermal transfer to avoid self-heating problems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eleeter

Not this again. AMD is not going to outsource CPU production. It makes no sense on many levels. Firstly, TSMC is likely not capable of producing an AMD CPU their process is not advanced enough. And if TSMC does upgrade their tooling to do it, the end product would very likely end up worse, higher power, lower clocks etc.

---

TSMC has been making 666 million transistors GPUs at 55nm for 10 months but you think it can't make 450 million transistors CPUs at 65nm?


Let's how well this TSMC-AMD agreement will go in the future..
I fear that as soon as AMD goes over this crisis and assumes total autonomy through their fabs, they'll try to get rid of TSMC - the easy or the hard way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToTTenTranz

TSMC has been making 666 million transistors GPUs at 55nm for 10 months but you think it can't make 450 million transistors CPUs at 65nm?

---

Look at the clock speeds. Big difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vitaminc

TSMC process technology is way ahead of AMD...

---

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eleeter

You have no idea what you're talking about.

---

Be nice, instead of "You have no idea what you're talking about" explain to him why his thinking is wrong.
Keeps the tempers down and we mods have to type less.:D
Thanks for reading..

Aren't there a limit to how big a percentage of CPU, that AMD can outsource to FABs that aren't their own? (x86 license contract)

If there is, I am still puzzled WTH anyone aren't challenging that old agreement. I think, that old license contract is legally very weak today, at best.

If all of this is true, then this would be a first step in AMD's "Asset Light Strategy". I believe they are right to do so and good move on their part. Even if this means infirior CPU quality (TDP / clocks), then it can still pay off with the right deal, as TSMC probably wouldn't be making the best of AMD's CPU / chipsets. This is probably more about quantity and price, and not quality itself.

AMD is not stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vitaminc

1. TSMC process technology is way ahead of AMD, launches faster and matures earlier. And, TSMC will not upgrade their tools for AMD specifically as AMD's volume is fairly small compare to other semiconductor giants such as Texas Instruments and Qualcomm.

2. AMD could make more as TSMC's quality control is top notch vs. big variances at AMD's own fab.

3. Mounting/stacking SOI and CMOS die isn't as easy a task as you would imagine.

Size does matter in the manufacturing business, and the only guys that could afford to charge forward and lead in manufacturing technologies are Intel, Samsung and TSMC. IBM/Hitachi could have patents but that's only paperwork. AMD? Nowhere on the map.

---

This is in line with all of your previous post regarding the AMD technological capabilities, so no surprises.

But let's stick to the facts: Intel is the only mass producer of highly complex chips as CPU's on 45nm tech, and beside that AMD is the only one left who has shown working product on 45nm (and about to go in mass production in the next 100 days).

So saying that AMD is nowhere on the map just beautifully paints the picture of your fanboyism!

TSMC making AMD CPUs? LOL..maybe a 2Ghz 150W 45nm K10 will be the new flag product?

TSMC is generic process. While AMD and Intel uses a highly specialized one to obtain the properties they need. TSMC is just "cheap" at 45nm its far far from "efficient". Intel or AMD making GPUs on a specialized process is something that could make an inferiour GPU beat anything.

Also I dont know if people forgot. X86 license demand anyone? AMD still needs to make the vast majority inhouse.

VIA is a fabless company with x86 license. How do you explain that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eson

VIA is a fabless company with x86 license. How do you explain that?

---

Really? Can you post a link proving that? I thought a vast portion of cpu production had to be done in-house. As always I could be wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stocius

Really? Can you post a link proving that? I thought a vast portion of cpu production had to be done in-house. As always I could be wrong.

---

Isaiah is manufactured by Fujitsu.
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20080515PD214.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eson

VIA is a fabless company with x86 license. How do you explain that?

---

If I don't make a mistake, it's the old x86 licence from the old time when ibm has pushed Intel to give licence (via licence = cyrix licence). This is not new x86 with all the improvements. The cross-licencing between AMD and Intel is much more advance, let the two compagnies to use the ip of the others, but that doesn't mean that AMD has the right to give the full x86 licence to an other compagny (And this is about what a large outsourcing is).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shintai

TSMC making AMD CPUs? LOL..maybe a 2Ghz 150W 45nm K10 will be the new flag product?

---

at least come with some data or an argument to state your point?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nedjo

For Crying out loud TSMC jus recently showed great breakthrough in bulk technology , and by many analyst their 40nm tech is in pair with what Intel's got in their 45nm HighK… why on earth would they go for SOI, when AMD's 45nm tech could very well beswan song of this great tech?!

---

Just to tell you that you do not have to retool anything in your fab for SOI wafers. I dont know if you knew this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shintai

TSMC making AMD CPUs? LOL..maybe a 2Ghz 150W 45nm K10 will be the new flag product?

TSMC is generic process. While AMD and Intel uses a highly specialized one to obtain the properties they need. TSMC is just "cheap" at 45nm its far far from "efficient". Intel or AMD making GPUs on a specialized process is something that could make an inferiour GPU beat anything.

Also I dont know if people forgot. X86 license demand anyone? AMD still needs to make the vast majority inhouse.

---

It´s probably for the Fusion part.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by v_rr

It´s probably for the Fusion part.

---

Fusion would be a singledie concept. I dont know what people expect. But Fusion is like value Nehalem. IGP+CPU. So I dont see any advantage of having some very small extra die external. The GPU part would be something like 5-10% of the CPU. With the weight added on 5%.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eson

VIA is a fabless company with x86 license. How do you explain that?

---

Try compare the 2 licenses. AMD uses Intel tech in its CPUs, just like Intel uses AMD tech. They cant be made by a 3rd party in any high volume without IP violation.