Paul Z Humphrey

GlobalFoundries (which now owns Chartered) and Samsung announced today
that they intend to synchronize their 28nm high-performance/low-leakage
production facilities. This new agreement follows a 2010 collaboration
between GloFo, Samsung, IBM, and STMicroelectronics in which all four
firms agreed to cooperate in building out their low-power 28nm process
nodes.

The new agreement means that Samsung and GF are collaborating to ensure
that their 28nm production facilities use common technologies and
components that allow parts to be produced at multiple facilities
without the need for redesign. Historically, moving a microprocessor
design from, say, TSMC to Chartered, has been prohibitively
time-consuming and expensive, even when both companies offered the same
process node.

<http://hothardware.com/News/Samsung-GlobalFoundries-Announce-New-28nm-Collaboration/>

salgud

On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:27:06 -0400, Paul Z Humphrey wrote:

> GlobalFoundries (which now owns Chartered) and Samsung announced today
> that they intend to synchronize their 28nm high-performance/low-leakage
> production facilities. This new agreement follows a 2010 collaboration
> between GloFo, Samsung, IBM, and STMicroelectronics in which all four
> firms agreed to cooperate in building out their low-power 28nm process
> nodes.
>
> The new agreement means that Samsung and GF are collaborating to ensure
> that their 28nm production facilities use common technologies and
> components that allow parts to be produced at multiple facilities
> without the need for redesign. Historically, moving a microprocessor
> design from, say, TSMC to Chartered, has been prohibitively
> time-consuming and expensive, even when both companies offered the same
> process node.
>
> <http://hothardware.com/News/Samsung-GlobalFoundries-Announce-New-28nm-Collaboration/>

I'm ecstatic!

Paul Z Humphrey

On 10/13/2011 12:35 PM, salgud wrote:

>> <http://hothardware.com/News/Samsung-GlobalFoundries-Announce-New-28nm-Collaboration/>
>
> I'm ecstatic!

You shouldn't be. As a result, Apple's supplier, TSMC, has decided to
hike its prices.

Paul Z Humphrey

On 10/13/2011 12:35 PM, salgud wrote:

>> <http://hothardware.com/News/Samsung-GlobalFoundries-Announce-New-28nm-Collaboration/>
>
> I'm ecstatic!

You shouldn't be. As a result, Apple's supplier, TSMC, has decided to
hike its prices.

Paul Z Humphrey

On 10/13/2011 12:35 PM, salgud wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:27:06 -0400, Paul Z Humphrey wrote:
>
>> GlobalFoundries (which now owns Chartered) and Samsung announced today
>> that they intend to synchronize their 28nm high-performance/low-leakage
>> production facilities. This new agreement follows a 2010 collaboration
>> between GloFo, Samsung, IBM, and STMicroelectronics in which all four
>> firms agreed to cooperate in building out their low-power 28nm process
>> nodes.
>>
>> The new agreement means that Samsung and GF are collaborating to ensure
>> that their 28nm production facilities use common technologies and
>> components that allow parts to be produced at multiple facilities
>> without the need for redesign. Historically, moving a microprocessor
>> design from, say, TSMC to Chartered, has been prohibitively
>> time-consuming and expensive, even when both companies offered the same
>> process node.
>>
>> <http://hothardware.com/News/Samsung-GlobalFoundries-Announce-New-28nm-Collaboration/>
>
> I'm ecstatic!

Your Name

In article <wrv9c0o7xx47.sdti3ttkcozt$.dlg@40tude.net>, salgud
<spamboy6547@comcast.net> wrote:

> On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 12:27:06 -0400, Paul Z Humphrey wrote:
>
> > GlobalFoundries (which now owns Chartered) and Samsung announced today
> > that they intend to synchronize their 28nm high-performance/low-leakage
> > production facilities. This new agreement follows a 2010 collaboration
> > between GloFo, Samsung, IBM, and STMicroelectronics in which all four
> > firms agreed to cooperate in building out their low-power 28nm process
> > nodes.
> >
> > The new agreement means that Samsung and GF are collaborating to ensure
> > that their 28nm production facilities use common technologies and
> > components that allow parts to be produced at multiple facilities
> > without the need for redesign. Historically, moving a microprocessor
> > design from, say, TSMC to Chartered, has been prohibitively
> > time-consuming and expensive, even when both companies offered the same
> > process node.
> >
> >
<http://hothardware.com/News/Samsung-GlobalFoundries-Announce-New-28nm-Collaboration/>
>
> I'm ecstatic!

Please stop encouraging that moron. :-(

SMS

On 10/13/2011 9:27 AM, Paul Z Humphrey wrote:

<snip>

> <http://hothardware.com/News/Samsung-GlobalFoundries-Announce-New-28nm-Collaboration/>

Meanwhile Intel is already at 22nm for their latest processors. TSMC has
not even begun production at 28nm.

If Intel ever decides to enter the portable device market for phones or
tablets, they'll have a substantial lead in process technology that they
can leverage versus TSMC or Samsung.

At IDF two weeks Intel was making noise about ARM, and they were in
attendance at this week's Android Open conference, so it would not be
surprising at all to see them decide to re-enter the mobile market with
ARM based SOCs. No doubt they're concerned about the pricing and margins
on ARM but it's immaterial if they want to play in the portable market.
They are halfheartedly trying to push Atom for tablets, but it's pretty
clear that they know the chances of major successes with Atom in the
mobile space are small.

Paul Z Humphrey

On 10/13/2011 05:24 PM, SMS wrote:


The move to a 22nm Tri-Gate process architecture is an important step
for Intel's entire microprocessor line, but it's especially critical for
the company's desire to enter the low-power world of tablets and
smartphones – and whatever consumer-level world-changers might appear next.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/05...gate_analysis/

JF Mezei

Paul Z Humphrey wrote:
> On 10/13/2011 05:24 PM, SMS wrote:
>
>
> The move to a 22nm Tri-Gate process architecture is an important step
> for Intel's entire microprocessor line, but it's especially critical for
> the company's desire to enter the low-power world of tablets and
> smartphones – and whatever consumer-level world-changers might appear next.

And guess what, since Apple is a FABless chip designer, it could go to
Intel and have Intel make its A6 or whatever processor if Intel ends up
having superior FABbing capabilities.

But it could end up being much cheaper to use 28nm and have higher yields.

Remember that the smaller you go, the higher the odds of one or more
CPUs on a wafer will be deffective and have to be thrown out, or sold as
a slower one.

In the case of Apple, since it doesn't sell "slower" A5 processors, one
which doesn't meet the specs has to be thrown out.

But for Intel, if a chip doesn't work at 2.6ghz, it can then down speed
it to 2.1gbz and if it works at that slower speed, it can be sold as such.

nospam

In article <4e978647$0$20342$c3e8da3$9deca2c3@news.astraweb.c om>, JF
Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> In the case of Apple, since it doesn't sell "slower" A5 processors, one
> which doesn't meet the specs has to be thrown out.

actually, they do. the a5 chip in the iphone 4s is clocked a little
slower compared to the ipad 2, presumably for better battery life
(much, much smaller battery in the iphone 4s).

> But for Intel, if a chip doesn't work at 2.6ghz, it can then down speed
> it to 2.1gbz and if it works at that slower speed, it can be sold as such.

same for apple.