Friday, August 3rd 2018

Chances of Intel Going Fabless Higher Than Ever

Intel is one of the few semiconductor companies that manufactures a majority of its products on its own silicon fabrication foundries. The breadwinner for the company continues to be CPUs, and a majority of its revenues continue to come from its client-computing group (CCG). CPUs, like GPUs, are required to be built on the latest silicon fabrication process to keep up (or catch up) with Moore's Law. Intel is plagued with severe technological roadblocks toward advancing its foundry process from 14 nanometer (nm) to its next step, 10 nm. In its latest Q2-2018 earnings call, the company confirmed that the 10 nm node won't put out before Q4-2019, even as rival AMD's CEO announced that its first 7 nm processors will be up for purchase by the end of 2018 (a year ahead with a more advanced process, on paper). Analysts are beginning to paint a very grim future for Intel's foundry business.

The prospects for Intel going fabless, at least for its cutting-edge products, is higher than ever. Analysts, speaking with Taiwan-based industry observer DigiTimes, mentioned that there is speculation of Intel scaling down its foundry business. Something like this, if true, could hint at the company looking for foundry partners with newer silicon-fabrication nodes at a more advanced stage of development (eg: GlobalFoundries 7 nm) to manufacture its processors, while relegating its own foundries to manufacture less complex products such as chipset, NAND flash, 3D XPoint memory, 5G PHYs, etc. Fancy a Core processor made by GloFo in the great state of New York?
Source: DigiTimes
Add your own comment

80 Comments on Chances of Intel Going Fabless Higher Than Ever

#76
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
trparky@Smartcom5, it comes from the fact that Intel has been sitting on the high throne while drinking their own Kool-Aid for so long. They've been caught up in their own superiority, their own ego. What we're seeing here with Intel is what happens when a company gets drunk on their own Kool-Aid.
I hope you're wrong. We really do need a revolution in process tech and hopefully Intel has been working on that on the side while 10nm falls flat on its face. If you're right then I really hope someone else will bring about the necessary revolution or process tech advancement is going to grind to a halt in a decade or two.
Posted on Reply
#77
londiste
Do you really think Intel has not been doing a lot of R&D in this time?
I mean, I get it - Intel is the big bad and evil incarnate but they are most definitely not incompetent. Just the opposite.

In today's related news - GlobalFoundries is out of the race for 7nm:
GlobalFoundries Stops All 7nm Development: Opts To Focus on Specialized Processes
Press ReleaseGF is realigning its leading-edge FinFET roadmap to serve the next wave of clients that will adopt the technology in the coming years. The company will shift development resources to make its 14/12nm FinFET platform more relevant to these clients, delivering a range of innovative IP and features including RF, embedded memory, low power and more. To support this transition, GF is putting its 7nm FinFET program on hold indefinitely and restructuring its research and development teams to support its enhanced portfolio initiatives. This will require a workforce reduction, however a significant number of top technologists will be redeployed on 14/12nm FinFET derivatives and other differentiated offerings.
Perhaps relevant to this topic of moving production targets:
AnandtechIt is noteworthy that when GlobalFoundries first announced its 7LP platform in September 2016, it said that it would start risk production of processors using this technology in early 2018 (PR), which means that the first chips should have been taped out before that. When the company detailed the process in June 2018, it said that it expected to start “volume production ramping in the second half of 2018” (PR), which would be close to impossible if customers taped out their first chips only in Q4.
Generally, it looks like the company had to adjust its roadmap somewhere along the way, moving the start of high-volume manufacturing (HVM) further into 2019.
Posted on Reply
#78
R0H1T
FordGT90ConceptI hope you're wrong. We really do need a revolution in process tech and hopefully Intel has been working on that on the side while 10nm falls flat on its face. If you're right then I really hope someone else will bring about the necessary revolution or process tech advancement is going to grind to a halt in a decade or two.
Half a decade, give or take a couple of years - GlobalFoundries Puts its 7 nm Program on Hold Indefinitely
Posted on Reply
#79
londiste
oxidizedAnother fact is current process superiority, Intel, stupidly or not, they have a perfect 14nm, which smokes in every case what the other foundries have, and the 7nm TSMC is said to have ready, could even be not that much better than Intel's super refined 14nm, because if they work, like they had in the last processes, they will only make a "decent enough" 7nm, just good enough to secure a decent gain compared to THEIR own 14nm, not to the competition's.
7nm brings close to twofold increase in transistor density along with lower power usage. Even if the maximum frequency is not there, these will bring in a lot of customers.
FordGT90ConceptI hope you're wrong. We really do need a revolution in process tech and hopefully Intel has been working on that on the side while 10nm falls flat on its face. If you're right then I really hope someone else will bring about the necessary revolution or process tech advancement is going to grind to a halt in a decade or two.
It's more of an evolution than revolution and Intel is right at the cutting edge. From what we know, even more so than TSMC at this point. Samsung is making the additional bet on EUV for 7nm right from get-go which is a risk and could go either way but should be a major benefit for them in the long term since that is where lithography is inevitably going (both Intel and TSMC will move to EUV with 10+nm and 7+nm respectively).
Posted on Reply
#80
oxidized
londiste7nm brings close to twofold increase in transistor density along with lower power usage. Even if the maximum frequency is not there, these will bring in a lot of customers.
No, that depends on how those are made, they won't necessarily bring twice the transistor density, not even if they respect the ITRS rules, and they probably won't, as seen with previous processes.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Feb 18th, 2025 14:54 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts