Friday, March 14th 2025

Samsung Foundry in Trouble, Might Cancel 1.4 nm Node High-Volume Manufacturing
Samsung Foundry could abandon its 1.4 nm (SF1.4) process node initially targeted for 2027 production, according to industry leaker @Jukanlosreve. This decision comes amid ongoing yield problems with the company's 3 nm SF3 node and follows the shutdown of underutilized 5 nm and 7 nm production lines. This could significantly impact Samsung's technology roadmap, which had positioned SF1.4 alongside automotive-focused SF2A and SF2Z nodes. According to Korea Economic Daily data, the foundry division's market share has fallen to 8.2% compared to TSMC's 67.1%. Samsung continues the development of Exynos 2600 on the SF2 node and maintains orders from Japan's Preferred Networks but has failed to attract major clients beyond Chinese firms, avoiding US sanctions. Internal restructuring appears imminent, with reports suggesting the Exynos design team may move under the Mobile Experience division.
While Samsung may prioritize improving yields on existing nodes rather than pursuing SF1.4, this approach risks competitive disadvantages in high-performance computing and AI markets. The SF2Z node with Backside Power Delivery Network (BPDN) technology remains under development, though its commercial viability depends on resolving broader manufacturing issues. Samsung's retreat would further fall behind advanced node manufacturing, competing with TSMC and potentially Intel, raising questions about competition in leading-edge semiconductor fabrication. The company's decisions in the coming months will determine whether it can regain manufacturing credibility or face production of trailing-edge semiconductor nodes. Manufacturing advanced silicon remains a challenge for everyone except TSMC.
Sources:
@Jukanlosreve on X, via Notebookcheck
While Samsung may prioritize improving yields on existing nodes rather than pursuing SF1.4, this approach risks competitive disadvantages in high-performance computing and AI markets. The SF2Z node with Backside Power Delivery Network (BPDN) technology remains under development, though its commercial viability depends on resolving broader manufacturing issues. Samsung's retreat would further fall behind advanced node manufacturing, competing with TSMC and potentially Intel, raising questions about competition in leading-edge semiconductor fabrication. The company's decisions in the coming months will determine whether it can regain manufacturing credibility or face production of trailing-edge semiconductor nodes. Manufacturing advanced silicon remains a challenge for everyone except TSMC.
39 Comments on Samsung Foundry in Trouble, Might Cancel 1.4 nm Node High-Volume Manufacturing
hopefully they will fix the yield issue(s)
If it can reduce heat generation you should get higher clocks
Wow! Just Wow! Who is that Magician Guy? I mean @Jukanlosreve...
Let me put it in a different way. Techpowerup is an absolute spreader of tech-rumours and, very often, tech-bullshit-like news!
The red line is crossed and this is my last post. I'll Never visit Techpowerup again.
Strange that they don't have buyers for 5nm & 7nm. Surely many don't need a smaller process then that.
Hopefully the get their act together because having TSMC supply basically the entire world is never a good idea.
They truly do need to stop putting the cart before the horse, but OTOH I also understand wanting to hit that target everyone else is attempting to yield right now before they take all the business.
Beyond that truly is silly (expense versus benefit). So what they're doing, while perhaps bad form before; up to this point, and would be in the future, actually kind of does make sense in this specific instance.
People also forget it's not like TSMC is going to be truly mass-producing 2nm (for consumer products outside of Apple/Qualcomm) for quite some time, let-alone even 3nm in the US.
Samsung *does* need to catch up, and sooner would be better than later, but unlike some that think it has to be done by EOY or early next for 2027 devices, I think if they can do it for 2028 stuff they'll be okay.
They would still be in the thick of it for most customers (especially those that don't want to spend more on TSMC/Intel's BSPD and/or limited wafers), and likely would be for at least a couple or more years after imo.
And even then, many won't transition past that offering (just like many didn't transition past other older processes for different reasons).
If they can compete with Intel/TSMC/Rapidus/whomever at that approx level and by that approx time I think they'll be fine. It just-so-happens TSMC was ahead and pushed them harder/faster than able until now.
At some point it's just going to be all about comparative pricing and volume, imo. And in the grand scheme of things, outside tech enthusiasts, it's not all that far away regardless if one, two, or even three years.
which would force those to up their game too.
for some reason they are happy to stick to idiotic small amounts of ram and storage on the devices they sell millions of
Massive over capacity probably the big concern for 2026.
It seemed like back in the 14-28nm nodes that even without a die shrink there seemed to be quite a wide margin of efficiency gains with just changes in architecture...maybe that'll be the case in the 2-3nm nodes too?
I suppose Nvidia could not offer something affordable enough besides there 8nm rumored T239 anyways
Mainstream graphics could well be made on 7nm.
3 Graphics card vendors isn't enough.
everyone is going full throttle with new data centers that need the latest and greatest. Maybe by 2027 things will slow down a bit, but '25/'26 orders are pretty much maxed out for the current fabs