Monday, May 1st 2023

AMD to Shift Some of its 4 nm CPU Silicon-fabrication to Samsung from TSMC

by
btarunr
 Discuss (44 Comments)
AMD has reportedly signed up with Samsung Electronics to shift some of its 4 nm processor silicon fabrication from TSMC. The apex Taiwan-based foundry is reportedly operating at capacity for its 4 nm-class nodes, with customers such as Apple and Qualcomm sourcing 4 nm mobile SoCs on the node, leaving AMD with limited allocation and/or bargaining power with TSMC. The company relies on 4 nm for its Ryzen 7040 series "Phoenix" mobile processors, and is in the process of adapting its design for Samsung's 4 nm-class nodes (of which there are five types for AMD to choose from).

Switching to Samsung probably gives AMD more scalability, particularly given that "Phoenix" has missed its release timeline, leaving AMD with the 5 nm + 6 nm Ryzen 7045 series "Dragon Range" MCM in the premium segments, and older 6 nm 7035 series "Rembrandt-R" in the mainstream and ultraportable segments, but nothing "apt" to compete against Intel "Raptor Lake-U" and "Raptor Lake-P." AMD has a limited window in which to ramp up "Phoenix," as Intel readies "Meteor Lake" for a 2H-2023 debut, with a focus on mobile variants.
Sources: Wccftech, OreXda (Twitter)

Related News

Add your own comment

44 Comments on AMD to Shift Some of its 4 nm CPU Silicon-fabrication to Samsung from TSMC

#1
dgianstefani
TPU Proofreader
I wonder if we'll see different performing variants of the same SKU, or whether specific models will be made on different nodes.
Posted on Reply
#2
dir_d
Taking a wild guess but the 5 nm + 6nm approach is not going well so they went to Samsung for a unified 4 nm part.
Posted on Reply
#3
Denver
This should be very expensive and unfeasible, unless the volume is so absurd that it pays off...there would also be loss of efficiency with the change.
Posted on Reply
#5
Count von Schwalbe
dir_dTaking a wild guess but the 5 nm + 6nm approach is not going well so they went to Samsung for a unified 4 nm part.
The Phoenix APUs are monolithic.
Posted on Reply
#6
yeeeeman
so they'll basically make phoenix on a 7nm TSMC like process. Good luck with it amd. We know for a fact what this results in, from qualcomm. But maybe you can do some magic and remove the crapiness from samsung fab process.
Posted on Reply
#7
Denver
yeeeemanso they'll basically make phoenix on a 7nm TSMC like process. Good luck with it amd. We know for a fact what this results in, from qualcomm. But maybe you can do some magic and remove the crapiness from samsung fab process.
Samsung's 4nm LPP looks very similar to TSMC's 5nm. It must be about 10% worse than TSMC 4nm.
Posted on Reply
#8
sethmatrix7
When Korea may actually be safer than Taiwan..:eek:
Posted on Reply
#9
Nanochip
So how does Samsung “4nm” compare with TSMC 5nm, and the upcoming intel “4” ?
Posted on Reply
#10
Daven
Meanwhile over at Intel…

Pat: “World say hello to Intel 7 available now for fab customers.”

World: …cricket sounds…
Posted on Reply
#11
Nanochip
DavenMeanwhile over at Intel…

Pat: “World say hello to Intel 7 available now for fab customers.”

World: …cricket sounds…
Lol lies. Intel will use 18A for its foundry customers and ARM at least has signed up. Intel’s foundry ambitions may well be a flop but ARM signing up is arguably major. For many reasons.
Posted on Reply
#12
dir_d
Count von SchwalbeThe Phoenix APUs are monolithic.
Then it must just come down to pricing, must have a better deal at Samsung.
Posted on Reply
#13
Fouquin
dir_dTaking a wild guess but the 5 nm + 6nm approach is not going well so they went to Samsung for a unified 4 nm part.
The two are different product segments. Dragon Range (Ryzen 7045 series) is desktop Zen 4 MCMs repackaged on BGA; so 5nm CCDs and 6nm IOD. Phoenix (Ryzen 7040 series) is a monolithic single-die Zen 4 APU on 4nm. The former is working well as a chiplet design should. The latter is having problems getting wafer allocation because AMD is not the primary customer for 4nm wafers at TSMC, and they're playing fourth fiddle to the top dogs. Doesn't have anything to do with pricing and everything to do with not getting enough chips made because TSMC literally cannot give them more right now.
Posted on Reply
#14
Count von Schwalbe
FouquinDoesn't have anything to do with pricing and everything to do with not getting enough chips made because TSMC literally cannot give them more right now.
I would think that they could get the wafers, given a high enough premium over asking, but it wouldn't make much sense for these parts.

Pity they can't move the low-end RDNA3 parts there, instead of TSMC 6nm.
Posted on Reply
#15
Fouquin
Count von SchwalbeI would think that they could get the wafers, given a high enough premium over asking, but it wouldn't make much sense for these parts.

Pity they can't move the low-end RDNA3 parts there, instead of TSMC 6nm.
If they could get the wafers it would have been in a supply contract months ago. I don't believe TSMC offers flexible supply on leading edge nodes, you need to be locked into that contract well in advance. AMD outbidding companies like Apple is laughable at best.
Posted on Reply
#16
Daven
NanochipLol lies. Intel will use 18A for its foundry customers and ARM at least has signed up. Intel’s foundry ambitions may well be a flop but ARM signing up is arguably major. For many reasons.
You do realize that ARM isn’t actually a foundry customer. They are not fabbing even a single chip.
Posted on Reply
#17
LabRat 891
I wonder what little differences there'll be between them?

IIRC, the K7 (Slot A / Socket 462/A) Athlon XP era had multiple fabs making "the same chip", but they physically were different packages, and had different OCing qualities. I think I've ran across this w/ older nVidia GPUs as well (diff fabs, on diff processes, making the same gen uArch dies; with different dimensional and clocking qualities)
Posted on Reply
#18
mechtech
yeeeemanso they'll basically make phoenix on a 7nm TSMC like process. Good luck with it amd. We know for a fact what this results in, from qualcomm. But maybe you can do some magic and remove the crapiness from samsung fab process.
All depends what they are fabbing. A lot of people like their ssd and bdie ram.
Posted on Reply
#19
TechLurker
I wonder if this is also in advance of Samsung maybe deploying more AMD IP in some of their product stack down the line. Basically, AMD using one design to "pipe clean" and familiarize themselves with Samsung's nodes, and then port over some designs that will work well within Samsung's fabs as quantity and quality matures.

I recall that besides RDNA IP, Samsung might be working with the Xilinx half to help improve their Exynos after repeated failures, and there was some speculation of maybe involving AMD on a joint chip design to basically redesign Exynos from the ground up.
Posted on Reply
#21
R0H1T
There shouldn't be much difference given they won't be clocking to 6GHz or come insane level, most of them would be tuned for best efficiency so there shouldn't be too much difference between the chips unless 4nm Samsung is really really bad.

Laptop chips also downclock incredibly quickly so there's that.
Posted on Reply
#22
Wirko
FouquinIf they could get the wafers it would have been in a supply contract months ago. I don't believe TSMC offers flexible supply on leading edge nodes, you need to be locked into that contract well in advance. AMD outbidding companies like Apple is laughable at best.
This also means that AMD has been aware for many months that they wouldn't be able to get enough wafers from TSMC. If they are smart, they designed the Phoenix chip with two foundries in mind so they need not waste an entire year now, or more, to port the design to Samsung's foundry.
(To be clear, I'm not saying that a single design can simply be copied to another stack of floppies and mailed to Korea; I'm saying AMD has had enough time to prepare.)
Posted on Reply
#23
TheinsanegamerN
qcmadnessBut there are just reports that tsmc's 5nm / 4nm process is under-utilized.

www.digitimes.com/news/a20230118PD216/5nm-tsmc.html
It maybe less about capacity and more about samsung offering a notably better price. With their profits in the toilet, losing 3.4 billion last quarter, they will likely be *incentivising* customers, and AMD will want tot ake advantage of that to raise margins on things like mobile chips.
Posted on Reply
#24
kondamin
If that pushes prices down i guess it’s a good thing.

if the can push idle power to an absolute minimum they would make nice stb and nas processors even if they can’t reach super high clocks.
Posted on Reply
#25
RedBear
R0H1TThere shouldn't be much difference given they won't be clocking to 6GHz or come insane level, most of them would be tuned for best efficiency so there shouldn't be too much difference between the chips unless 4nm Samsung is really really bad.

Laptop chips also downclock incredibly quickly so there's that.
Mobile phones don't clock to crazy levels and they don't really operate at high frequencies for extended time, but when Qualcomm moved to TSMC 4nm for their Snapdragon 8 Plus Gen 1 they gained both in performance and efficiency. So I wouldn't really hold my breath for any miracle here, probably they're just confident that Intel is sinking and they can safely get a performance handicap (which they're taking for whichever reason, it might be cost, bargaining power, geopolitical tensions, etc.).
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 16th, 2024 14:27 EDT change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts