Tuesday, August 28th 2018

AMD Chip Manufacturing to Lay Solely With TSMC On, After 7 nm - And Why It's not a Decision, but a Necessity

It's been a tumultuous few days for AMD, as the company has seen Jim Anderson, Computing and Graphics Group leader after the departure of Raja Koduri, leave the company, at a time of soaring share value for the company (hitting $25.26 and leaving short positions well, short, by $2.67 billion.) However, there's one particular piece of news that is most relevant for the company: Globalfoundries' announcement to stop all ongoing development on the 7 nm node.

This is particularly important for a variety of reasons. The most important one is this: Globalfoundries' inability to execute on the 7 nm node leaves AMD fully free to procure chips and technology from competing foundries. If you remember, AMD's spin-off of GlobalFoundries left the former with the short end of the stick, having to cater to GlobalFoundries' special pricing, and paying for the privilege of accessing other foundries' inventories. Of course, the Wafer Supply Agreement (WSA) that is in place will have to be amended - again - but the fact is this: AMD wants 7 nm products, and GlobalFoundries can't provide.
To the forumites: this piece is marked as an editorial

AMD's CTO Mark Papermaster wrote thus in a blog post:
AMD's next major milestone is the introduction of our upcoming 7nm product portfolio, including the initial products with our second generation "Zen 2" CPU core and our new "Navi" GPU architecture. We have already taped out multiple 7nm products at TSMC, including our first 7nm GPU planned to launch later this year and our first 7nm server CPU that we plan to launch in 2019. Our work with TSMC on their 7nm node has gone very well and we have seen excellent results from early silicon. To streamline our development and align our investments closely with each of our foundry partner's investments, today we are announcing we intend to focus the breadth of our 7nm product portfolio on TSMC's industry-leading 7nm process.
The thing is, AMD going solely with TSMC for 7 nm isn't a decision: it's a necessity. It's a necessity of increasing need for AMD to bank on its powerful forward momentum against Intel on the CPU wars. It's essential for AMD's continued push in the professional, server field. And it's of utmost importance for AMD's relevance in graphics technologies against NVIDIA's frankly dominating position (despite AMD controlling all high-performance games consoles, a strategy that will only increase its fruits for AMD, should they be able to maintain this exclusivity - and all points towards that). Zen 2, EPYC 2, Vega 20, Navi - those are not only sizeable pieces of AMD's product portfolio, these are its bread and butter.
As great as that part of the deal is for AMD, there's an obvious drawback of yet another foundry being left in the dust of new node developments: the weight of the world's semiconductor manufacturing capability on the 7 nm node - and AMD's efforts in it - stand solely on the shoulders of one player. And that's not even looking into actual output for TSMC's 7 nm node, how many customers will want to manufacture their chips on it, and whether or not TSMC has the ability to satisfy demand from all players.

Should anything befall TSMC, should the silicon giant trip, AMD will have all of its product portfolio endangered. Consumer and professional GPU and CPU products will all be manufactured under TSMC's 7 nm process, as AMD has stated time and again - and in quite an aggressive manner. Here's hoping other players step up to the 7 nm manufacturing task, or, that being as hard as it is, that nothing affects TSMC's ability to deliver, lest one giant brings down others with it.
Sources: AMD Blogs, via TechSpot
Add your own comment

87 Comments on AMD Chip Manufacturing to Lay Solely With TSMC On, After 7 nm - And Why It's not a Decision, but a Necessity

#76
notb
R0H1TWhat? www.nextplatform.com/2018/03/01/server-market-booms-last/
That's $18 billion a quarter (probably last year) & not annually! The sever market could actually top $100 in a year or two easily, where do you think Chipzilla's $6 ~ 7 billion (annually) in operating income from DCG came from?
You might be thinking about server market value as a whole, not just CPUs. Intel's yearly revenue is $60bln (from all segments) and they have ~99% of server CPU market.
Posted on Reply
#77
R0H1T
notbYou might be thinking about server market value as a whole, not just CPUs. Intel's yearly revenue is $60bln (from all segments) and they have ~99% of server CPU market.
They don't, perhaps 99% of x86 server market but not the overall server CPU market. That's just gross exaggeration.
Posted on Reply
#78
StrayKAT
R0H1TThey don't, perhaps 99% of x86 server market but not the overall server CPU market. That's just gross exaggeration.
It's hard to find numbers (I'm sure someone else can do better), but apparently IBM took about 14% in 2015. It couldn't have changed that much since.

www.fool.com/investing/2016/06/01/where-does-ibm-rank-in-software-and-hardware.aspx

edit: This is after they sold the x86 division to Lenovo btw.. so these are all Power based.
Posted on Reply
#79
R0H1T
StrayKATIt's hard to find numbers (I'm sure someone else can do better), but apparently IBM took about 14% in 2015. It couldn't have changed that much since.

www.fool.com/investing/2016/06/01/where-does-ibm-rank-in-software-and-hardware.aspx

edit: This is after they sold the x86 division to Lenovo btw.. so these are all Power based.
Yes that's why it sounds implausible, there's also SPARC & AMD (just recently) mind you, so even at Intel's peak 99% sounds dubious.
Posted on Reply
#80
notb
R0H1TThey don't, perhaps 99% of x86 server market but not the overall server CPU market. That's just gross exaggeration.
Yes, I meant x86. Should have stated this clearly.
Precisely I said "server CPU market is worth" and that's how analysts talk about it. That's because you can actually price / buy x86 CPUs. :-)
This market is estimated at ~$18bln and Intel has 99%. AMD has 1%. Of course this will change in 2018 figures.
R0H1TYes that's why it sounds implausible, there's also SPARC & AMD (just recently) mind you, so even at Intel's peak 99% sounds dubious.
AMD is the 1% (2017 figures!). Other architectures aren't included, since you buy whole systems.
StrayKATIt's hard to find numbers (I'm sure someone else can do better), but apparently IBM took about 14% in 2015. It couldn't have changed that much since.
For 2017 IBM reported $6.5bln revenue from hardware - that's POWER, z and storage solutions.
These are whole machines, so we'd have to compare them to how much the server market is worth. I'm seeing very different estimations, but mostly in the $80-100bln range, so IBM's share would be around 6-8%.
Posted on Reply
#81
R-T-B
RichFRandoid fantasies predate Ayn Rand. Every generation moans and groans about how the best and brightest have disappeared/been sidelined by inferior folk. In reality, the banning of lead products like gasoline and paint has improved IQ and behavior. Lead has been an extremely long-standing brain drain on humanity. For example, the Roman empire's massive problems, often nebulously attributed to "decadence" were, in large part, due to the effects of lead poisoning. We're not out of the woods with lead poisoning by any means. It still strongly affects inner-city folk, due to dust from demolition and old housing. It is a persistent pollutant in soil that goes into crops like grapes in the US. China, India, and others still mismanage it (polluting soil and food via the soil). The other reality is that corruption is neither new nor stamped with an expiration date (aside, perhaps from the aforementioned takeover by rational AI).


Don't let facts get in the way of a good moan man...

Seriously... You are dealing with people who treat "altruism" as a cuss word. Give up.
Posted on Reply
#82
StrayKAT
R-T-BDon't let facts get in the way of a good moan man...

Seriously... You are dealing with people who treat "altruism" as a cuss word. Give up.
Ayn Rand, I sort of understand (her American followers.. not so much). She was a young Russian girl who was traumatized by a supposed "altruistic" worker's movement that eventually did things like this:



For every opposite action, etc., etc..

This kind of horror had it's extreme counterpart in unfettered "selfishness". It created people like her who celebrated the exact opposite ideal of communism.

Both were wrong though. True altruism - as well as individuality (what the so call Rand adherents want) is elsewhere. My 2c.
Posted on Reply
#83
R-T-B
StrayKATAyn Rand, I sort of understand (her American followers.. not so much). She was a young Russian girl who was traumatized by a supposed "altruistic" worker's movement that eventually did things like this:



For every opposite action, etc., etc..

This kind of horror had it's extreme counterpart in unfettered "selfishness". It created people like her who celebrated the exact opposite ideal of communism.

Both were wrong though. True altruism - as well as individuality (what the so call Rand adherents want) is elsewhere. My 2c.
I hear you. Like most things, moderation is probably a good thing here.

Thing is it's really OT in this thread.
Posted on Reply
#84
StrayKAT
R-T-BI hear you. Like most things, moderation is probably a good thing here.

Thing is it's really OT in this thread.
True enough.. Admittedly, that's a hefty "2c" I originally got us off the track with.
Posted on Reply
#85
mtcn77
R-T-BI hear you. Like most things, moderation is probably a good thing here.

Thing is it's really OT in this thread.
Seems like the "People's State of America" has become incumbent on external aid. Oh, the irony of Rand... Such an exacting call on SJW's and griefers.
Posted on Reply
#86
R-T-B
mtcn77Seems like the "People's State of America" has become incumbent on external aid. Oh, the irony of Rand... Such an exacting call on SJW's and griefers.
Can you call it quits now? Everyone has agreed it's OT. Not to mention you aren't even making much sense anymore.
Posted on Reply
#87
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
Thread title makes it sound like AMD is sourcing 7 nm from someone else (Samsung?) and that post-7 nm, AMD's contracts will go exclusively to TSMC. Is there actually confirmation for the former? If so, what isn't being made at TSMC? The latter seems kind of silly because post-7 nm seems like a fantasy at this point.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Apr 16th, 2024 02:33 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts