Friday, November 29th 2019

Samsung Scores PC CPU Manufacturing Order from Intel

Samsung has reportedly secured a "PC CPU" manufacturing order from Intel. This would entail Intel using Samsung's fabs to manufacture its processors. "PC CPU" is a broad term, interchangeable with "client CPU," and could include both notebook and desktop processors, spanning the "S," "H," "U," and "Y" silicon variants (mainstream desktop, mainstream notebook, ultrabook, and ultra low-power, respectively). Samsung's bouquet of contract-manufacturing covers not just silicon fabrication across 14 nm, but also sub 10 nm nodes, but also provides other key stages of processor manufacturing, including bumping and packaging. Intel would want minimal expenditure in adapting its chip designs to Samsung's nodes

In her November 20 letter addressed to Intel's customers, executive V-P and GM for sales, marketing, and communications, Michelle Johnston Holthaus, mentioned that in addition to Intel's own manufacturing facilities, the company is roping in "foundries" (third-party silicon fabrication companies) to meet demand. Samsung and TSMC lead the foundry business, followed by the likes of GlobalFoundries, UMC, etc.
Many Thanks to biffzinker for the tip. Source: Pulse News Korea
Add your own comment

30 Comments on Samsung Scores PC CPU Manufacturing Order from Intel

#2
dicktracy
Just port Tiger Lake and next year’s Golden Cove to Samsung for crying out loud and take back that non-gaming performance lead lol.
Posted on Reply
#3
stimpy88
Intel, surely a lesson in "how the mighty have fallen".

I'm sure Samsung wont ever look in to the designs for what your getting them to make... They just wouldn't do that kind of thing...
Posted on Reply
#4
Patriot
stimpy88
Intel, surely a lesson in "how the mighty have fallen".

I'm sure Samsung wont ever look in to the designs for what your getting them to make... They just wouldn't do that kind of thing...
Samsung takes a peek, gasps in horror, it's a fucking patchwork doll in there.
Posted on Reply
#5
Pan
Maybe its time for intel to spin-off their fabs aswell?
Posted on Reply
#6
Tsukiyomi91
Pretty sure there's gonna be another "factory disaster"... in the making.
Posted on Reply
#7
fancucker
Now watch people desperately try to denigrate Samsungs process to avoid the fact that Willow Cove/Golden Cove's IPC uplift will devastate Zen 3 and possibly Zen 4
Posted on Reply
#8
Tsukiyomi91
Don't put all your eggs in one basket, now... Samsung will pull all sorts of BS in order to keep the asking price high while ensuring there's shortages.
Posted on Reply
#9
Vya Domus
Good luck in using nodes optimized for low power SoCs. They either get TSMC on board or it's futile.
Posted on Reply
#10
notb
Vya Domus
Good luck in using nodes optimized for low power SoCs. They either get TSMC on board or it's futile.
You really believe this or there wasn't a better argument around? :)

And in case you've missed it: low power SoCs is a big chunk of what Intel makes, which really takes away any sense from your theory - assuming it was true (but it isn't :)).

Pan
Maybe its time for intel to spin-off their fabs aswell?
Why would they?
Owning fabs is their great advantage right now.
Posted on Reply
#11
Noztra
fancucker
Now watch people desperately try to denigrate Samsungs process to avoid the fact that Willow Cove/Golden Cove's IPC uplift will devastate Zen 3 and possibly Zen 4
Do you work as a comedian?
Posted on Reply
#13
kapone32
Oh Boy this could mean 7nm is coming sooner than we thought.
Posted on Reply
#14
HD64G
Very sensible move from Intel even if they are in panic mode as their HEDT CPU series' launch showed clearly. Me thinks that Samsung will make only low power CPUs for Intel. Intel knows that this segment needs efficiency, low cost and big quantities. Zen2 APUs for mobiles are coming in the next few months to take over the last market Intel had an advantage.
Posted on Reply
#15
The Egg
I would expect Intel to start with the smaller, easier stuff like chipsets, NICs, and other small controller chips to free up fab space, rather than anything like a mainline CPU which would take a significant time/money investment to rework for Samsung’s fab process.
Posted on Reply
#16
kings
Vya Domus
Good luck in using nodes optimized for low power SoCs. They either get TSMC on board or it's futile.
Your Ryzen 1700X is manufactured in a low power process (Low Power Plus the technical term), which Samsung has licensed to GlobalFoundries.

Does that mean the CPU is bad?
Posted on Reply
#17
Smartcom5
Joss
Thanks, that's a priceless piece.
I couldn't picture what you was talking about, and likely so did others. So I made it.
Though, should be revised by now for Samsung and especially TSMC – as the latter advanced to 5nm already and will likely ramp it even faster than their 7nm (which by itself in fact even started (!) with a +↑70% yield already in march, yielding them the single most successful first-yield any process has ever reached within the last 5 years). Hope you may find it useful anyway.


Smartcom

kings
Your Ryzen 1700X is manufactured in a low power process (Low Power Plus the technical term), which Samsung has licensed to GlobalFoundries.

Does that mean the CPU is bad?
No, in fact quite the contrary.
The then 14nm LPP process from Global Foundries, which was used for the first generation of Ryzen, Threadripper & Epyc, was actually explicitly designed for mobi-le and ultra-portable SoCs such as Apple's A10, Qualcomm's Snapdragon or MediaTek's Helio - it was designed for extreme efficiency but low clock rates. This was never a process for desktop processors - it was de facto completely unsuitable for such or at least much less suitable for it, since you potentially obliterated the high-clock potential of desktop CPUs or at least couldn't exploit it.

... and the fact that AMD with Ryzen was still able to archive 3.6-4 GHz while still staying extremely efficient on a mobile process at that time, shows quite deeply the efficiency and grandiose architecture of Ryzen. Even the Threadripper in its first generation managed to hit 4.2 GHz at its peak – which is even 1.2 GHz more than the node should have been even able to achieve in the first place, as 14nm LPP was only specified for some theoretical maximum of around +3 GHz, at least theoretically and on paper.

Smartcom
Posted on Reply
#18
spectatorx
Before reading i took a look at random lines in this news and one line starts with "h, u and y". Some people will know why this caught my attention, after this i started reading. Intel is selling less now as amd took over a lot of consumer marketshare and enters back to other parts of market like servers, yet intel still has problems with providing enough cpus and has to outsource production? I find this odd.
Posted on Reply
#19
notb
spectatorx
Intel is selling less now as amd took over a lot of consumer marketshare and enters back to other parts of market like servers, yet intel still has problems with providing enough cpus and has to outsource production? I find this odd.
You haven't seen the news about Intel's Q3 results, but you seem interested in the topic. I find that odd. :)

Actually Intel is selling more than ever, with 2019Q3 revenue roughly equal to record 2018Q3 (at similar or lower prices).
They're slightly down in consumer segment (because of AMD), but exploded in DataCenters.

So this is a real problem. They make at least as many chips, while some of their production lines are transitioning to 10nm - which doesn't help for sure...
Posted on Reply
#20
Chrispy_
Patriot
Samsung takes a peek, gasps in horror, it's a fucking patchwork doll in there.
Based off the sheer quantity of vulnerabilities Intel seems to have, I wouldn't be surprised if that's actually the truth.
Posted on Reply
#21
Vya Domus
kings
Your Ryzen 1700X is manufactured in a low power process (Low Power Plus the technical term), which Samsung has licensed to GlobalFoundries.

Does that mean the CPU is bad?
Careful, your inner fanboy shows itself. Did you seriously expect that I would care more about defending some product that I own ? Sorry I don't work like that, no fanboy here, try again.

My 1700X as other first generation Zen products hit a frequency limit and a power wall at around 4 Ghz while other products from Intel manged to reach much higher clocks while maintaining much better power efficiency. That's a clear indication that the node was unfit for high performance processors. That's literally the whole point, Samsung isn't a provider of high performance nodes, first gen Zen is proof of that.

My 1700X also came out in 2017 and was up against a stagnant lineup of underwhelming products from Intel so it did well enough. Things have changed however, Intel has pushed their current node so far they are facing performance regressions with 10nm and AMD isn't stagnating, they deliver product after product, innovation after innovation.

The clock is ticking and Intel can't get away with a sub-par node like AMD did back then.
Posted on Reply
#22
Paganstomp
Obi Wan Samsung... you're our only hope!
Posted on Reply
#24
Dave65
fancucker
Now watch people desperately try to denigrate Samsungs process to avoid the fact that Willow Cove/Golden Cove's IPC uplift will devastate Zen 3 and possibly Zen 4
Always wondered if there really is a DREAM LAND, now I know cause you live in it.:roll:
Posted on Reply
#25
kings
Vya Domus
Careful, your inner fanboy shows itself. Did you seriously expect that I would care more about defending some product that I own ? Sorry I don't work like that, no fanboy here, try again.

My 1700X as other first generation Zen products hit a frequency limit and a power wall at around 4 Ghz while other products from Intel manged to reach much higher clocks while maintaining much better power efficiency. That's a clear indication that the node was unfit for high performance processors. That's literally the whole point, Samsung isn't a provider of high performance nodes, first gen Zen is proof of that.

My 1700X also came out in 2017 and was up against a stagnant lineup of underwhelming products from Intel so it did well enough. Things have changed however, Intel has pushed their current node so far they are facing performance regressions with 10nm and AMD isn't stagnating, they deliver product after product, innovation after innovation.

The clock is ticking and Intel can't get away with a sub-par node like AMD did back then.
You really should stop calling other fanboys, just because they don't agree with you 100% on something. I'm such a fanboy, I have a Ryzen and a Polaris card in my living room HTPC.

I just mentioned your 1700X, not for you to defend it, but to show you that because it is a low power process, it doesn't mean the product is bad or has poor performance.

By the way, if this is true, we don't even know what kind of CPU Samsung would produce, it could very well be laptop CPUs where efficiency prevailed over clocks. That's why I did not agree with your comment that only TSMC is worth it.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment