Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GlobalFoundries Stops All 7nm Development: Opts To Focus on Specialized Processes (anandtech.com)

Posted by msmash on from the change-of-plans dept.

GlobalFoundries has made a major strategy shift announcement. The contract maker of semiconductors says it is ceasing development of bleeding edge manufacturing technologies and stop all work on its 7LP (7 nm) fabrication processes, which will not be used for any client. From a report: Instead, the company will focus on specialized process technologies for clients in emerging high-growth markets. These technologies will initially be based on the company's 14LPP/12LP platform and will include RF, embedded memory, and low power features. Because of the strategy shift, GF will cut 5% of its staff as well as renegotiate its WSA and IP-related deals with AMD and IBM.

GlobalFoundries was on track to tape out its clients' first chips made using its 7 nm process technology in the fourth quarter of this year, but "a few weeks ago" the company decided to take a drastic strategical turn, says Gary Patton. The CTO stressed that the decision was made not based on technical issues that the company faced, but on a careful consideration of business opportunities the company had with its 7LP platform as well as financial concerns. On the heels of this announcement, AMD said today that it will move all of its 7nm production on both CPUs and GPUs to TSMC.

9 of 114 comments (clear)

  1. Weasel words! by HornWumpus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    'Not based on technical issues' but based on...lots of bullshit...as well as financial concerns.

    'Financial concerns' like a 10% yield, or some other technical disaster, so full of shit.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    1. Re:Weasel words! by Tough+Love · · Score: 3, Informative

      Intel is having trouble with 7 nm because it's using 4 masks to get there. So, it's really using older tech with many steps to etch smaller w/ these overlays. If you have to run the silicon through the light 4 times in different positions using different patterns, you can get horrible yields as the slightest deviation will either ruin chips or severely impact their performance.

      And yet, that is exactly what TSMC is doing (i.e., no EUV) and they are supposedly ramping up volume production, though I would not bet my life on the truth of this. Intel just pushed it ever so slightly too far with about 10% smaller half pitch than TSMC, and it seems, it just didn't work out. BTW, Intel is not having trouble with 7nm because there is no such thing as Intel 7nm.

      I haven't seen anything credible beyond 5 nm -- and that wasn't even using silicon as the substrate.

      Google "gate all around".

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  2. Re:Intel to blame? by Anubis+IV · · Score: 4, Insightful

    AMD's contract with GlobalFoundries was ending this year anyway, so AMD doesn't lose anything with this announcement, other than a potential alternate source. In fact, it's entirely possible that GF's failure to secure AMD as a client may have played into their decision to drop 7nm.

    That said, with only Samsung and TSMC on the leading edge now, it does mean that AMD has one less bargaining chip next time negotiations come around (i.e. they can't realistically threaten to go back to GF), whereas Intel will continue using their own processes as they always have. So, at least in that minor regard, I suppose this does benefit Intel and harm AMD somewhat.

  3. Did Moore's law just end? by sbaker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did Moore's law just end? Intel said they thought it had...maybe this is confirmation.

    --
    www.sjbaker.org
    1. Re:Did Moore's law just end? by AbRASiON · · Score: 5, Informative

      Firstly, their definition of "7nm" is actually, about the same as Intel 10nm, it's stupid marketing lies and speak.

      Secondly, Intel themselves are stuggling like total crazy to achieve 10nm reliably.

      So, to answer your question, yeah, I think Moores Law is very very close to dead if not dead. Just go look up benchmarks for processors designed 5 years ago, they're still viable now.

      If you compare frequency, IPC, core count, relatively, you'll see the amount of progress we've had in the past 5 years is, atrociously bad, very, very bad.
      This is why mom / pop PCs built even up to 7 years ago, just need 2 more sticks of ram, the dust blown out and an SSD with a Windows re-install, they'll be fine for another 5.

      It's over, no more bleeding edge, insane fast PCs. Just very very small burps forward.

    2. Re:Did Moore's law just end? by SoftwareArtist · · Score: 3, Informative

      Only if you only look at Intel processors. Current ARM processors blow away the ones from five years ago. Same with GPUs from AMD and NVIDIA. AMD's current x86 processors are also way faster than their ones from five years ago. It's just Intel that's falling behind.

      --
      "I'm too busy to research this and form an educated opinion, but I do have time to tell everyone my uninformed opinion."
  4. Smart by Tough+Love · · Score: 4, Informative

    Smart move. There is just too much bleeding edge science and engineering at 7nm, this is a physical reality. Stick with profitable, mature fab tech and iteratively improve it. Get into 7nm when some of the horrible EUV issues have well known solutions, which should carry on to 5nm.

    Meanwhile, the big Asian fabs are said to be ramping 7nm production, but as far as I know, nobody has seen actual parts arrive beyond samples. Certainly not enough to have a good idea about yields. Definitely a believe it when you see it situation. Of course, I hope that Samsung and TSMC have actually overtaken Intel at this transition, and given the economics of the situation it seems inevitable, but we do not have proof it has actually happened yet.

    --
    When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
  5. IBM loses, too by swschrad · · Score: 3, Interesting

    IBM's fab in Vermont was sold to GF, and believe it continued to be defense-rated for (nobody's talking) type chips. so folks doing things they shouldn't in places they are not supposed to be are going to be scampering for product nobody should know about. look for Intel to suddenly get its 7nm act together.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  6. 7nm is hard by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    7nm is hard, heck, 14, 10nm are hard, even 28nm is hard.

    Many more effects, OCV, double, tripple, or quad patterning, not to mention new STA models, fault models, transistor models, extraction models, DRC, ERC and LVS models, all of these cost money.

    phones will likely stay on the 28nm process node for a long long time, and unless you plan to charge $600 for a cpu, it's unlikely that even intel or AMD will go to that node for the consumer level stuff.

    the ROI just isn't there.