News & Analysis
Comment
docdivakar
@MarkLaPedus: it was good to see you at DesignCon last week. I remain skeptical ...
SS123
testing!
450-mm brings confusion to supply chain
Mark Lapedus
2/1/2011 8:38 PM EST
Soaring fab costs
Despite the improvement in business, fewer companies are willing to throw down the money to build new, greenfield plants. One reason is that fab costs are soaring out of control.
At one time, a leading-edge 300-mm fab was about $3 billion to $5 billion. Now, Toshiba Corp. may have set the record for the world’s most expensive fab. The company’s new 300-mm NAND plant (Fab 5), including construction costs, is expected to run $10.5 billion to $11.5 billion, according to SEMI.
At the recent Industry Strategy Symposium (ISS), sponsored by SEMI, Robert Bruck, vice president of the Technology and Manufacturing Group at Intel Corp., said a 450-mm fab could run $10 billion. That figure may not include construction costs.
The R&D costs to develop a 22-nm process is expected to run from $999 million to $1.354 billion, compared to $581 million to $796 million at 32-nm, according to Handel Jones, CEO of International Business Strategies Inc. At 90-nm, the R&D cost ranged from $198 million to $283 million, Jones said.
Fab tool costs are also soaring, especially lithography. In the 1980s, a leading-edge lithography scanner sold for about $1 million. Today, ASML Holding NV’s 193-nm immersion scanners run $40 million each. And a production-worthy extreme ultraviolet (EUV) tool could sell for about $125 million-if or when these machines are shipped.
Photomask costs are also increasing. A 45-nm ''mask set'' runs about $800,000 to $900,000, but a 32/28-nm ''mask set'' could run $2 million or so, according to one photomask vendor. A 22-nm ''mask set'' could double, according to some.
Needless to say, IC design costs are soaring out of control. ''With each successive node the cost of a design goes up,’’ said Piper Jaffray’s Richard. ‘’The cost of a 45-nm SOC chip design is estimated to be roughly $80 million and a 32-nm SOC is $130 million. We estimate that the addressable market of these chips needs to be roughly $400 million and $650 million to make a reasonable return assuming a 50% gross margin.’’
The cost to move from 300-mm to 450-mm fabs is also expected to be enormous. Every 15 years or so, the industry has moved to a new wafer size, ostensibly to stay on Moore’s Law. The transition to a new wafer size has already been bumpy, especially in 300-mm, when fab companies announced and then delayed a plethora of plants several years ago. The fab tool makers developed the first round tools for these plants, but were left holding the bag-and suffered massive losses-when the fabs were delayed.
For some time, four chip makers-Intel, Samsung, TSMC, and, to some degree, Toshiba-have been pushing the industry towards the 450-mm era. IDMs wanted 450-mm pilot lines as early as 2012.
In the beginning, most fab tool vendors refused to invest in 450-mm for several reasons. The return-on-investment remains unclear and no one is sure who will pay for the R&D. And fab tool vendors do not want to repeat the same mistakes in the early days of the 300-mm era.
Then, suddenly, Intel recently announced the D1X fab in Oregon, a plant that is capable of producing 300-mm wafers and is ''450-mm capable.’’ The startup time for D1X is 2013.
Last week, TSMC officially disclosed plans that it will build a 450-mm fab, according to an analyst. The first 450-mm line is planned for Fab 12 Phase VI; it will be for their 20-nm production ramp, according to VLSI Research. TSMC’s 450-mm pilot line is expected to start around 2013 to 2014, with production due in 2015 to 2016, according to the firm.
Next: 450-mm confusion
Despite the improvement in business, fewer companies are willing to throw down the money to build new, greenfield plants. One reason is that fab costs are soaring out of control.
At one time, a leading-edge 300-mm fab was about $3 billion to $5 billion. Now, Toshiba Corp. may have set the record for the world’s most expensive fab. The company’s new 300-mm NAND plant (Fab 5), including construction costs, is expected to run $10.5 billion to $11.5 billion, according to SEMI.
At the recent Industry Strategy Symposium (ISS), sponsored by SEMI, Robert Bruck, vice president of the Technology and Manufacturing Group at Intel Corp., said a 450-mm fab could run $10 billion. That figure may not include construction costs.
The R&D costs to develop a 22-nm process is expected to run from $999 million to $1.354 billion, compared to $581 million to $796 million at 32-nm, according to Handel Jones, CEO of International Business Strategies Inc. At 90-nm, the R&D cost ranged from $198 million to $283 million, Jones said.
Fab tool costs are also soaring, especially lithography. In the 1980s, a leading-edge lithography scanner sold for about $1 million. Today, ASML Holding NV’s 193-nm immersion scanners run $40 million each. And a production-worthy extreme ultraviolet (EUV) tool could sell for about $125 million-if or when these machines are shipped.
Photomask costs are also increasing. A 45-nm ''mask set'' runs about $800,000 to $900,000, but a 32/28-nm ''mask set'' could run $2 million or so, according to one photomask vendor. A 22-nm ''mask set'' could double, according to some.
Needless to say, IC design costs are soaring out of control. ''With each successive node the cost of a design goes up,’’ said Piper Jaffray’s Richard. ‘’The cost of a 45-nm SOC chip design is estimated to be roughly $80 million and a 32-nm SOC is $130 million. We estimate that the addressable market of these chips needs to be roughly $400 million and $650 million to make a reasonable return assuming a 50% gross margin.’’
The cost to move from 300-mm to 450-mm fabs is also expected to be enormous. Every 15 years or so, the industry has moved to a new wafer size, ostensibly to stay on Moore’s Law. The transition to a new wafer size has already been bumpy, especially in 300-mm, when fab companies announced and then delayed a plethora of plants several years ago. The fab tool makers developed the first round tools for these plants, but were left holding the bag-and suffered massive losses-when the fabs were delayed.
For some time, four chip makers-Intel, Samsung, TSMC, and, to some degree, Toshiba-have been pushing the industry towards the 450-mm era. IDMs wanted 450-mm pilot lines as early as 2012.
In the beginning, most fab tool vendors refused to invest in 450-mm for several reasons. The return-on-investment remains unclear and no one is sure who will pay for the R&D. And fab tool vendors do not want to repeat the same mistakes in the early days of the 300-mm era.
Then, suddenly, Intel recently announced the D1X fab in Oregon, a plant that is capable of producing 300-mm wafers and is ''450-mm capable.’’ The startup time for D1X is 2013.
Last week, TSMC officially disclosed plans that it will build a 450-mm fab, according to an analyst. The first 450-mm line is planned for Fab 12 Phase VI; it will be for their 20-nm production ramp, according to VLSI Research. TSMC’s 450-mm pilot line is expected to start around 2013 to 2014, with production due in 2015 to 2016, according to the firm.
Next: 450-mm confusion
Navigate to related information


mark.lapedus
2/2/2011 11:54 AM EST
Is the industry going down the wrong path with 450-mm?
Sign in to Reply
Jim.Wieser
2/2/2011 1:00 PM EST
I had heard there was an "intermediate" wafer size between 300 and 450mm which is more cost effective from an equipment and infrastructure point of view. It would still provide a path for reduced $$/mm2 and in a more manageable way. Comments from the equipment industry?
Sign in to Reply
David Jimenez
2/2/2011 12:21 PM EST
It will be interesting to see the responses we get from our 5th annual process technology survey (currently underway at http://www.wwk.com/2011survey.pdf). The responses from the previous 4 surveys on 450mm manufacturing indicated more than 6 years out (39% responded never), more than 6 years out (56% responded never), beyond 2015(17% responded never), and beyond 2017(38% responded never).
Sign in to Reply
SiFarmer (Ret.)
2/2/2011 12:37 PM EST
C'mon guys? How many people think the wafer size is unlimited. What's next? A 1 meter wafer?!?
I predict Dr. Moore's Law will soon continue along other tracks than wafer size. You heard it here first! :)
Sign in to Reply
Jim.Wieser
2/2/2011 1:05 PM EST
I had heard there is an intermediate wafer size between 300mm and 450mm which is MORE cost effective than going to 450mm. Do any of the equipment manufacturers have comment on this?
Sign in to Reply
ScottenJ
2/2/2011 1:10 PM EST
There is no intermediate wafer size between 300mm and 450mm. 450mm is the next wafer size.
Sign in to Reply
GoGoGeek
2/2/2011 2:07 PM EST
400mm was planned long time ago. SEMI has a 400mm wafer in the lobby in San Jose as display. It is now 450mm.
Sign in to Reply
SudsSutherland
2/2/2011 2:18 PM EST
Folks seem to forget that Dan Maydan, then in the Office of the President at AMAT,suggested in the mid 90's that the industry should go directly to 450mm from the incumbent 200mm. What followed of course was the initial 300mm "false-start"
Sign in to Reply
mlvlvr
2/2/2011 4:10 PM EST
Judging by where 450mm is today, and how long it took 300mm to get into production (ignoring Motorola) from a similar point, we're looking at what, 7 years? That doesn't change any capacity issues for a long long time.
Sign in to Reply
lcovey
2/3/2011 11:57 AM EST
I think its a deliberate move from those few companies (read TSMC) to kill off its competition. The big companies that can afford it will do it to grab all the business cornering the market, much like OPEC controls oil prices.
Sign in to Reply
mark.lapedus
2/3/2011 7:09 PM EST
So is 450-mm a good or bad idea?
Sign in to Reply
SS123
2/4/2011 1:59 PM EST
Its certainly a good idea, for hi volume foundries anyways. I wonder what the limitation is on Si wafers, they are bound to crack at some point due to shear weight...
Sign in to Reply
SS123
2/4/2011 2:02 PM EST
testing!
Sign in to Reply
iniewski
2/3/2011 8:57 PM EST
Good for Intel and Samsung, bad for everyone else ;-)...dr Kris
Sign in to Reply
docdivakar
2/6/2011 1:17 PM EST
@MarkLaPedus: it was good to see you at DesignCon last week. I remain skeptical of TSMC's plan to have a pilot line for 450mm by 2013. Other market factors including the stabilization of flash memory prizes and their future fluctuations also have an impact on the urgency to drive the 450mm adoption.
Missing in the article are references to technology nodes that are going to be piloted in TSMC/other vendor fabs and their strategy thereof.
Lack of automation standards is a significant impediment but given the number of players wanting to participate in 450mm is so small, I hope it is easily resolved.
MP Divakar
Sign in to Reply