News & Analysis
Comment
docdivakar
@ChrisGar: After the CMOS imaging Silicon heralded the way for 3D IC, DRAMs are ...
ChrisGar
I'm surprised because it looks like DRAMs will be important for initial 3D IC ...
TSMC goes it alone with 3-D IC process
Rick Merritt
12/13/2011 2:51 PM EST
BURLINGAME, Calif. – TSMC will try to go it alone with an integrated 3-D chip stacking technology as its only offering for future customers. The approach makes commercial sense for TSMC, but some fabless chip designers said it lacks technical merit and limits their options.
3-D chip stacks are seen as a strategic new direction in chip design at a time when progress is becoming more difficult in the traditional scaling of semiconductor process technology. However, foundries, packaging houses and integrated chip makers are still debating how to address the technical challenges making 3-D stacks.
TSMC claims its approach will be simpler, cheaper and more reliable than using multiple foundries, packaging houses and other partners. It is focused on creating so-called through-silicon vias (TSVs) early on in the process, then adding packaging capabilities to its fabs.
The Taiwan chip maker made 3-D test chips for about five companies including Xilinx which used Amkor as a packaging partner. These "first wave" 3-D customers will be able to continue using external partnerships if they choose, "but for new customers we have this one proposal, one [integrated] solution," Doug Chen-Hua Yu, a senior R&D director at TSMC, told EE Times.
"Some, but not all our customers want us to work with other partners, but many customers like our approach very much," Yu said.
Yu pitched the integrated approach in a presentation at a 3-D technical conference here. Using a single foundry, reduces shipping that can crack the thin wafers needed for 3-D ICs and reduces confusion of who is liable for a broken product. TSMC also believes it can lower costs by eliminating unneeded steps at lower capital equipment costs than packaging houses, Yu said.
In a Q&A afterwards, packaging analyst Jan Vardaman asked Yu how TSMC would develop the test, assembly and substrate expertise paclkaging companies have today.
"This new proposal is only two or three quarters old because we worked with many customers in this area and we found out [reliability issues] had become much worse, more risky and complicated," Yu said. "Someone has to come forward to assume the responsibility and take on the challenges--this is a new ball game, and the old way of doing business is out of date, I'm afraid," he said.
Xilinx plans to continue using a mix of foundries and packaging houses such as TSMC and Amkor to make its so-called 2.5-D chips such as the Virtex 2000T announced earlier this year.
"In general, the fabless industry would like more degrees of freedom," Ivo Bolsens, chief technology officer of Xilinx told EE Times. "I don’t see any technical reason against any particular design flows," he added.
Analysts noted TSMC will face plenty of competition and may be forced into being more of a team player.
"TSMC said they want to do everything," said Jim Feldhan of Semico Research. "That’s very gallant of them, but we need the rest of the industry to step up so that these processes are well adopted and understood," he said.
"TSMC makes a very compelling case [for going it alone] but others won't lie down or go away--there's a lot of money in play here," said Jeff Perkins, President of Yole Inc.


chipmonk
12/13/2011 4:22 PM EST
The profit margin for packaging & assembly is just a fraction of that possible even for a Foundry like TSMC. So whats TSMCs motive to keep all 3D in - house and even cut off options by opting for via - first ? Is it just to prevent damage during xfer of partially processed wafers to the OSATs for assembly & damage caused by them to the thinned wafers ? What has been the experience during processing the 2.5D FPGAs for Xilinx ?
Or is it more a business decision ? e,g. keeping everything inside a secret from nosey OSATs. This would only mean that TSMC is really banking on 3D stacking as a way to get off the Moore's Law treadmill in case their 20 nm bombs.
Sign in to Reply
mlamorey
12/13/2011 5:43 PM EST
Customer are very apprehensive to go to market with a plan that involves brand new chip - chip - package interactions where ownership of issues and development overruns can be critical in time to market and success.
Sign in to Reply
KB3001
12/13/2011 4:28 PM EST
Bold move by TSMC.
Sign in to Reply
resistion
12/13/2011 5:17 PM EST
Maybe tsmc has to acquire a packaging company.
Sign in to Reply
docdivakar
12/14/2011 11:49 AM EST
This is not encouraging for small companies and the startups that can innovate for 3DIC-enabled product innovations.
@chipmonk: I am not sure if the business volume from 3DIC products coming TSMC's way (GloFo is actively working on this too!) is enough to offsest any debacles from TSMC's 20nm business. Certainly the announcement above doesn't encourage small companies to go TSMC's way for 3DIC business.
I find the statement "Someone has to come forward to assume the responsibility..." amusing! This has been an on-going debate on who 'owns' the yield issues, reworks (if possible) and I don't believe it is going to be decided any time soon.
MP Divakar
Sign in to Reply
chipmonk
12/14/2011 12:16 PM EST
I think that working with OSATs for the Xilinx 2.5 D module has probably provided TSMC a good gap and risk analyses. The technical drivers behind TSMC decision to do it all may be the fact that when it comes to resolving key integration issues e,g. chip package interaction, thin-wafer handling etc. TSMC probably has a lot more engineering resources than the OSATs themselves. If interested you can look up TSMC papers at recent IEEE - IITC conf.
My question was more what are the global business scenario / tech. contingency ( e,g. trouble at 20 nm ) assumptions under which TSMC thinks this would be a viable alternative for them.
Sign in to Reply
ChrisGar
12/15/2011 10:09 AM EST
I'm surprised because it looks like DRAMs will be important for initial 3D IC products. TSMC must be planning to offer their DRAMs as the only DRAM solution for 3D ICs.
Also, testing/DFT is important for 3D ICs. TSMC apparently is prepared to work with customers on test methodology to ensure yield can be optimized, yield learning, burn-in stress, etc.
Sign in to Reply
docdivakar
12/16/2011 1:20 PM EST
@ChrisGar: After the CMOS imaging Silicon heralded the way for 3D IC, DRAMs are the ones that are leading the way.
WideIO 3D IC standards will be released very soon (stay tuned, there is an article on this by yours truly hitting the portal any minute today). The soon to be released JEDEC standard for this exclusively 3D, though 2.5D version is in the roadmap. This standard explicitly calls for post-stack assembly test enablement.
MP Divakar
Sign in to Reply