Hope you will read this answer, Divakar! It is not so much about yields. It is about ramping. q4/11 will see 2% revenue share of 28nm at TSMC followed by 10% in q1/12 according to TSMC. Glofo is even behind that on 28 nm, but already shipping millions of Llanos with even more sophisticated SOI-Technology in 32 nm which is very likely even superior to TSMC bulk process. So it is not that TSMC and Glofo are bad. There is no other foundry that can do this. But there is Intel and nobody can really compete with them.
@daleste: thank you for raising a voice of reason!
One report from the PCPER.com website says TSMC's revenue from 28nm process is going to be approximately 10% in 2012 and way less in 2011!
This makes me wonder, what exactly is the yield range for TSMC's HKMG Gate last process?
There seems to be some confusion about the article and the validity of the statements. The foundry business is not as easy as most would think. Building wafers for many customers and meeting their requirements for performance and cost is very difficult. As we move to smaller geometries, the problems increase. Having a low yielding process is not always the foundries' fault. It can also be caused by poor design techniques. The problems have to be worked out by the companies as a joint project supported by both or the consequences are dire.
Thank you for your answer. I am even more upset by the article on Extremetech and the fact that the official press release a few months about manufacturing issues earlier caused serious troubles. Very nice that you wrote that these issues are almost outworked already! Yes, but I do not really like to see false rumors to spread and to cause damage and I know that EEtimes is reliable in this regard and this should be verified. There is so much AMD-bashing these days and we must only read all these comments here.
Sorry and Thanks
Here you can compare it by your own:
There are already articles critisizing SA at ATI-Forum.de and planet3dnow.de
Jakobus, why are you complaining about the accuracy of a story from a site called "semi-accurate"?? Surely the name speaks for itself. As for the story written above, if you read it, I referred to the "reports" in passing and then said I had no confirmation on such a manufacturing move taking place, only confirmation of a roadmap change. You're right that there is absolutely no confirmation, and that is made abundantly clear in the above article, so I really don't see why you are so upset about it. It's an opinion piece, alluding to the reports, not confirming them, and CONFIRMING that the only thing we know for sure is that roadmap changes are coming in December. If you have issues with Semi-Accurate, that is fortunately not our problem, as the site has nothing to do with EETimes. Best!
The wrong story at the wrong time with the wrong actors, wrong locations and wrong backgrounds. It was in summer when taiwanese media reported that TSMC will produce. There had never been any confirmation that Glofo would produce them, only considerations. Semiaccurate only refers into its own hearsay in an earlier article written by himself: http://semiaccurate.com/2010/11/18/glofo-will-fab-amds-krishna/
This is from a year ago and even earlier than the news from Taiwan from summer and when no decision had been made!
Here is the link. And if you read the articles from Semiaccurate and Extremetech than you will see that it was no more than a (wrong) assumption that Glofo is intended to produce the chip. But this was not the case and now all this allegations have no foundation any more. The truth is totally different.
AMD simply decided to let produce TSMC more Radeon GPUs with high margins instead of low margin APUs because
the 40nm Bobacats are still selling very well. It has nothing to do with Glofo. Please, get it!
The story is partly wrong and exaggerated. Already months ago taiwanese media such as digitimes and commercial times reported that the chips are to be produced by TSMC and not Glofo. While Glofo is already busy with Llano and Trinity chips, TSMC also has not so much capacaties in 28nm for all its customers. Therefore, AMD is obiously shifting to more profitable graphic gpus. All in all, the story has little to do with Glofo or problems at AMD but with high demand for hardly available 28 nm products from TSMC.
As we unveil EE Times’ 2015 Silicon 60 list, journalist & Silicon 60 researcher Peter Clarke hosts a conversation on startups in the electronics industry. Panelists Dan Armbrust (investment firm Silicon Catalyst), Andrew Kau (venture capital firm Walden International), and Stan Boland (successful serial entrepreneur, former CEO of Neul, Icera) join in the live debate.