seems right . For more and more of our product line, ROI is staying at mature node longer and moving to advanced node later. If mature node is improved more, even better.
At a high level this is driven by the increasing cost of the advance node plus the advanced node delievering less "goodness" over time.
Nvidia made related comments. We can debate the node 20? 14? But transistor cost even at maturity is not really lower at some point. So that begs the question why pay for higher cost for a few years just to get to cost parity?
Even at the 20nm node our company thinking was 20nm MIGHT only make sense for application processors chips. All other chips like wifi, we think will stay at 40/28nm. Interesting that even Nvida questions value of 20nm? They have historically been 1st movers and helped bebug yield and design rule issues to help make 65 /45/40 viable for industry.