Breaking News
Comments
Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
<<   <   Page 3 / 5   >   >>
m00nshine
User Rank
Author
Re: GlobalFoundries expansion
m00nshine   2/9/2014 9:57:33 AM
NO RATINGS
Intel cant use their own fabs (ie F42) why would they want an old non-CE! Fab? They already close all other aquired fabs (Colorado and Mass.) Been there before. Tech, patents, and an opportunity to disrupt the GloFo/Samsung alliance as a reason, thats another story.

resistion
User Rank
Author
Re: GlobalFoundries expansion
resistion   2/9/2014 3:21:48 AM
NO RATINGS
GF is a better fit than Intel, but do they have the money or are they more influenced by Samsung.

HS_SemiPro
User Rank
Author
Re: GlobalFoundries expansion
HS_SemiPro   2/9/2014 12:46:54 AM
NO RATINGS
Rick,

From a Fab point of view SOI or  Bulk do not need any special tools, same set of tools and infrastructure can be used to make intel tech or IBM tech.

But I don't think Intel would be interested in IBM fab, they have plenty of their own. ANd IBM's fab is pretty small any way.

On the other hand, Intel can be in IBM's Chip design or R&D units, to expand their business beyond  PCs and expand to high margin servers and other ASICs that IBM was making for other people.

Intel may be happy  to snap good R &D engineers in Semiconductor tech.

rick merritt
User Rank
Author
Re: GlobalFoundries expansion
rick merritt   2/8/2014 11:04:15 PM
NO RATINGS
@Resistion: Doesn't IBM's use of SOI and FD-SOI make IBM's fabs sub-optimal for Intel's products and processes?

resistion
User Rank
Author
Re: GlobalFoundries expansion
resistion   2/8/2014 3:52:43 AM
NO RATINGS
Money still seems pretty tight at GF, even with ATIC funding. Those billions seem largely for current activities; the new Malta fab. Also, GF's 20-10 nm roadmap seems largely fixed already.

http://www.bizjournals.com/albany/blog/2014/01/majority-of-design-done-on-second.html?page=all

resistion
User Rank
Author
Intel?
resistion   2/8/2014 3:16:47 AM
NO RATINGS
Maybe only Intel can afford to buy?

chipmonk0
User Rank
Author
Re: Yes to GloFo
chipmonk0   2/8/2014 2:27:39 AM
NO RATINGS
rather than invest a few billions at their Fishkill Fab to catch up with Intel won't IBM be better off going Fabless and start using Intel as a Foundry for chips of their own design ?

HS_SemiPro
User Rank
Author
Re: Yes to GloFo
HS_SemiPro   2/8/2014 2:18:45 AM
NO RATINGS
Fishkill Fab is mostly development FAB ( R&D) and plus a little bit capacity for running older ASICs and about not much wafer capacity for a legitimate foundry business, besides global already has decent size fab in upstate NY.

Yorktown is a pretty big  R & D center and not just for Semiconductors. Everything from Software, servers, devices, physical sciences,Mathematics  is reserached there.

Silicon and semiconductor research can't really be done without a FAB like facility.

IBM was already making X86 based server (which we call comodity servers) which was made using latest Intel technology, which they sold to Lenovo,  and these server sold at  cheaper prize  than servers based on IBM chips,

So it look like they can't sell their servers using generic chips.

IBM uses its  Semiconductors  Tech for its servers, that gives it advantge  in high end servers, once they sell their semiconductor business this high end Server business will go as well.

 

HS_SemiPro
User Rank
Author
Re: IBM's Chip Unit on Chopping Block
HS_SemiPro   2/8/2014 2:04:39 AM
NO RATINGS
IBM has a 8" FAB with about 1600 WSD capacity in Vermont &   300mm fab with about 600 WSD in Fishkill.

seaEE
User Rank
Author
IBM's Chip Unit on Chopping Block
seaEE   2/8/2014 12:32:20 AM
NO RATINGS
I wonder how IBM's fab compares size-wise with other fabs of similar technology?

<<   <   Page 3 / 5   >   >>


Datasheets.com Parts Search

185 million searchable parts
(please enter a part number or hit search to begin)
Radio
NEXT UPCOMING BROADCAST

What are the engineering and design challenges in creating successful IoT devices? These devices are usually small, resource-constrained electronics designed to sense, collect, send, and/or interpret data. Some of the devices need to be smart enough to act upon data in real time, 24/7. Are the design challenges the same as with embedded systems, but with a little developer- and IT-skills added in? What do engineers need to know? Rick Merritt talks with two experts about the tools and best options for designing IoT devices in 2016. Specifically the guests will discuss sensors, security, and lessons from IoT deployments.
Like Us on Facebook
Special Video Section
LED lighting is an important feature in today’s and future ...
05:27
The LT8602 has two high voltage buck regulators with an ...
05:18
The quality and reliability of Mill-Max's two-piece ...
01:34
Why the multicopter? It has every thing in it. 58 of ...
Security is important in all parts of the IoT chain, ...
Infineon explains their philosophy and why the multicopter ...
The LTC4282 Hot SwapTM controller allows a board to be ...
This video highlights the Zynq® UltraScale+™ MPSoC, and sho...
Homeowners may soon be able to store the energy generated ...
The LTC®6363 is a low power, low noise, fully differential ...
See the Virtex® UltraScale+™ FPGA with 32.75G backplane ...
Vincent Ching, applications engineer at Avago Technologies, ...
The LT®6375 is a unity-gain difference amplifier which ...
The LTC®4015 is a complete synchronous buck controller/ ...
10:35
The LTC®2983 measures a wide variety of temperature sensors ...
The LTC®3886 is a dual PolyPhase DC/DC synchronous ...
The LTC®2348-18 is an 18-bit, low noise 8-channel ...
The LT®3042 is a high performance low dropout linear ...