Apple Likely Already Designing Chips Based on TSMC's 2nm Process

[MacRumors]

Apple is already designing the chips that will use TSMC's next-generation 2-nanometer fabrication process, according to information allegedly sourced from an Apple employee on LinkedIn.

Originally captured by Korean website gamma0burst and shared on X (Twitter) by the leaker Revegnus (@Tech_Reve), the information appears in a heavily redacted slide said to list the employee's work on past and current projects at Apple.

A non-redacted part of the slide reads "TS5nm, TS3nm, working on TS2nm," terms believed to reference the different fabrication processes Apple has chosen for past, current, and future chips. Terms like "3nm" and "2nm" refer to the specific architecture and design rules TSMC is using for a family of chips. Decreases in node size correspond to a smaller transistor size, so more transistors can fit on a processor, leading to boosts in speed and more efficient power consumption.

Rumors suggest that TSMC is already starting work on more advanced 1.4-nanometer chips, which are expected to come out as soon as 2027. Apple is said to be looking to reserve TSMC's initial manufacturing capabilities for both 1.4nm and 1nm technologies. To get a sense of the nanometer scale, a strand of human hair is about 80,000 to 100,000nm wide.

Last year, Apple adopted 3nm chips for its iPhones and Macs, an upgrade over the prior 5nm mode. The switch to 3nm technology brought 20 percent faster GPU speeds, 10 percent faster CPU speed, and a 2x faster Neural Engine to the iPhone, and similar improvements on Macs.

Apple is believed to be the first company that will receive chips built on TSMC's future 2nm process, which is expected to go into production in the second half of 2025. The 2nm fabrication process, also known simply as "N2," is expected to offer a 10 to 15 percent speed improvement at the same power or a 25 to 30 percent power reduction at the same speed compared to chips made with the supplier's ‌3nm‌ technology.

TSMC is building two new facilities to accommodate 2nm chip production, and is waiting on approval for a third. The Taiwanese fab giant is spending billions on the change, and Apple will also need to make chip design changes to accommodate the new technology. Apple is TSMC's main client, and it is typically the first to get TSMC's new chips. Apple acquired all of TSMC's 3-nanometer chips in 2023 for iPhones, iPads, and Macs, for example.

Article Link: Apple Likely Already Designing Chips Based on TSMC's 2nm Process

 

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

That is about as surprising as us getting another iPhone around September.

 

[Blackstick]

Wow it’s almost like they’ll continue to refine and innovate their processors. I never would have assumed it 😆

 

[attohs]

Where are the M4 rumors?

 

[Wxchaser]

Bring on the 0nm chips!

 

[OS X Dude]

More space for more dedicated neural controllers... could we be seeing majority on-device AI be a key feature for Macs and iOS devices going forward? Would be incredible for data privacy and security if it's not phoning home to a cloud constantly.

 

[diddl14]

Of course they are, why would that even be a rumor! 🤔

 

[Spock]

I’m guessing they are already working on what will be beyond 1nm, or below..

 

[klasma]

To get a sense of the nanometer scale, a strand of human hair is about 80,000 to 100,000nm wide.

This is misleading. The process node designations are marketing terms and have little relation to the actual structure sizes, which are at least an order of magnitude larger. In addition, the decrease in actual structure size between process nodes is much less significant than the marketing names would suggest: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_nm_process

 

[aaadktda]

These chips will be amazing paired with 8GB of ram and 256GB of storage.

 

[gsurf123]

Is it "likely already designing" or "already designing"?

 

[Skyscraperfan]

I still do not like that 4nm, 3nm, 2nm naming, because nothing about those chips really has that measurements. Those names are completely fake. They only indicate a relative comparison. So of course a 2nm chip is denser than a 3nm chip.

It reminds me of the "1 inch sensors" of some cameras. Not even the diagonal of those sensor is one inch long. So that number is intentionally misleading and that should be illegal even if every company does it.

 

[Motorola68000]

These chips will be amazing paired with 8GB of ram and 256GB of storage.

But you to translate that into Applesaletalk 'amazing paired with 8Gb equivalent to 16Gb of ram and 256Gb of storage, which is again slowed down compared with its predecessor but where it is at least equivalent to 256Gb'...light hearted TIC

 

[AgeOfSpiracles]

I still do not like that 4nm, 3nm, 2nm naming, because nothing about those chips really has that measurements. Those names are completely fake. They only indicate a relative comparison. So of course a 2nm chip is denser than a 3nm chip.

It reminds me of the "1 inch sensors" of some cameras. Not even the diagonal of those sensor is one inch long. So that number is intentionally misleading and that should be illegal even if every company does it.

This is a tired, pedantic gripe that has no real bearing on anything. Yes, we all know that it's a marketing designation and not a technical measurement. Nevertheless it does still describe advances in fab tech and does actually result in increased chip efficiency and performance. It doesn't mean anything to consumers, and is intended for the real customers, ie Apple, AMD, Samsung, who are well aware of the actual meaning of these terms.

 

[klasma]

These chips will be amazing paired with 8GB of ram and 256GB of storage.

You also have to consider that 2 nm on Macs is equivalent to 1 nm on PCs.

 

[krspkbl]

The naming scheme is just for marketing. if we get below 1nm then they might do something like "X9nm" because it sounds cooler and more powerful/exciting than "900pm". 9pm is 0.009nm so we're never going to get to low numbers to get close to make it sound better.

Every 100pm we can shrink will just be a 0.Xnm difference

1nm (or X10nm)
X9nm (0.9nm)
X8nm (0.8nm)
X7nm (0.7nm)
etc...

 

[MayaUser]

"To get a sense of the nanometer scale, a strand of human hair is about 80,000 to 100,000nm wide."

Even you dont know these are just marketing name and is not about that it will be indeed 1.4nm or 1nm
The only thing for customers that for real...its in the clothing fibres . When yarn makers like L. Colombo, or Loro Piana or Kiton are saying their garments are from 15µ or 10µ or under that, it is for real..these its just marketing and its so easy to test it and measure it in labs etc

 

[UltimaKilo]

This is a tired, pedantic gripe that has no real bearing on anything. Yes, we all know that it's a marketing designation and not a technical measurement. Nevertheless it does still describe advances in fab tech and does actually result in increased chip efficiency and performance. It doesn't mean anything to consumers, and is intended for the real customers, ie Apple, AMD, Samsung, who are well aware of the actual meaning of these terms.

The naming scheme is just for marketing. if we get below 1nm then they might do something like "X9nm" because it sounds cooler and more powerful/exciting than "900pm". 9pm is 0.009nm so we're never going to get to low numbers to get close to make it sound better.

Every 100pm we can shrink will just be a 0.Xnm difference

1nm (or X10nm)
X9nm (0.9nm)
X8nm (0.8nm)
X7nm (0.7nm)
etc...

Actually, most people do not understand that for many, many years now, “nm” has just been a marketing scheme (clearly MacRumors doesn’t). Adopting decimals might allow them to squeeze a few years out of it before they have to hit the drawing board.

A friend of mine who is a senior VP at Qualcomm told me they have floated the idea of increasing numbers via stacks, but it’s way too early.

 

[Skyscraperfan]

It doesn't mean anything to consumers, and is intended for the real customers, ie Apple, AMD, Samsung, who are well aware of the actual meaning of these terms.

Still Apple uses those terms in communication with end consumers. Or they at least spread it.

Wikipedia has a good article about the 3nm process. It ist shocking how far it is way from having a 3nm measurement anywhere:

3 nm process - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Quote:
The term "3 nanometer" has no direct relation to any actual physical feature (such as gate length, metal pitch or gate pitch) of the transistors. According to the projections contained in the 2021 update of the International Roadmap for Devices and Systems published by IEEE Standards Association Industry Connection, a "3 nm" node is expected to have a contacted gate pitch of 48 nanometers, and a tightest metal pitch of 24 nanometers.

 

[munpip214]

Design cycle of a processor is multiple years. Of course they are working on the next generation from TSMC. And while they are doing this their architects are working on the generation after that.

 

[boast]

Tons of companies already have N2 PDKs to play with…

 

[trip1ex]

That is about as surprising as us getting another iPhone around September.

We are getting a new iPhone this year!?!?!?!?

 

[nylonsteel]

okay great so we're gonna get 2nm
hope aapl refreshes products that do it justice
or even better something "insanely great" in a.i.

 

[BuffaloTF]

I better just hold off for the 5 picometer chip.

 

[norbinhouston]

I hope one of those new factories is outside of Taiwan. Just in case China does something stupid, the supply chain disruption won't be too bad.