Samsung Manufacturing Issues Reportedly Overblown, May Split A8 Production with TSMC

[fertilized-egg]

It seems that these days all the rumors we get are contradicting each other

Actually it doesn't contradict the earlier article. As often is the case, Macrumors and others are doing a terrible job of summarizing the original article and adding the flame to the fire by not correctly stating the facts from the article.

The article states:

- "It's true Samsung has been having troubles with yields from their 20 nano process"
- However "there are aspects of it that have been exaggerated"
- Samsung will supply Apple with chips "as soon as the yield is met"
- It'll "be later than TSMC" but they'll have no problem Apple's schedule.

Thus if anything it corroborates a lot of facts in the earlier article that 1) TSMC really is getting a large portion of A8 supply 2) Samsung really has had trouble with the yield.

The only thing changed is that TSMC isn't getting the exclusivity and Samsung is also supplying the chips, which is a huge news but doesn't completely contradict what's been said.

What's amazing is Apple is multisourcing their processor. If they are really doing it, I'll be really curious to see how they are doing it, and what kind of downside there is to the multi sourcing.

 

[procol]

Hasn't that rumor pattern about Samsung stopping fabbing Apple SoCs been repeated for the last 3 years already?

This TSMC-deal rumor has been established as an annual event since A4 and may turn out to be the 5th iteration with A8 in the end. As always Taiwanese media can't be trusted much for this matter. However, nobody knows for sure yet though.

Tidbits I gathered from the Korean tech forums translated into somewhat unclear conclusion.

According to what's being said in the forums, Samsung is amid the big-scale upgrading process for the most of their 20nm lines to 14nm lines. Both TSMC and Samsung are eager to pass 20nm-class process as quick as possible because next-gen process, 10nm-class finfet, can provide the tremendous advantage. What makes people confused is that even 20nm lines Samsung reserved for their own Exynos SoC production almost reached the limit now. That means there are not enough 20nm lines for A8 production.

Meanwhile, TSMC's 20nm mass production is speculated to be delayed to 3Q 2014 again. The only publicized information related to the situation is the launching date for Xilinx's 20nm products supposed to be made by TSMC. The launch was originally planned for the 4Q last year but delayed then. Thus, this is another delay. FPGA companies like Xilinx are known to pay regardless of the yields-rate. They don't care whether it is produced in low yields or not. This means also TSMC can't start to make 20nm A8 at least until 3Q. Even it's said that Qualcomm's Snapdragon 810 originally planned for the next year might be delayed too.

Thus, Koreans in the tech forums are speculating that Samsung will produce most of 20nm A8 from Global Foundries fab in US which Apple bought some months ago. IBM, GF and Samsung allegedly had formed the alliance for R&D regarding semiconductor production process and shares the same technology base for production. Korean techies speculate that Samsung is probably setting up the lines of Apple-owned GF fabs and be in charge of the operation on behalf of Apple for A8 production. As a result, the huge A8 volumes Apple would require for iPhone 6 will be from Samsung's own fab and the former GF fab and the latter will take the most of those. That's the conclusion Korean techies are saying now.

Apple's SoC for iPhone after A8 will be made from 10nm-class process and Samsung is likely to take that deal again if the aforementioned tidbits are true because they will be ready with 10nm lines then.

And... unlike the components such as display panels, DRAM, SSD, SoC is the last thing to take from multi source. You can use the completely different SoCs just like Samsung has done for their Galaxy phones, but sourcing SoCs of the identical design from multiple fabs which have the different production processes can turn out to be a disaster later. TSMC and Samsung/GF have nothing in common regarding the production process.

Take this with a grain of salt, of course.

 

[deconstruct60]

I think looking at the evidence the truth is clear to see. Samsung have had issues and are scrambling to refute them and increase their production rates. Hence the reason TSMC are already producing the chips. This yield issue is most likely due to higher priority being given to Samsung's increasing hardware requirements.

Scrambling? TSMC and Samsung never were scheduled to bring their 20nm fabs into production capacity at exactly the same time . There is little evidence that Samsung is scrambling any more than TSMC was scrambling 4-8 months ago. Yields aren't what they "should be" to make Apple happy, but Apple isn't in production either.

It is unclear weather Samsung and TSMC are doing the same A8 class variant. ( Samsung looking to GlobalFundairs (IBM design based ) as a spillover, back-up site is suggestive that TSMC wouldn't/couldn't be the alternative. ). Not sure why the iPhone needs exactly the same CPU+GPU package as an iPad. Same with AppleTV. iWatch , Airport/Time Capsule. So even if the Samsung and TSMC fab processes aren't 100% identical the process customizing tweaks don't have to be to just one specific design implementation.

Yes Apple is an important customer who they earn money off but it is also the competition and if they are having to decide who takes priority then it is in their interest they choose themselves.

Yield issues aren't something that a fab narrowly targets and one specific customer. If Apple's 20nm designs are having problems on Samsungs brand new 20nm process then Samsungs designs probably are too. Not 100% identical issues, but likely in same zone.

As a fab vendor Samsung has more of a reputation of being more consistent than of being "bleeding edge". TSMC is about the opposite. Bleeding edge but yields that mature slowly. Apple is somewhat pushing them both into uncomfortable positions.

if TSMC yields aren't up to snuff in large scale production then maybe Samsung would fill the gap (presuming they are making the same thing. ). There is long TSMC track record they will flub it and/or run out of wafer slots that Apple can get.

Though if this strain is to do with the Gear they would be better off dropping it as the profit of that has to be tiny when compared to being a massive manufacturer for other companies key components.

Gear is an example of something that shouldn't be on the same Fab slots than the smartphones. It is a different CPU+GPU combo on a slightly different lower power and cheaper process.

All the surplus Apple has its insane to think they aren't producing their own chips by now.

Outsourcing high capital cost and higher risk is one reason why they have the high cash surplus. Apple pushes risks off onto other suppliers. Apple's overall marketshare in the Phone business is shrinking. Likewise tablets.. again shriking. Mac's? Same sub 10% they have had for over a decade.

Apple sells alot when draw a smaller circle around higher end products. But relative to the overall fab market not as much to take on risk of a $4-5B fab that they may or may not be able to run at full capacity for more than several years.

 

[giantfan1224]

There is that. These days not everything is a Samsung component since Apple has moved to different parts instead of Samsung Branded NAND, SoCs, HDD, SSD, displays and DRAM modules. However, with how much vitriol some of the users spit about Samsung here. One would think they would instantly ensure their devices have zero Samsung "taint" by taking them apart as soon as they buy them.

I just find it slightly amusing about how adamant some people are about a boycott but will take that risk just because of well... Apple.

There is a certain irony about slamming Samsung while doing it on your iPhone and I suppose many who do it don't even realize that Samsung is in the very phone or tablet they're using to do it. I take exception, however, with those that say you can't hate Samsung, boycott their products but yet still own an i-device.

 

[deconstruct60]

....
Thus, Koreans in the tech forums are speculating that Samsung will produce most of 20nm A8 from Global Foundries fab in US which Apple bought some months ago.

Apple bought when? There was talk of Apple "buying into" the GF plant, but that really wasn't clear that they were outright buying the capital equipment or just buying up wafer processing slots. Buy a ton of wafer slots and it may look like buying the place but really not.

Since GF is a foundry company, it doesn't make much sense at all for them to sell off foundries. If they dump their foundries what do they have left?

IBM, GF and Samsung allegedly had formed the alliance for R&D regarding semiconductor production process and shares the same technology base for production. Korean techies speculate that Samsung is probably setting up the lines of Apple-owned GF fabs and be in charge of the operation on behalf of Apple for A8 production.

Or more simply setting up minor tweaks so that design primed to go at Samsung's plant can spill over to the GF plant with the corresponding minor 'recipe tweaks'. ( http://allthingsd.com/20131112/dont...balfoundries-and-apple-at-least-not-just-yet/ ) If Apple just needed "someone to run the plant" then GF could do that. That is their primary business.

IBM is supposedly thinking about shopping their Fab but that is a different NY plant. ( but they are thinking about getting out of the Fab business. Which is kind of bad since their R&D keeps alot of the other ones competitive.)

Apple's SoC for iPhone after A8 will be made from 10nm-class process and Samsung is likely to take that deal again if the aforementioned tidbits are true.

Given A7 is 28nm it is highly doubtful that A8 is going to jump directly to 10nm. 20nm is a far more realistic transition point. 14nm somewhat possible. Shouldn't skip multiple process sizes in incremental designs. That adds tons of risk that really doesn't buy much.

 

[samcraig]

Corporations do not, but Officers of Corporations indeed do. Steve Jobs certainly did with his quote of going "nuclear" over Samsung. I suspect that Tim has a cooler head, but I would not be surprised if he also wants to get rid of Samsung.

Steve Jobs went nuclear over Samsung? Can you find me that quote?

 

[deconstruct60]

Steve Jobs went nuclear over Samsung? Can you find me that quote?

It was technically Google but all the Samsung phones Apple has their underwear in a twist over are Android phones.

' ... I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong. I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this." ... '
http://news.cnet.com/8301-33617_3-57500246-276/jobs-gets-wish-in-thermonuclear-war-at-least-for-now/

However since Jobs death, folks have wondered if Apple will throw billions at it. ( hundreds of millions yeah but billions probably not. )

http://gigaom.com/2012/11/12/tim-cook-too-practical-for-steve-jobs-thermonuclear-war/


given the Billions thrown at Nortel patents ( to keep them out of Google's hands... not high chance going to get that money back and in meantime created another patent troll ), Jobs was quite serious about throwing billions at it.

the chance of Apple destroying Android is almost zero at this point and Jobs is dead (so dying breath is spent). Android existed before Jobs put Google's CEO on Apple's board. Stolen product is a bit of hyperbole.

 

[samcraig]

It was technically Google but all the Samsung phones Apple has their underwear in a twist over are Android phones.

' ... I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong. I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this." ... '
http://news.cnet.com/8301-33617_3-57500246-276/jobs-gets-wish-in-thermonuclear-war-at-least-for-now/

However since Jobs death, folks have wondered if Apple will throw billions at it. ( hundreds of millions yeah but billions probably not. )

http://gigaom.com/2012/11/12/tim-cook-too-practical-for-steve-jobs-thermonuclear-war/


given the Billions thrown at Nortel patents ( to keep them out of Google's hands... not high chance going to get that money back and in meantime created another patent troll ), Jobs was quite serious about throwing billions at it.

the chance of Apple destroying Android is almost zero at this point and Jobs is dead (so dying breath is spent). Android existed before Jobs put Google's CEO on Apple's board. Stolen product is a bit of hyperbole.

I know all of the above. I was clearly pointing out the OPs incorrect assertion.

 

[Tanegashima]

I hope I get a good one (tsmc)

How do you know if it's samesung or tsmc? Do you have to examine the chip?

 

[brinary001]

Apple and Samsung should just **** and get it over with already. It's the only way to settle their differences. IF Hollywood has taught me anything.

 

[samcraig]

Apple and Samsung should just **** and get it over with already. It's the only way to settle their differences. IF Hollywood has taught me anything.

Think of the CHILDREN!!

 

[the8thark]

Also known as, just making stuff up.
Obviously none of these so called reporters have any idea what is going on.

Also known as professional journalism.
(I understand the oxymoron I just said).

 

[wizard]

It seems that these days all the rumors we get are contradicting each other

Many people have this idea that Apple is trying to dump Samsung. I don't see it that way. Rather I see Apples demand outstripping Samsungs ability to keep up. Rumors that Samsung was validating production on Global Foundries lines seems to confirm this.

For a company like Apple it gets to the point where you can't have all of your eggs in one basket. TSMC can be seen as a second source solution.

 

[2457282]

I know all of the above. I was clearly pointing out the OPs incorrect assertion.

Well, I stand corrected on the point that it was Google and not Samsung that Jobs wanted to go nuclear on, but the main point I was making still stands.

 

[deconstruct60]

I know all of the above. I was clearly pointing out the OPs incorrect assertion.

As much as the US (and other ) military created the comical term "tactical nuclear weapons", they aren't. They are broad impact devices. When Apple decided to start lobbing nukes, they were going to inflict lots of collateral damage. Going 'nuclear' on Google always meant inflicting damage on companies standing next to and working with Google. Samsung is/was deeply ingrained in the product sector along multiple dimensions. It was only a matter of how much damage was Apple going to inflict.

The primary target? No. Targeted? Yes. so the OP was off, but not by a wider margin than a nuke blast radius.

 

[samcraig]

As much as the US (and other ) military created the comical term "tactical nuclear weapons", they aren't. They are broad impact devices. When Apple decided to start lobbing nukes, they were going to inflict lots of collateral damage. Going 'nuclear' on Google always meant inflicting damage on companies standing next to and working with Google. Samsung is/was deeply ingrained in the product sector along multiple dimensions. It was only a matter of how much damage was Apple going to inflict.

The primary target? No. Targeted? Yes. so the OP was off, but not by a wider margin than a nuke blast radius.

Ultimately it doesn't matter. Apple is not going to sink Samsung. I don't even think they've dented Samsung or scared them off at all. So it's money (on both sides) being dumped more into lawyers hands than anything else.

 

[Tech198]

oh, a break up.... it would have happened eventually.

 

[JerryCards]

iPhone 6 may come out earlier because of Samsung mass production of A8.

 

[macs4nw]

This Apple love/hate relationship with Samsung is nothing short of bizarre.

It's called business; letting their emotions get in the way is usually a bad idea.