Samsung Reportedly Drops Out of Apple's A8 Chip Production Over Low Yields

[dBeats]

It's Apple that should be afraid of not knowing what Samsung and Google are going to do.

Have you seen iOS 7? I'd count how many parts of that OS is a copy of Android, but it'd be a waste of my time.

I'm pretty sure almost everyone has seen iOS 7 because over 80% of people using an iDevice is on it. KitKat is still in the single digits.

Android was a copy of iOS. The even admitted they had to go "back to the drawing board" after they saw the iPhone. What they really meant is "back to the copy machine."

 

[fertilized-egg]

How did the LG lcd's work out a while back? And the Toshiba drives vs the Samsungs? Samsung has provided pretty good parts for Apple.

And this is where it becomes obvious you have a Samsung hammer and using it to make a crude comparison everywhere, the situation isn't analogous at all. Let me explain carefully so that you can understand.

Both LG and Toshiba had been supplying displays and storage components with Apple even longer than Samsung has been, in other words they were the incumbents, just like Samsung is for chips now. In fact AFAIK LG was (almost) the sole supplier for the iPad 1 and is still the main supplier of LCD for Apple by far.

So if you want to make the similar comparison, TSMC is where Samsung was in the examples you've citied, they are the giant supplier who wants to get the Apple contract by pushing out the incumbent.

Now a move to a fab that has had some issues and I'm biased for commenting? Apple's had some quality control issues in recent times. I hope this doesn't become another one.

Had some issues such as? Samsung is the largest customer for TSMC via Qualcomm and the majority of Samsung phones use TSMC made processors, not to mention modem chips used by most major phones including the iPhones. Have we had an incident Samsung phones suddenly stopped working because of the TSMC chips? Exactly what "issues" are you talking about? If you going to bring some far fetched comparisons like nVidia and ATI graphic chips' yield, you better let me know who else even makes those chips so that we can make a better comparison. Not to mention that the article states TSMC is getting better yield than Samsung. (Trusting the article is another thing but that's for another discussion)

You started with the premise that TSMC is "the second tier supplier" and you have no fact to support it other than bringing up some completely unrelated issues such as LCDs and flash memory controllers which has nothing to do with this matter. Did you even know that Samsung LSI, despite its long standing relationship with Apple, is a relatively newcomer in the foundry game whereas TSMC is by far the foundry with the most experience?

Is it ok for someone who owns Apple products to criticize Apple the company?

Here's the crux of the matter, the persecution complex to justify your own bias. I am fine with criticism on Apple but you're going beyond just criticizing the company.

From your comment it's fairly obvious you didn't even bother to read the article and know little about TSMC. But because you're trying to make the evidence fit your preconceived notion, you're just throwing evidence you've know and make it look as if everything Apple does is negative, a constant theme I see with many Macrumors posters.

 

[AppleScruff1]

And this is where it becomes obvious you have a Samsung hammer and using it to make a crude comparison everywhere, the situation isn't analogous at all. Let me explain carefully so that you can understand.

Both LG and Toshiba had been supplying displays and storage components with Apple even longer than Samsung has been, in other words they were the incumbents, just like Samsung is for chips now. In fact AFAIK LG was (almost) the sole supplier for the iPad 1 and is still the main supplier of LCD for Apple by far.

So if you want to make the similar comparison, TSMC is where Samsung was in the examples you've citied, they are the giant supplier who wants to get the Apple contract by pushing out the incumbent.



Had some issues such as? Samsung is the largest customer for TSMC via Qualcomm and the majority of Samsung phones use TSMC made processors, not to mention modem chips used by most major phones including the iPhones. Have we had an incident Samsung phones suddenly stopped working because of the TSMC chips? Exactly what "issues" are you talking about? If you going to bring some far fetched comparisons like nVidia and ATI graphic chips' yield, you better let me know who else even makes those chips so that we can make a better comparison. Not to mention that the article states TSMC is getting better yield than Samsung. (Trusting the article is another thing but that's for another discussion)

You started with the premise that TSMC is "the second tier supplier" and you have no fact to support it other than bringing up some completely unrelated issues such as LCDs and flash memory controllers which has nothing to do with this matter. Did you even know that Samsung LSI, despite its long standing relationship with Apple, is a relatively newcomer in the foundry game whereas TSMC is by far the foundry with the most experience?



Here's the crux of the matter, the persecution complex to justify your own bias. I am fine with criticism on Apple but you're going beyond just criticizing the company.

From your comment it's fairly obvious you didn't even bother to read the article and know little about TSMC. But because you're trying to make the evidence fit your preconceived notion, you're just throwing evidence you've know and make it look as if everything Apple does is negative, a constant theme I see with many Macrumors posters.

I don't recall anyone here hoping to get an LG display on their Macbook. Ditto for a Toshiba ssd, regardless of how long either had been supplying Apple with components.

I recall Nvidia having issues with TSMC a year and a half or so ago. I could probably do a quick search and post a link or two. Bias works both ways, doesn't it?

 

[fertilized-egg]

I don't recall anyone here hoping to get an LG display on their Macbook. Ditto for a Toshiba ssd, regardless of how long either had been supplying Apple with components.

And Toshiba drives and LG displays have something to do with Samsung LSI vs. TSMC because? By the way, if you look at rMBP threads, there are actually users who prefer recent LG panels over Samsung ones. But again that's another story.

I recall Nvidia having issues with TSMC a year and a half or so ago. I could probably do a quick search and post a link or two. Bias works both ways, doesn't it?

If you're going by nVidia, that's probably the yield issue.

First, the graphic chips are a different animal from mobile SoCs. In fact nobody else even makes those big graphic chips except TSMC so the comparison is moot.

Second, the YIELD IS EXACTLY THE THING THE ARTICLE SAYS TSMC IS DOING BETTER THAN SAMSUNG. Geez. Did you even read the article?

 

[chrmjenkins]

I don't recall anyone here hoping to get an LG display on their Macbook. Ditto for a Toshiba ssd, regardless of how long either had been supplying Apple with components.

I recall Nvidia having issues with TSMC a year and a half or so ago. I could probably do a quick search and post a link or two. Bias works both ways, doesn't it?

You're ignoring his point. If no one else makes nvidia parts, what good is pointing out the fact that TSMC had an issue with said parts? You would need to provide a detailed analysis of the size and complexity of the part in question and relate that to the maturity of TSMC's processes and tools. I'm willing to bet you're not prepared to make such an analysis.

The actual point is that the manufacturing of GPUs is closely followed due to the large enthusiasts communities. The GPUs tend to be very large in size and have enormous transistor counts, both of which are huge negative factors in getting high yield parts. Trouble is to be expected for those types of parts.

 

[AppleScruff1]

You're ignoring his point. If no one else makes nvidia parts, what good is pointing out the fact that TSMC had an issue with said parts? You would need to provide a detailed analysis of the size and complexity of the part in question and relate that to the maturity of TSMC's processes and tools. I'm willing to bet you're not prepared to make such an analysis.

The actual point is that the manufacturing of GPUs is closely followed due to the large enthusiasts communities. The GPUs tend to be very large in size and have enormous transistor counts, both of which are huge negative factors in getting high yield parts. Trouble is to be expected for those types of parts.

I'm not as smart as you guys. I simply thought that since Nvidia had problems with TSMC that perhaps TSMC had some problems with quality control.

 

[chrmjenkins]

I'm not as smart as you guys. I simply thought that since Nvidia had problems with TSMC that perhaps TSMC had some problems with quality control.

You don't have to be smart to understand the implications of these issues. Simply looking at the info available out there is help enough.

 

[Mike MA]

Oh wait, that means sooner or later Samsung needs to do some own R&D once their supply business will slow down.

 

[samcraig]

Oh wait, that means sooner or later Samsung needs to do some own R&D once their supply business will slow down.

Are you really implying that Samsung doesn't do R&D?

 

[Mike MA]

Are you really implying that Samsung doesn't do R&D?

Just read between the lines.

 

[unplugme71]

With Samsung responsible for less than 9% of the components in any Apple device, I'm not sure where you're getting this from.

Where does your 9% come from? And on which products? Which model numbers of those products?

 

[r00fus]

Obvious Troll

What if I told you that, currently, Apple copies more than others?

It's Apple that should be afraid of not knowing what Samsung and Google are going to do.

Have you seen iOS 7? I'd count how many parts of that OS is a copy of Android, but it'd be a waste of my time.

Obvious Troll is obvious. Seriously, Apple doesn't need to spy on Samsung or Google - many of the features lifted from Android (IMHO done better in iOS) have been around for a while.

 

[cwt1nospam]

Please explain further.

If I tell you I need milk eggs and sugar - am I making a cake? What will it look like? Or maybe I'm making cookies? Or perhaps I'm making a pie. What other ingredients am I using? How will the pie taste? What design am I using for the lattice. What shape are the cookies? How many layers is the cake and what frosting is on it.

A processor is closer to cake than it is to milk, eggs and sugar. There's CISC vs RISC, 32 bit vs 64 bit, Level 1 and level 2 cache, clock speed, power consumption, etc. I can't believe it's necessary to point out that there's a ton of information to be had by knowing what the next processor will be capable of doing.

 

[samcraig]

A processor is closer to cake than it is to milk, eggs and sugar. There's CISC vs RISC, 32 bit vs 64 bit, Level 1 and level 2 cache, clock speed, power consumption, etc. I can't believe it's necessary to point out that there's a ton of information to be had by knowing what the next processor will be capable of doing.

I disagree - nothing Apple has sued Samsung over has been about what Samsung can gleam from the components they produce. I can't believe you can't believe the necessity of pointing out what exactly?

Tell me again how knowing the processor can tell anything about the OS, form factor and other trade dress items.

So no - having the processor is not like having the cake. Unless you mean that it's like having the cake but having no idea what shape the cake will be in, what flavor the cake is, what icing will be on top or in the layers and what the cake will be decorated with and whether or not it will have candles.

 

[fertilized-egg]

I'm not as smart as you guys. I simply thought that since Nvidia had problems with TSMC that perhaps TSMC had some problems with quality control.

So in one thread you went from "TSMC is a second tier supplier and Apple is making a mistake" to "We should remember LG vs. Samsung in LCDs" to "I don't know much about it". Wow.

The actual point is that the manufacturing of GPUs is closely followed due to the large enthusiasts communities. The GPUs tend to be very large in size and have enormous transistor counts, both of which are huge negative factors in getting high yield parts. Trouble is to be expected for those types of parts.

Speaking of enthusiasts communities, has there anything been said about Global Foundries? There were some reports that Apple is looking into acquire their fabs through some sort of financial arrangements in combination with Samsung's help, has there anything come out of that?

If Samsung's chip division loses Apple's business, which has accounted for the majority of their revenue, one would imagine they'll go hard after Qualcomm and nVidia/AMD. I'm still confused how that'll make sense with the rumored GF deal and now this. So many things in flux!

 

[AppleScruff1]

So in one thread you went from "TSMC is a second tier supplier and Apple is making a mistake" to "We should remember LG vs. Samsung in LCDs" to "I don't know much about it". Wow.

I admit I am not an expert on chip production and quality control as most of the others in this thread are. I recall the problems Nvidia had with TMSC a year or so ago and thought it was a quality control issue, not realizing one had to be intimately involved with the industry to make a comment. Hence my analogy about Samsung vs LG lcd's and Toshiba vs Samsung ssd's.

I stated my opinion and explained it. Respectfully.

 

[h4lp m3]

Samsung was removed because they're Samsung.

 

[mtneer]

This is probably a crushing death blow to Intel. They have been really pig headed about trying manufacturing in the US. I wish they could leave that to the experts in Asia and concentrate on creating cheaper chips for the market.

 

[Doomtomb]

It's a logo that fits one hundred percent with what the company does. All their customers know that. Your opinion alone makes it clear that you are not their customer.

I have a feeling you are neither their customer either.

Apple will move away from Samsung sooner or later.

When that happens, Samsung will no longer have the advantage over other Android makers on knowing what Apple is going to make.

Ya, it's totally apart of the deal that Apple has to reveal all their trade secrets to Samsung in order for their chips to be manufactured by Samsung for profits. /sarcasm.

Serious question. How does Samsung know what Apple is going to make? Are you implying that Apple, when sending over component requests, also include a file with their product roadmap? Or is Samsung able to figure out Apple's product information based on the specs of the components?

Genuinely curious.

Finally. I was being overwhelmed with the amount of stupidity in this thread.

 

[mrxak]

Well if the app you're using is Safari or iTunes, yes, those only use 10% or less of the potential. Now doubling the performance in the same power envelope does not mean you use 1/2 the power to do the same task. More depends on the CPU/GPU/RAM/storage/bus/IO ability to power cycle.

Here is Anandtech's review of the MBA i5 and i7. Same TDP but i5 (slower) generally got better battery life due to naturally lower power levels (perhaps now called SDP) So no, increasing performance/Watt does not necessarily increase battery life.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7113/2013-macbook-air-core-i5-4250u-vs-core-i7-4650u/4

Race to sleep is what saves battery life.

 

[fertilized-egg]

Serious question. How does Samsung know what Apple is going to make?

Please explain further.

If I tell you I need milk eggs and sugar - am I making a cake?

Finally. I was being overwhelmed with the amount of stupidity in this thread.

While I don't agree with all the claims about the component suppliers' advantage, it's very easy to think of ways that Samsung and LG could get some advance intel from their relationship to Apple.

A chip will have a certain power requirement and blocks with different functions. From those facts they could figure out with reasonable certainty what they are being used for, if it's for a phone, a tablet or something bigger. And when Apple ordered the single core A5, Samsung could've probably guessed it was for the Apple TV based on multiple factors.

Then we have screens. When Apple comes knocking in at Samsung or LG Display and ask about a 13" IPS LCD with the same aspect ratio to the iPad, a 5.7" display, 27" display, or a 1.5" AMOLED display, it doesn't take a genius to figure out roughly what the display is for, and from the date of possible production and the level of details, they could guess at when things would be ready for production.

Even better for Samsung, they could combine the information gathered from the display side and compare to what they heard from the chip supplying side to corroborate the evidence. If Apple asks for more chips with power requirement suitable for a large tablet while asking for 12.9" displays, it'll be pretty obvious what is going to happen. Likewise if Apple does order chips with even higher power requirements and a laptop-suitable display at the same time, they can probably guess Apple is finally making a ARM powered laptop.

Once those information is received by the component divisions, my guess is what a Samsung executive said will happen "all information leaks". This doesn't mean suppliers will copy everything Apple does with great accuracy, but it's also seems silly to dismiss the notion that the suppliers can predict Apple's future action with much more certainty than other outsiders.

 

[cwt1nospam]

I disagree - nothing Apple has sued Samsung over has been about what Samsung can gleam from the components they produce. I can't believe you can't believe the necessity of pointing out what exactly?

Tell me again how knowing the processor can tell anything about the OS, form factor and other trade dress items.

You seem to think there needs to be some detailed road map along with the information necessary to build the processor in order to be useful to Samsung. Nothing could be further from the truth.

There are many things that depend on processor performance, so knowing how it will perform can tell you what's possible. Given that you know for the most part what a company might want to do with their phone, knowing processor details can tell you a great deal about whether or not they'll be able to do those things.

 

[Septembersrain]

Oh come on. Both sides benefit here. Both are gaining publicity and free marketing from the fiasco. Ever heard that in publicity there is no such thing as "Bad"? I think all this information is leaked for more stipulation and marketing.

 

[cynics]

While I don't agree with all the claims about the component suppliers' advantage, it's very easy to think of ways that Samsung and LG could get some advance intel from their relationship to Apple.

A chip will have a certain power requirement and blocks with different functions. From those facts they could figure out with reasonable certainty what they are being used for, if it's for a phone, a tablet or something bigger. And when Apple ordered the single core A5, Samsung could've probably guessed it was for the Apple TV based on multiple factors.

Then we have screens. When Apple comes knocking in at Samsung or LG Display and ask about a 13" IPS LCD with the same aspect ratio to the iPad, a 5.7" display, 27" display, or a 1.5" AMOLED display, it doesn't take a genius to figure out roughly what the display is for, and from the date of possible production and the level of details, they could guess at when things would be ready for production.

Even better for Samsung, they could combine the information gathered from the display side and compare to what they heard from the chip supplying side to corroborate the evidence. If Apple asks for more chips with power requirement suitable for a large tablet while asking for 12.9" displays, it'll be pretty obvious what is going to happen. Likewise if Apple does order chips with even higher power requirements and a laptop-suitable display at the same time, they can probably guess Apple is finally making a ARM powered laptop.

Once those information is received by the component divisions, my guess is what a Samsung executive said will happen "all information leaks". This doesn't mean suppliers will copy everything Apple does with great accuracy, but it's also seems silly to dismiss the notion that the suppliers can predict Apple's future action with much more certainty than other outsiders.

Lol, there is NO useful stealing/copying at the manufacturing level.

Sure maybe it would give you ideas you haven't thought of or a head start vs other manufacturers. So in that sense you could copy. But you are still year(s) behind the company you are about to go into final production for.

The most dissimilar thing about an iPhone vs Galaxy phone are the parts.