You are currently viewing SemiWiki as a guest which gives you limited access to the site. To view blog comments and experience other SemiWiki features you must be a registered member. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
I'm looking to classify the semiconductor industry space into the specialized sub-sectors that make up the eco-system.
My goal is to have a classification that makes it easier to present the industry to people who do not work in this sector. Such people might be investors, people considering careers in this industry, etc....
I've come up with this graphic as a starting point.
The dark green squares are the individual sub-sectors. Below is a brief elaboration of what encompasses each sector.
Raw materials and process consumables suppliers: These would be companies that supply things like photoresist, gases, and other chemicals that are used in the fabs. I don't believe fabs produce such chemicals themselves?
Fabs: i.e. TSMC, Global Foundries, Intel, UMC, etc....
Fab equipment makers: ASML, Lam Research, Applied Materials, etc........
Fabless Design Houses: Intel, AMD, ST Microelectronics, ON Semi, Texas Instruments, etc.....
Backend/Packaging: Companies that package bare dies (or do most fabs do this themselves?) My understanding is that most of this sector is concentrated in Taiwan.
Instrumentation/test tools: Agilent, etc.... who make test instruments that design houses use to test their taped out chips during spins throughout the design process
Is this an accurate/complete? Can't think of a better place to ask this question than Semiwiki
No it would not. I'm talking about commercial IP, not IP developed internally. Also, some of the companies on your fabless design houses list have fabs. Intel for example is an IDM. STM, On Semi, and TI have fabs and use foundries so they are called fab-lite.
Yes, I believe I see the difference you are drawing between internal IP and commercial IP.
Do 'design houses' by definition produce only internal IP? In other words, is Arm (alongside other players in that space) not a special type of design house that licenses its ip instead of manufacturing hardware? Maybe I'm just delving into semantics, but I'm genuinely curious about the distinction.
Yes, I believe I see the difference you are drawing between internal IP and commercial IP.
Do 'design houses' by definition produce only internal IP? In other words, is Arm (alongside other players in that space) not a special type of design house that licenses its ip instead of manufacturing hardware? Maybe I'm just delving into semantics, but I'm genuinely curious about the distinction.
To me a design house is a services company like Alchip, Sondrel, eInfochips, etc... Arm is an IP company as is Rambus, and Imagination Technologies. Qualcomm, Broadcom, and Nvidia are fabless semiconductor companies. Intel and Samsung are IDMs. TSMC, SMIC and UMC are foundries.
To me a design house is a services company like Alchip, Sondrel, eInfochips, etc... Arm is an IP company as is Rambus, and Imagination Technologies. Qualcomm, Broadcom, and Nvidia are fabless semiconductor companies. Intel and Samsung are IDMs. TSMC, SMIC and UMC are foundries.
I like to add one more important subsector to the fabless ecosystem. It is called "design service". GUC is probably the most famous one.
Design service companies don't have any products. Their revenue is depending on their customer’s success. Suppose you have some brilliant ideas about AI and like to build an ASIC IC. You passed the system simulation and even generated the Verilog code. Design service can take care of the rest from layout to tapeout. They can find the packaging and testing houses if needed.
They serve system companies and smaller design companies really well. Suddenly, some huge system companies like Google, AWS can produce their IC for internal use. I believe they are all working with design service at least initially. This greatly speeds up time to market and keeps the design team minimum. More system companies will it attempting to follow suit.
Among 400+ TSMC customers, big ones like Qualcomm, Broadcom can do everything in-house. Many of the smaller ones would love to work with design services just like system companies.
What about "Metrology" as a category? As devices become more complicated in 3D, I've heard that critical dimensional analysis and defect analysis are just getting more attention and resources. I would imagine companies like KLA Tencor, NOVA, Nanometrics?, Bruker (for XRD) could go in this category?
What about "Metrology" as a category? As devices become more complicated in 3D, I've heard that critical dimensional analysis and defect analysis are just getting more attention and resources. I would imagine companies like KLA Tencor, NOVA, Nanometrics?, Bruker (for XRD) could go in this category?
Thanks for the input. I had thought of metrology equipment makers, and I figured they'd fit into the categories of "Fab equipment makers," as I imagine such metrology solutions (the actual machines and related analysis software) are part of the semicon. fab production line.
I suppose it could be a sub-category.
