Semiwiki on LinkedIn Semiwiki on Facebook Semiwiki on Twitter Register / Log in 
Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/threads/industry-faces-%E2%80%9Cacute%E2%80%9D-cpu-shortage-with-hope-that-intel-18a-yields-improve.25017/page-2
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2031070
            [XFI] => 1060170
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Industry faces “acute” CPU shortage with hope that Intel 18A yields improve

OneEng said:
Just my opinion .... and from the view of a potential customer:

1) Roadmap & timeline trust factor
2) Competitive IP concerns
3) Infancy of the use of industry standard tooling

I suspect that many people focus on the competitiveness in the metrics between Intel and TSMC (which is quite normal for a bunch of engineers ;) ).

Once a pilot program is actually in progress, I suspect that other issues will arise that a customer didn't think as much about in the beginning. Issues like the issue process, corrective action process, contractual issues, support structure, etc are things that lots of people overlook in the beginning of a major program, but that hurt like crazy once you are in the middle of it all.
Click to expand...
One thing to ask: Is the Intel Product group happy with IFS as a supplier right now? Are they happy with the supply and planning and delivery? How do they score IFS vs TSMC as a supplier?
 
MKWVentures said:
One thing to ask: Is the Intel Product group happy with IFS as a supplier right now? Are they happy with the supply and planning and delivery? How do they score IFS vs TSMC as a supplier?
Click to expand...
this is going to have internal politics involved tbh depending on who you ask and i think we should let products decide in the roadmap.
 
Last edited:
MKWVentures said:
One thing to ask: Is the Intel Product group happy with IFS as a supplier right now? Are they happy with the supply and planning and delivery? How do they score IFS vs TSMC as a supplier?
Click to expand...
While I think that is a good metric to consider, I would have concerns about how the internal customer's opinion relates to an external customer's opinion.

It has been my experience that people that are used to having an internal supplier tend to be very critical of the internal supplier ..... until they deal with an external supplier. Also, the financial politics are strong with an internal supplier (who get's the lion's share of the profit?) vs. an external supplier.

I would be very interested to hear how Intel Product group rates IFS vs TSMC though.
 
OneEng said:
While I think that is a good metric to consider, I would have concerns about how the internal customer's opinion relates to an external customer's opinion.

It has been my experience that people that are used to having an internal supplier tend to be very critical of the internal supplier ..... until they deal with an external supplier. Also, the financial politics are strong with an internal supplier (who get's the lion's share of the profit?) vs. an external supplier.

I would be very interested to hear how Intel Product group rates IFS vs TSMC though.
Click to expand...
Intel has been using TSMC for some time now. Billions in spending per year. multiple products, This is why you should always have multiple vendors and a internal vs Exterrnal discussion on each project.

I agree everyone is very critical of Internal supplier. Some external suppliers are better than Intel Internal, some are problematic,

in the Past MJ and even PG were clear that product group decides... no "take one for the team". That how the whole IDM2.0 got agreed upon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top