New Disruptive Microchip Technology and The Secret Plan of Intel by Anastasi in Tech

[Daniel Nenni]

"TSMC has just announced 1.6 nanometer technology in this video I will explain how these new transistors work and why from this moment on we have to use both sides of the wafer and why it is huge for the industry? let me explain! almost all of the world's chips supply today about 90% of it comes from TSMC fabs and it Powers technological progress as well as AI boom TSMC started making three Micron Technology in 1987 and just imagine three Micron is like 3,000 nanometers and just some days ago they've announced new technology that can enable chips at 1.6 nanometers now these new transistors involve two big Innovations first of all a Noel transistor architecture and backside power delivery and this is something that has never happened before a separation of power interconnect from the signaling and as a chip designer I can tell you it's a big deal for the entire industry."

 

[hist78]

"TSMC has just announced 1.6 nanometer technology in this video I will explain how these new transistors work and why from this moment on we have to use both sides of the wafer and why it is huge for the industry? let me explain! almost all of the world's chips supply today about 90% of it comes from TSMC fabs and it Powers technological progress as well as AI boom TSMC started making three Micron Technology in 1987 and just imagine three Micron is like 3,000 nanometers and just some days ago they've announced new technology that can enable chips at 1.6 nanometers now these new transistors involve two big Innovations first of all a Noel transistor architecture and backside power delivery and this is something that has never happened before a separation of power interconnect from the signaling and as a chip designer I can tell you it's a big deal for the entire industry."

Starting around 11:20 of the video, she believes Intel used to be more conservative in adopting new technology and TSMC was more aggressive in that regard. She claims now it's the other way around. I think this is debatable.

 

[samwilde]

IBM used to be the aggressive one with adopting new process technology. Intel was right behind them or sometimes ahead. TSMC used to be pretty conservative.

Then IBM sold its fabs.

The only "aggressive" moves TSMC did was helping create immersion lithography, and putting EUV into production before other companies.

 

[Daniel Nenni]

Why is she calling it 1.6nm? We are in the angstrom era?

90% of the worlds chip supply comes from TSMC?

TSMC will begin production on N2 at the beginning of 2025 with the first ones appearing in iPhones

TSMC has not been a risk taker since Apple came to town at 20nm.

Intel has many more firsts including HKMG, FinFET, BSPD, etc... so I would call them the risk takers.

She has quite a business enterprise developing. For only $17.50 per month..........

A better explanation of TSMC A16:

I did not see him at the Santa Clara conference however..........

 

[Xebec]

‘Glass half full’ - while it’s not good at all that Anastasia is getting so many things wrong, channels like hers do get people interested in tech, and may even help bend someone towards a new interest in engineering or semiconductors as they enter high school or college..

(That said - Ian is excellent!)

P.S. She got all of us to click by titling it “1.6nm”

 

[samwilde]

IBM was ahead with copper interconnects and they were early adopters of SOI.
Intel was ahead with strained silicon, HKMG, FinFET.
TSMC was arguably ahead of others in low-k by using Black Diamond.

TSMC is fairly conservative with changes in process design. This can be seen by them being followers, not leaders, in FinFET and GAA.

 

[Daniel Nenni]

IBM was ahead with copper interconnects and they were early adopters of SOI.
Intel was ahead with strained silicon, HKMG, FinFET.
TSMC was arguably ahead of others in low-k by using Black Diamond.

TSMC is fairly conservative with changes in process design. This can be seen by them being followers, not leaders, in FinFET and GAA.

If you look at the volumes and margins TSMC produces, "fairly conservative" is a good thing. I grew up with the foundries and it was interesting to see how many customers got "inconvenienced" by delays and bad yield which is why TSMC today is the "Trusted" foundry. If Samsung or Intel want to catch TSMC they will need to take risks and be first, best, and I think they can do it. But, if they think they can beat TSMC by negative statements in the press they are wrong. At the big customers a foundry team makes the foundry decision and theirs jobs depend on what they decide. Articles or Youtube videos from outsiders mean absolutely nothing.

When I first started in Silicon Valley IBM was the industry standard. Customers used to say "You cannot lose your job by choosing IBM". TSMC has that same status today amongst foundries, absolutely.

 

[Barnsley]

If you look at the volumes and margins TSMC produces, "fairly conservative" is a good thing. I grew up with the foundries and it was interesting to see how many customers got "inconvenienced" by delays and bad yield which is why TSMC today is the "Trusted" foundry. If Samsung or Intel want to catch TSMC they will need to take risks and be first, best, and I think they can do it. But, if they think they can beat TSMC by negative statements in the press they are wrong. At the big customers a foundry team makes the foundry decision and theirs jobs depend on what they decide. Articles or Youtube videos from outsiders mean absolutely nothing.

When I first started in Silicon Valley IBM was the industry standard. Customers used to say "You cannot lose your job by choosing IBM". TSMC has that same status today amongst foundries, absolutely.

As you say its the principle today!

Very difficult for a company in Semicon to get business if the main player has very good deliverables!

Which purchaser/planner is going to go out on a limb to send work to a new supplier?

Gaining that trust is very very difficult.

 

[Dick James]

IBM was ahead with copper interconnects and they were early adopters of SOI.
Intel was ahead with strained silicon, HKMG, FinFET.
TSMC was arguably ahead of others in low-k by using Black Diamond.

TSMC is fairly conservative with changes in process design. This can be seen by them being followers, not leaders, in FinFET and GAA.

I would add in CMP at IBM… and tungsten plugs… that’s going back to the ’80s Before that we were limited to three or four metal layers, and that was a push.

 

[IanCutress]

A better explanation of TSMC A16:

I did not see him at the Santa Clara conference however..........

Wasn't invited! Tsmc are very geocentric about these events because they don't fly people out. I spoke with the relevant people today (at the EU Tech symposium in Amsterdam) about that - I simply said to let me know. I'm in the US so damned often chances are I can swing by or extend a trip if needed.

I just recorded an interview with Dr. Kevin Zhang, got him to speak to the new announcements, expansion, and High-NA. Hopefully publish that next week as both a transcription and a video.

Re: Anastasia - she's a chip designer by trade with some good research skills. YouTube is a side hustle for her, so she's still learning the journalist ropes a bit. I've tried to get a few companies to engage with her on that front, giver her briefings, but her day job makes it limited. Sometimes I find recommending press/influencers I know to my trusted contacts in comms/PR is a bit hit and miss - they don't always want to reach out to more people, even on the back of a recommendation. I've even had Comms get iffy when I bring other influencers (some with channels 5x the size of mine) as camerapeople or writers to attend events with me, whereas a non-creator gets the green light immediately.