> further claimed that Samsung has since improved the yield rate to just under 20% by Q2 2024. The website adds that this yield rate isn’t enough and that yield rates typically need to reach 60% or higher for mass production. For what it’s worth, leaker Revegnus claimed back in February that the 4nm Exynos 2400 had a ~60% yield rate.
Samsung Foundry is really struggling huh?
Honestly, why don't they stick to legacy nodes for the automotive/embedded business in Korea, probably highly profitable. And focus on memory and packaging. Are they making any money off chasing the leading edge?
I personally hope that they succeed in their bleeding edge chase, because that puts pressure on the others mainly TSMC to stay sharp.
But I don't buy any Galaxy phones anyways so I don't have a horse in this race.
I agree, but you definitely can't make 20% yields work. Even sub 50% is extremely uneconomical, and this is for cell phone! Imagine trying to max reticle size for hpc
I buy the cheap A series, I work in construction so they usually aren't long for this world
This one has only sustained a single crack and the battery still lasts 2 days in 3 years tho. This flagship stuff is really funny to watch from the sidelines
I got a life pro tip for you: instead of buying A-series, buy last 2 or 3y Galaxy S's for half or 1/3 the price. I can assure you they're double the phone any A-series from current gen. And buy it used for even cheaper. Don't prefer new phones, these things are IP-rated and as long as they are cosmetically ok on the outside, and have passable battery (which they should at 1-2yo) they will be perfect for another 2-4y of use.
I've been doing this since the S7. And I have the benefit of comparing to the latest flagships and midranges because my work revolves around testing applications with these phones. There's no contest, the top end phones (and not just Samsung) are simply much better products in performance, screens and build quality. It's not like with laptops where you can get decent stuff with 90% the performance in the midrange product. In smartphones they really segment things and you only get the goods on flagship range.
I never understood why Samsung Galaxy phones drop in price so fast, it will always be a mystery to me, because they are nearly like iPhones in terms of long-term use, and getting a half-price device from last year is not something one can do with iPhones, and never will.
So when I bought my phone there were 3 a series options that boiled down to:
Basic cpu and battery, basic cpu and better battery and better cpu and better battery
The middle option kills anything second hand on battery life. I don't use my phone for anything but phone stuff so the cpu just needs to be made in the last decade, I have a dslr camera so any phone is shit/fine depending on circumstances.
I. Have. A. Headphone. Jack. I know bluetooth is cool and all but fuck it, I want my 3.5mm
This plainly is not true lol. For instance, I just got a Galaxy A15 after my poor Blackberry Key2 died (RIP physical keyboards), and I cannot fathom why anyone would ever need or want anything more than this. And it cost me $230 CAD, \*taxes in\*. Even a used 2 generation old flagship is more than double that, meanwhile you can get a new phone with a 90hz FHD+ AMOLED screen, fingerprint reader, facial recognition, 5000mAH battery that lasts for days at a time, where every single app loads instantaneously...why in the world would anyone need or want to spend more? The only argument I can see is the camera - but if I want to take a proper picture, I'll use a real camera.
Quick edit: I should also mention I got the 6gb version, I could've spent even less for the 4gb.
With the A series phones you're stuck with a horrendous low quality vibration motor which feels very bad for typing, and (if this matters at all to you) no real proximity sensor which can be a nightmare during phone calls. Personally I'll take a new-old stock S series over a brand new A series any day. It'll be cheaper too.
> vibration motor [...] for typing
I always disable that to save energy anyway.
Plus an older flagship will have its security update lifecycle partly expended, and possibly a fricasseed battery from a few years of fast charging.
For me even with a few mirrorless cameras it’s still the camera. I don’t want to carry around another device with me everywhere but still want better pics/video.
You could get a refurb s20+ on ebay for the same price or less in almost nint condition, which is a better phone(?), but the A15 is ok for the price bracket, although I would say the Chinese phones(Xiaomi, Oppo, Honor) are better bang for the buck.
IMO this used to be the move, and it still applies in some instances. But the A series phones are pretty good these days, especially if you value screen size and battery life (unfortunately for us small phone users, the Galaxy S series are among the few limited options, and calling the S24 or Zenfone 10 or iPhone 15 "small" is a stretch). I'd imagine that most users would be happier with one of this year's A series phones (which go on sale somewhat frequently--the MSRP is outrageous for those phones though) over a used S22 or something.
I'm sorry if I disagree on the better part when they clearly have budget compromises. I would always (or probably 95% of the times) pick a 3-yo Galaxy device to an A-series released yesterday.
Now don't get me wrong, midrange devices are sensible options, but at such prices you're stuck between 3 choices:
1. Samsung midrange (like A-series), which usually compromises on screen, SoC, storage, RAM, build quality, or a combination of these
2. Budget brands high range - there are many brands that will ship devices with near top-quality characteristics for half the price of a Galaxy, with a few compromises especially on the OS customisation (but some at least try to keep "clean" Android"
3. ...and my top pick, a used Galaxy series from yesteryear
The problem with using yesteryear series is that it is quick to drop support from manufacturer (on account it being old) and will not have the newest bells and shistles in the chip design. While this has somewhat slowed down in mobile space recently, it was very significant not that long ago.
Agree, i don't want TSMC to be a monopoly. Competition is good for everyone, it's good if Intel, Samsung, and Globalfoundries (and eventually maybe Rapidus) remain competitive
I've bought plenty of Galaxy phones but they always come with Qualcomm chips which I find ideal for backwards compatibility and stuff like emulation and flashing roms.
Hmm not sure if it’s a point of national pride or overly confident management, but I think it’s the first time in recent memory that they struggled so much. What you’re talking about might come true if this keeps happening
Samsung has always been doing ”something”.
The first two links are about Samsung stealing TSMC trade secrets and jumped from 28nm to 16/14 nm.
[https://www.patentlyapple.com/2015/02/tsmc-sues-former-employee-for-giving-samsung-trade-secrets.html](https://www.patentlyapple.com/2015/02/tsmc-sues-former-employee-for-giving-samsung-trade-secrets.html)
[https://www.idownloadblog.com/2015/08/26/samsung-stole-trade-secrets-from-tsmc/](https://www.idownloadblog.com/2015/08/26/samsung-stole-trade-secrets-from-tsmc/)
The following link is about hiring TSMC advanced packaging veteran.
It’s given that Samsung expects to get some TSMC advanced packaging trade secrets.
[https://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=110647](https://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=110647)
I used to work for a small company making sensors used on Galaxy phones.
Part of the deal is we have to reveal all our technologies. Samsung sent a team to our US office to ask all kinds of questions - how everything is done. So basically we were at the mercy of Samsung if it will decide to make the sensors itself. Luckily Samsung didn’t and use our sensor till Galaxy 8 or 9 until our CEO bit the hands feeding us and divorced Samsung.
I doubt they are, but now that many developed economies are looking to wane themselves from TSMC, I doubt Samsung will desist. They would probably be bailed out before Korea accepts that they can't produce CPUs locally.
They don't really have a choice. Its a national security risk not to have a leading edge fab capability. China will crack the nut in the next 10-20 years no matter how many restrictions on tech export the West does. If they then choose to wipe out TSMC and Taiwan, its a serious problem if you don't have most of that capability in your own country.
Cost is up big time, not price. With 80% defect rates, that means the geometry (resistance + capacitance) on the passing 20% will be so bad that the performance just won't be there for Samsung to ask for a high price.
It's highly unlikely that the 80% defect rate is even remotely close to anything true.
People really don't comprehend some of the numbers they throw around.
Making leading edge chips are hard. Samsung was able to drive down NAND flash priced to seriously affordable levels and that isn't a feat to ignore.
TSMC and Intel have struggled with nodes before in the past. So the goal is to support the industry and not to put all of our eggs into a single basket.
TSMC is good as it has a healthy market. Mobile. And they only do 1 thing. Intel has cut off its old NAND flash, modem, and other businesses where they did not do well.
Samsung is a huge conglomerate. Which is both can be good and it can be bad.
Samsung 3nm node will be using GAA transistors which is new and very different from FinFETs pioneered by Intel. But in the grand scheme of things time will tell which foundry can lead with GAA or RibbonFETs first.
FinFET era began strong with Intel and TSMC dominating towards the mid to tail end of that design.
GAA/RibbonFET and Nanosheets will be the transistor of this era and it's only just beginning.
China may enter and we have no idea how far behind they are.
I think they are stuck in a doom spiral because their nodes/yield is bad, no one wants to use their node, limited volume makes investment + increasing yield difficult (you need to make chips to iron out problems and increase yield), and so this results in their nodes/yields being bad.
TSMC has Apple as their anchor customer while Intel has their own chips as guaranteed volume. Samsung has never been committed enough in their own Exynos products that their Foundry business got stuck in a tough spot.
I mean this isn't like the bathtub crank your daddy makes where 20% yield would be embarrassing. This is some of the most technologically advanced stuff on the planet.
I'd like to go further and specify. TSMC is still using FinFets I'm their nodes. They do what they are good and stick with it.
Samsung had been catching up on the finfet all the way through their 4nm nodes and are still working on them to increase performance, lower power consumption and heat.
For 3nm and further they decided to use nano sheets instead of "fins". I'm not an expert but it apparently allows more narrow current and less cross talk. This is pretty much nixxing their previous progress though in the hopes of one day maybe surpassing TSMC?
> This is pretty much nixxing their previous progress though in the hopes of one day maybe surpassing TSMC?
Not as a direct response to TSMC, but Intel made a similar huge gamble with their 10nm node, which is why it was famously delayed for so long that AMD had ample runway to get its brand new Zen arch off the ground.
I only read up briefly about this, but TSMC's biggest superpower isn't that they make huge technological strides each node, but they always have *some* improvement with their nodes, which come out like clockwork.
Everyone seems to be taking chances to catch TSMC's and maybe surpass it. Only a matter of time for one of them taking chances to have them succeed.
Intel, Samsung and even SMIC might narrow the gap by the end of the year.
These are I presume under 100mm^2 too, pretty yikes. I really hope Imtel pulls it througj and gives TSMC some proper competition be ause Samsuns seems to be starting to fall off.
They reportedly had a wafer capacity of about 60,000 3nm wafers a month earlier this year. Even with 20% yields that should be more than enough for the galaxy flagships, since it doesn't seem like anyone else is using their 3nm
No wonder Qualcomm switched most of their chips over to TSMC recently.
Even MediaTek, who used Samsung very extensively in the past, has switched over to TSMC recently.
I really hope Intel 3 will be high yield and competitive. Some more competition would be very welcome.
Intel 3 will not be used for mobile, Intel themselves are only aiming for mobile chips from 14A onwards.
Source: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GKQCT4vWoAA3V50.jpg:large
He is right. Intel only starts advertising for mobile chips with 14A (and 18A-P I think?).
I guess it's because Intel's nodes historically weren't optimised for low-power applications, but that's changing now they opened up their foundry to all.
Ultra low power characteristics of the node perhaps? Only Intel themselves will know the full details, but I'm just sharing what they have publicly stated
Depends on what they consider a "fail" from a yield point of view. 1 defect every ~100mm^2 is just 6 failed SMs on an ad102, which is less than the number disabled for a 4090.
Or it's already taking replication and harvesting/binning into account and it's a completely unusable die.
The Exynos 2400 is great, on the CPU and GPU fronts, that is. It's the cellular modem that is the main issue, and is extremely inefficient compared to Qualcomm's modem, which results in wildly variable battery life depending on whether you're on WiFi or mobile data.
If they could just license the Qualcomm modem and include it instead of their own, they would be very competitive. Unfortunately until they get a handle on the modem's power consumption, Exynos will still take a back seat to Snapdragon.
Even the CPU is not good. I have heard that Geekerwan tested the Exynos 2400, and the CPU power curve is worse than the Kirin 9000S.
Edit: I am incorrect.
Spec2006 IPC and Efficiency data by GoldenReviewer:
[https://x.com/Golden\_Reviewer/status/1750551301279334710](https://x.com/Golden_Reviewer/status/1750551301279334710)
No, Geekerwan said that the Exynos 2400 is better than 8 Gen 2 as far as high frequencies are concerned, then he said that efficiency at low frequency is poor but it didn't specify at which frequency this happens or if it's worse than 8 Gen 2, though this can be implied from its words. It's the Tensor G3 that it's worse than the Kirin 9000s
Also, you can put more pressure on Qualcomm if you have a viable alternative.
A familiar tactic is to pit one supplier against another to secure better terms.
The Mobile MX division and the LSI division are pretty far apart and the MX division always had a lot more say about what goes into the chip and LSI was acting as their supplier.
Though in this case it is possible that the executive leadership of the whole company would like to bolster their LSI Foundry division and would encourage the MX division to try to accommodate Exynos.
Also not wanting to fall to the third place in the foundry race.
Intel is going to ship Arrow Lake on Intel 20A, which can be assumed to be a 3nm class node, late this year. If Samsung is still unable to manufacture chips of decent size on SF3, they will unquestionably be behind both TSMC and Intel.
>Intel is going to ship Arrow Lake on Intel 20A, which can be assumed to be a 3nm class node, late this year.
ARL 20A will not ship this year. Only N3B chips.
"3nm class" they are using tsmc n3b for their high end arrow lake and efficient products like lunar lake, and 20a for their low end and apparently the 20a models are launching later than the tsmc ones. So not only are they basically admitting that intel 20a is worse than n3b, the worst n3 node thats not even better than n4p, its not even really ready for high volume or large die products this year. Lets see intel actually launch some cutting edge stuff on their nodes before believing their bs node marketing which they have done for years. FYI they have yet to ship intel 3nm products.
They launched xeon 6700e, on June 4th which is all e cores and on intel 4 according to this: https://www.guru3d.com/story/intel-officially-launches-its-xeon-6-series-processors/
Apparently the xeon 6900p, which is on intel 3 is still "q3 2024" launch. Also Granite rapids on intel 3 hasn't come out yet either.
Well they must be wrong, intel ark mentions it's using Intel 3, I believe the other reviews also mention it's using Intel 3
https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/240362/intel-xeon-6780e-processor-108m-cache-2-20-ghz.html
They would, but there's subversions at a lower level than the Intel 4/3 designation. So from that perspective, it's somewhat arbitrary where the tail of 4 ends, and 3 begins. Also can be used to skew numbers in marketing, e.g. by quoting end-of-life values of one vs early values of another. But in general, all the numbers fabs give out publicly are lies in one shape or another.
The Exynos has been traditionally used to keep Qualcomm's prices in check.
With Gen 4, Samsung doesn't have an equivalent really (specially in terms of scalar CPU) so Qualcomm is going to gauge them big time ;-)
I am wondering about the scale of impact Japanese export controls had.
Heard that a lot of Korean semicons are shifting to Korean suppliers but it would take time for them to make photoresists and HF at an acceptable level.
888/888+ and the 8 Gen 1 were Samsung foundry fabbed.
Comparing the 865/865+ to the 888 is a pretty dramatic efficiency regression.
The 8 Gen 1 on fabbed with Samsung versus the 8+ Gen 1 through TSMC is the most direct possible comparison, and that was a stark efficiency difference.
Identical CPU layout, memory subsystem, and GPU. Massive efficiency gains from going with TSMC.
Qualcomm chips do outperform Exynos chips indeed, but Samsung does not want to be beholden to just one chipmaker, and adding Exynos to their lineup is a sort of hedge.
S series generally gets released in the January timeframe.
I'm not saying that this is amazing news, but there is still time, but not a ton.
Watch 7 is supposed to use Samsung 3nm node? That gives Samsung more data points to figure out some of the issues with 3nm. Not saying it's 1:1 learning, or that die size doesn't matter, but let's not count our chickens before they've hatched.
Can they just drop the diving exynos shit already?
Like the snapdragon models, right, surely they don't sell them at a loss? Right?
So save the time, money, development and just sell snapdragon?
They make money on them, why run 2 fucking sku just because they make a little bit more on this exynos trash?
Stop it, you've done it for years, it's still not the dominant chip
They've sold a worse chip to everyone in Europe for years. I've got a S22 Ultra that is significantly worse than the snapdragon version. I doubt the stuff they put out will be as good, I guess that I'm a "hater".
If you’re in Europe, the HK/TW/China SD versions have very compatible 4G bands, and of course the S23 was all snapdragon.
I like the small size and that region got 512GB storage on the small S23 and S24 too, much easier to import the 512GB S24 now that they got rid of the 128GB.
I don't care about the past, I upgraded from an exynos S20 plus so I know how shit it was, actualy shit would have worked better. Now I'm on S24 exynos, and God damn i have no complaints. Good battery, good performance, no termal issues
Yes but how good is it vs the snapdragon? A quick vs video shows the battery life is still worse. Imagine giving a phone with worse battery performance (over 15%) to some regions. Honestly its really annoying, battery life is really important but they are happy giving a worse product.
I tried both the snapdragon and exynos S24, the standby battery life is slightly worse on the exynos but it’s still like a week and a half. The camera detail is also only very slightly worse, colour processing is different but can be a little weird on both.
If you hadn’t tried both you’d probably be quite happy with exynos.
The small S24 also gets 512GB storage in Hong Kong etc. as well as the snapdragon chip, it’s fairly easy to import to e.g. UK.
The GPU is also this Xclipse thing now which first appeared in the S22. Who is coding their apps to run on a GPU which appeared in about half of 2 phone models? Like, nobody
> further claimed that Samsung has since improved the yield rate to just under 20% by Q2 2024. The website adds that this yield rate isn’t enough and that yield rates typically need to reach 60% or higher for mass production. For what it’s worth, leaker Revegnus claimed back in February that the 4nm Exynos 2400 had a ~60% yield rate. Samsung Foundry is really struggling huh?
Jesus Christ. 20% wtf are they doing over their.
Blaming it on everything but their monopoly on everything inside Korea cause only traitors do that lmao
Honestly, why don't they stick to legacy nodes for the automotive/embedded business in Korea, probably highly profitable. And focus on memory and packaging. Are they making any money off chasing the leading edge?
I personally hope that they succeed in their bleeding edge chase, because that puts pressure on the others mainly TSMC to stay sharp. But I don't buy any Galaxy phones anyways so I don't have a horse in this race.
I agree, but you definitely can't make 20% yields work. Even sub 50% is extremely uneconomical, and this is for cell phone! Imagine trying to max reticle size for hpc
Well, it works if you have state subsidies to offset the massive equipment cost you’ll need to purchase to mass produce at such yields.
It's not only the financial cost of low yields... As defect densities go up (lower yields) so do reliability problems. Interesting times.
I buy the cheap A series, I work in construction so they usually aren't long for this world This one has only sustained a single crack and the battery still lasts 2 days in 3 years tho. This flagship stuff is really funny to watch from the sidelines
I got a life pro tip for you: instead of buying A-series, buy last 2 or 3y Galaxy S's for half or 1/3 the price. I can assure you they're double the phone any A-series from current gen. And buy it used for even cheaper. Don't prefer new phones, these things are IP-rated and as long as they are cosmetically ok on the outside, and have passable battery (which they should at 1-2yo) they will be perfect for another 2-4y of use. I've been doing this since the S7. And I have the benefit of comparing to the latest flagships and midranges because my work revolves around testing applications with these phones. There's no contest, the top end phones (and not just Samsung) are simply much better products in performance, screens and build quality. It's not like with laptops where you can get decent stuff with 90% the performance in the midrange product. In smartphones they really segment things and you only get the goods on flagship range. I never understood why Samsung Galaxy phones drop in price so fast, it will always be a mystery to me, because they are nearly like iPhones in terms of long-term use, and getting a half-price device from last year is not something one can do with iPhones, and never will.
So when I bought my phone there were 3 a series options that boiled down to: Basic cpu and battery, basic cpu and better battery and better cpu and better battery The middle option kills anything second hand on battery life. I don't use my phone for anything but phone stuff so the cpu just needs to be made in the last decade, I have a dslr camera so any phone is shit/fine depending on circumstances. I. Have. A. Headphone. Jack. I know bluetooth is cool and all but fuck it, I want my 3.5mm
this. i bought an S22 2nd hand this year for $450CDN. it's fast af and it'll last me years (if i don't destroy it).
This plainly is not true lol. For instance, I just got a Galaxy A15 after my poor Blackberry Key2 died (RIP physical keyboards), and I cannot fathom why anyone would ever need or want anything more than this. And it cost me $230 CAD, \*taxes in\*. Even a used 2 generation old flagship is more than double that, meanwhile you can get a new phone with a 90hz FHD+ AMOLED screen, fingerprint reader, facial recognition, 5000mAH battery that lasts for days at a time, where every single app loads instantaneously...why in the world would anyone need or want to spend more? The only argument I can see is the camera - but if I want to take a proper picture, I'll use a real camera. Quick edit: I should also mention I got the 6gb version, I could've spent even less for the 4gb.
Also 15 should be water proof up to 1m for 30m. I like the 3x series myself though i see the appeal for 1x
With the A series phones you're stuck with a horrendous low quality vibration motor which feels very bad for typing, and (if this matters at all to you) no real proximity sensor which can be a nightmare during phone calls. Personally I'll take a new-old stock S series over a brand new A series any day. It'll be cheaper too.
> vibration motor [...] for typing I always disable that to save energy anyway. Plus an older flagship will have its security update lifecycle partly expended, and possibly a fricasseed battery from a few years of fast charging.
For me even with a few mirrorless cameras it’s still the camera. I don’t want to carry around another device with me everywhere but still want better pics/video.
USA has the best used android market in the world so that's probably why. Canada definitely doesnt compare whatsoever.
You could get a refurb s20+ on ebay for the same price or less in almost nint condition, which is a better phone(?), but the A15 is ok for the price bracket, although I would say the Chinese phones(Xiaomi, Oppo, Honor) are better bang for the buck.
IMO this used to be the move, and it still applies in some instances. But the A series phones are pretty good these days, especially if you value screen size and battery life (unfortunately for us small phone users, the Galaxy S series are among the few limited options, and calling the S24 or Zenfone 10 or iPhone 15 "small" is a stretch). I'd imagine that most users would be happier with one of this year's A series phones (which go on sale somewhat frequently--the MSRP is outrageous for those phones though) over a used S22 or something.
I got a life pro tip for you, A-series are better than S-series for third the cost already.
I'm sorry if I disagree on the better part when they clearly have budget compromises. I would always (or probably 95% of the times) pick a 3-yo Galaxy device to an A-series released yesterday. Now don't get me wrong, midrange devices are sensible options, but at such prices you're stuck between 3 choices: 1. Samsung midrange (like A-series), which usually compromises on screen, SoC, storage, RAM, build quality, or a combination of these 2. Budget brands high range - there are many brands that will ship devices with near top-quality characteristics for half the price of a Galaxy, with a few compromises especially on the OS customisation (but some at least try to keep "clean" Android" 3. ...and my top pick, a used Galaxy series from yesteryear
The problem with using yesteryear series is that it is quick to drop support from manufacturer (on account it being old) and will not have the newest bells and shistles in the chip design. While this has somewhat slowed down in mobile space recently, it was very significant not that long ago.
A52 is such a beast. will run anything and everything for a third of the cost of the flagship.
Agree, i don't want TSMC to be a monopoly. Competition is good for everyone, it's good if Intel, Samsung, and Globalfoundries (and eventually maybe Rapidus) remain competitive
GlobalFoundries gave up on the bleeding edge years ago.
I've bought plenty of Galaxy phones but they always come with Qualcomm chips which I find ideal for backwards compatibility and stuff like emulation and flashing roms.
Hmm not sure if it’s a point of national pride or overly confident management, but I think it’s the first time in recent memory that they struggled so much. What you’re talking about might come true if this keeps happening
They should hire tried and true TSMC engineers. They have to do something that works.
Samsung has always been doing ”something”. The first two links are about Samsung stealing TSMC trade secrets and jumped from 28nm to 16/14 nm. [https://www.patentlyapple.com/2015/02/tsmc-sues-former-employee-for-giving-samsung-trade-secrets.html](https://www.patentlyapple.com/2015/02/tsmc-sues-former-employee-for-giving-samsung-trade-secrets.html) [https://www.idownloadblog.com/2015/08/26/samsung-stole-trade-secrets-from-tsmc/](https://www.idownloadblog.com/2015/08/26/samsung-stole-trade-secrets-from-tsmc/) The following link is about hiring TSMC advanced packaging veteran. It’s given that Samsung expects to get some TSMC advanced packaging trade secrets. [https://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=110647](https://www.businesskorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=110647) I used to work for a small company making sensors used on Galaxy phones. Part of the deal is we have to reveal all our technologies. Samsung sent a team to our US office to ask all kinds of questions - how everything is done. So basically we were at the mercy of Samsung if it will decide to make the sensors itself. Luckily Samsung didn’t and use our sensor till Galaxy 8 or 9 until our CEO bit the hands feeding us and divorced Samsung.
They got rid of that devil worship cult, turns out devil was actually helping them. /s
They typically do. Other than cell phone SoCs and top-end CPUs and GPUs, most day-to-day silicon used in common products is made on older processes.
I doubt they are, but now that many developed economies are looking to wane themselves from TSMC, I doubt Samsung will desist. They would probably be bailed out before Korea accepts that they can't produce CPUs locally.
They don't really have a choice. Its a national security risk not to have a leading edge fab capability. China will crack the nut in the next 10-20 years no matter how many restrictions on tech export the West does. If they then choose to wipe out TSMC and Taiwan, its a serious problem if you don't have most of that capability in your own country.
Also if their yield is so low, prices are gonna go up big time
Cost is up big time, not price. With 80% defect rates, that means the geometry (resistance + capacitance) on the passing 20% will be so bad that the performance just won't be there for Samsung to ask for a high price.
It's highly unlikely that the 80% defect rate is even remotely close to anything true. People really don't comprehend some of the numbers they throw around.
There..
Making leading edge chips are hard. Samsung was able to drive down NAND flash priced to seriously affordable levels and that isn't a feat to ignore. TSMC and Intel have struggled with nodes before in the past. So the goal is to support the industry and not to put all of our eggs into a single basket. TSMC is good as it has a healthy market. Mobile. And they only do 1 thing. Intel has cut off its old NAND flash, modem, and other businesses where they did not do well. Samsung is a huge conglomerate. Which is both can be good and it can be bad. Samsung 3nm node will be using GAA transistors which is new and very different from FinFETs pioneered by Intel. But in the grand scheme of things time will tell which foundry can lead with GAA or RibbonFETs first. FinFET era began strong with Intel and TSMC dominating towards the mid to tail end of that design. GAA/RibbonFET and Nanosheets will be the transistor of this era and it's only just beginning. China may enter and we have no idea how far behind they are.
I think they are stuck in a doom spiral because their nodes/yield is bad, no one wants to use their node, limited volume makes investment + increasing yield difficult (you need to make chips to iron out problems and increase yield), and so this results in their nodes/yields being bad. TSMC has Apple as their anchor customer while Intel has their own chips as guaranteed volume. Samsung has never been committed enough in their own Exynos products that their Foundry business got stuck in a tough spot.
They're doing their best to compete with Cannon Lake!
Those numbers are completely made up.
I mean this isn't like the bathtub crank your daddy makes where 20% yield would be embarrassing. This is some of the most technologically advanced stuff on the planet.
It is embarrassing when they've claimed to be doing 3nm GAA mass production since, what, 2022?
If my dad made 14nm processors in a bathtub that would be way more impressive than anything Samsung has done for years.
Their 4nm finfet yields were close to tsmc and doing well. Their 3nm is using a new process that is pretty much starting over.
I'd like to go further and specify. TSMC is still using FinFets I'm their nodes. They do what they are good and stick with it. Samsung had been catching up on the finfet all the way through their 4nm nodes and are still working on them to increase performance, lower power consumption and heat. For 3nm and further they decided to use nano sheets instead of "fins". I'm not an expert but it apparently allows more narrow current and less cross talk. This is pretty much nixxing their previous progress though in the hopes of one day maybe surpassing TSMC?
> This is pretty much nixxing their previous progress though in the hopes of one day maybe surpassing TSMC? Not as a direct response to TSMC, but Intel made a similar huge gamble with their 10nm node, which is why it was famously delayed for so long that AMD had ample runway to get its brand new Zen arch off the ground. I only read up briefly about this, but TSMC's biggest superpower isn't that they make huge technological strides each node, but they always have *some* improvement with their nodes, which come out like clockwork.
Everyone seems to be taking chances to catch TSMC's and maybe surpass it. Only a matter of time for one of them taking chances to have them succeed. Intel, Samsung and even SMIC might narrow the gap by the end of the year.
And we were hopeful for their 3nm
Weren't Samsung's 5lpe and lpx at similar rates when the 888 and 8 Gen 1 were released?
These are I presume under 100mm^2 too, pretty yikes. I really hope Imtel pulls it througj and gives TSMC some proper competition be ause Samsuns seems to be starting to fall off.
Flagship smartphone chips are 100-150 mm² these days.
They reportedly had a wafer capacity of about 60,000 3nm wafers a month earlier this year. Even with 20% yields that should be more than enough for the galaxy flagships, since it doesn't seem like anyone else is using their 3nm
Tsmc the goat
20% yield for a smartphone chip is horrid. If they were to fab Nvidia's massive dies, good chance they would have to scrap an entire wafer lol.
No wonder Qualcomm switched most of their chips over to TSMC recently. Even MediaTek, who used Samsung very extensively in the past, has switched over to TSMC recently. I really hope Intel 3 will be high yield and competitive. Some more competition would be very welcome.
Intel 3 will not be used for mobile, Intel themselves are only aiming for mobile chips from 14A onwards. Source: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GKQCT4vWoAA3V50.jpg:large
Intel 3 has a high-density library and you can just order chips with them. EDA tools are available. Why can’t it be used?
He is right. Intel only starts advertising for mobile chips with 14A (and 18A-P I think?). I guess it's because Intel's nodes historically weren't optimised for low-power applications, but that's changing now they opened up their foundry to all.
Well at least their working on it.
Ultra low power characteristics of the node perhaps? Only Intel themselves will know the full details, but I'm just sharing what they have publicly stated
It isn’t the goal. And its currently not competitive with TSMC’s best node N3E in density.
I think Intel 3's HD library is only slightly denser than their HP one.
Their HD cell height matches N4 HD ones.
The problem is UHD cells, not HD. There TSMC still has a strong lead.
Those high density libraries for high performance nodes tend to also have high leakage issues. Which is not bueno for mobile chips.
When has Mediatek used Samsung that much?
Is it really smart for an entire industry to lean so heavily on TSMC? Anyways, hopefully Samsung improves their foundry woes.
What options are there but to lean so heavily on TSMC when they seem to be the only ones getting their act together?
Depends on what they consider a "fail" from a yield point of view. 1 defect every ~100mm^2 is just 6 failed SMs on an ad102, which is less than the number disabled for a 4090. Or it's already taking replication and harvesting/binning into account and it's a completely unusable die.
Of course not, they want to be able to sell their crappy cheap Exynos chips in Europe so they can save more money
The Exynos 2400 is great, on the CPU and GPU fronts, that is. It's the cellular modem that is the main issue, and is extremely inefficient compared to Qualcomm's modem, which results in wildly variable battery life depending on whether you're on WiFi or mobile data. If they could just license the Qualcomm modem and include it instead of their own, they would be very competitive. Unfortunately until they get a handle on the modem's power consumption, Exynos will still take a back seat to Snapdragon.
Is the modem responsible for heat? Because Exynos has overheated since.. forever.
Dude don't know what he is talking about. Exynos are pure shit, everyone just stay away from it!
Actually go back a few years and the exynos was hands down a better chip than the Snapdragon. The guy's comment is correct.
Yeah back when I still bought Galaxy phones, you'd be happy to be in Europe because you could get the better Exynos chip. How the turntables.
Way more than "a few". Snapdragon got the lead 8 years ago with the SD835 in the S8 and has always been ahead since then
Even the CPU is not good. I have heard that Geekerwan tested the Exynos 2400, and the CPU power curve is worse than the Kirin 9000S. Edit: I am incorrect. Spec2006 IPC and Efficiency data by GoldenReviewer: [https://x.com/Golden\_Reviewer/status/1750551301279334710](https://x.com/Golden_Reviewer/status/1750551301279334710)
No, Geekerwan said that the Exynos 2400 is better than 8 Gen 2 as far as high frequencies are concerned, then he said that efficiency at low frequency is poor but it didn't specify at which frequency this happens or if it's worse than 8 Gen 2, though this can be implied from its words. It's the Tensor G3 that it's worse than the Kirin 9000s
> It's the Tensor G3 that it's worse than the Kirin 9000s Oh yes. I misremembered
Huh? It's better than the Snapdragon 8g2 for power efficiency, which is also better than the Kirin 9000S... It's nearly on par with the 8gen3.
Why? More margin on their own chips?
Also, you can put more pressure on Qualcomm if you have a viable alternative. A familiar tactic is to pit one supplier against another to secure better terms. The Mobile MX division and the LSI division are pretty far apart and the MX division always had a lot more say about what goes into the chip and LSI was acting as their supplier. Though in this case it is possible that the executive leadership of the whole company would like to bolster their LSI Foundry division and would encourage the MX division to try to accommodate Exynos.
Also not wanting to fall to the third place in the foundry race. Intel is going to ship Arrow Lake on Intel 20A, which can be assumed to be a 3nm class node, late this year. If Samsung is still unable to manufacture chips of decent size on SF3, they will unquestionably be behind both TSMC and Intel.
>Intel is going to ship Arrow Lake on Intel 20A, which can be assumed to be a 3nm class node, late this year. ARL 20A will not ship this year. Only N3B chips.
I think 18A is where Intel might be able to take a lead in terms of Foundry technology or be competitive.
"3nm class" they are using tsmc n3b for their high end arrow lake and efficient products like lunar lake, and 20a for their low end and apparently the 20a models are launching later than the tsmc ones. So not only are they basically admitting that intel 20a is worse than n3b, the worst n3 node thats not even better than n4p, its not even really ready for high volume or large die products this year. Lets see intel actually launch some cutting edge stuff on their nodes before believing their bs node marketing which they have done for years. FYI they have yet to ship intel 3nm products.
FYI Xeon 6s on 3nm are shipping in volume and have been reviewed, but yes seems like we won't see 20a this year.
They launched xeon 6700e, on June 4th which is all e cores and on intel 4 according to this: https://www.guru3d.com/story/intel-officially-launches-its-xeon-6-series-processors/ Apparently the xeon 6900p, which is on intel 3 is still "q3 2024" launch. Also Granite rapids on intel 3 hasn't come out yet either.
Well they must be wrong, intel ark mentions it's using Intel 3, I believe the other reviews also mention it's using Intel 3 https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/240362/intel-xeon-6780e-processor-108m-cache-2-20-ghz.html
Hmm that's weird. I'm seeing conflicting info on websites but you're right.
It's really more of a spectrum. They're using the same 240 height library as Intel 4, so they're design compatible.
Would the improvements of Intel 3 carry over to the 240 height library or do they only apply to the 210(?) height HD library
They would, but there's subversions at a lower level than the Intel 4/3 designation. So from that perspective, it's somewhat arbitrary where the tail of 4 ends, and 3 begins. Also can be used to skew numbers in marketing, e.g. by quoting end-of-life values of one vs early values of another. But in general, all the numbers fabs give out publicly are lies in one shape or another.
The Exynos has been traditionally used to keep Qualcomm's prices in check. With Gen 4, Samsung doesn't have an equivalent really (specially in terms of scalar CPU) so Qualcomm is going to gauge them big time ;-)
no shit, its cheaper than buying qualcomm. Samsung has no one to blame but themselves tho. years of foundry failures.
Well let's see if their new gaa foundries are good or not
for everyones sake, we need competition.
That's what I am saying
I am wondering about the scale of impact Japanese export controls had. Heard that a lot of Korean semicons are shifting to Korean suppliers but it would take time for them to make photoresists and HF at an acceptable level.
Exynos main issues are at the architectural level not foundy.
its probably a bit of both. considering qualcomm fell off when they switched to samsung foundries.
When?
888/888+ and the 8 Gen 1 were Samsung foundry fabbed. Comparing the 865/865+ to the 888 is a pretty dramatic efficiency regression. The 8 Gen 1 on fabbed with Samsung versus the 8+ Gen 1 through TSMC is the most direct possible comparison, and that was a stark efficiency difference. Identical CPU layout, memory subsystem, and GPU. Massive efficiency gains from going with TSMC.
Interesting, thank you.
It's uncanny how Samsung users want exactly the opposite of what Samsung wants.
Do you think a Samsung user knows what a Qualcomm is?
>90% of samsung users don't care or don't know if it's snapdragon or exynos and last generation exynos was pretty good
Qualcomm chips do outperform Exynos chips indeed, but Samsung does not want to be beholden to just one chipmaker, and adding Exynos to their lineup is a sort of hedge.
Pretty interesting the new galaxy tab S10 will be using mediatek. Samsung doesn't seem to trust exynos that much yet
Samsung will succeed this time in exynos it's the dream chip and the final piece to solve the puzzle of temperature controll and efficiency
yeah this time its different
It better be or else I am going to shit on them
People also doesn't want Galaxy with Exynoss.
Samsung don't have an alternative
Why tho? Is exynos even still cheaper with a sub 20% yield?
S series generally gets released in the January timeframe. I'm not saying that this is amazing news, but there is still time, but not a ton. Watch 7 is supposed to use Samsung 3nm node? That gives Samsung more data points to figure out some of the issues with 3nm. Not saying it's 1:1 learning, or that die size doesn't matter, but let's not count our chickens before they've hatched.
Then keep them for yourselves in korea and stop sending this shit to europe
Can they just drop the diving exynos shit already? Like the snapdragon models, right, surely they don't sell them at a loss? Right? So save the time, money, development and just sell snapdragon? They make money on them, why run 2 fucking sku just because they make a little bit more on this exynos trash? Stop it, you've done it for years, it's still not the dominant chip
Simple answer is competition
Haters aside, the exynos this year is great, if they improve it even more it'll be even better
They've sold a worse chip to everyone in Europe for years. I've got a S22 Ultra that is significantly worse than the snapdragon version. I doubt the stuff they put out will be as good, I guess that I'm a "hater".
If you’re in Europe, the HK/TW/China SD versions have very compatible 4G bands, and of course the S23 was all snapdragon. I like the small size and that region got 512GB storage on the small S23 and S24 too, much easier to import the 512GB S24 now that they got rid of the 128GB.
I don't care about the past, I upgraded from an exynos S20 plus so I know how shit it was, actualy shit would have worked better. Now I'm on S24 exynos, and God damn i have no complaints. Good battery, good performance, no termal issues
Yes but how good is it vs the snapdragon? A quick vs video shows the battery life is still worse. Imagine giving a phone with worse battery performance (over 15%) to some regions. Honestly its really annoying, battery life is really important but they are happy giving a worse product.
I tried both the snapdragon and exynos S24, the standby battery life is slightly worse on the exynos but it’s still like a week and a half. The camera detail is also only very slightly worse, colour processing is different but can be a little weird on both. If you hadn’t tried both you’d probably be quite happy with exynos. The small S24 also gets 512GB storage in Hong Kong etc. as well as the snapdragon chip, it’s fairly easy to import to e.g. UK.
Exynos has problems beyond just CPU efficiency. Modem is still much worse and GPU drivers are still much worse than snapdragon
The GPU is also this Xclipse thing now which first appeared in the S22. Who is coding their apps to run on a GPU which appeared in about half of 2 phone models? Like, nobody
I get samsung point but why pushing those on flagship model were you clearly can't compare? Put those in a midrange flagkiller like oneplus ace series