[MangoCoffee]

> process technology migration to 3- and 2-nanometer (nm) based on the company’s Gate-All-Around (GAA) transistor structure

I believe GAA is the next gen tech for the node process. Samsung is the first foundry to do GAA w/3nm while TSMC is sticking w/FinFET for their 3nm. It'll be interesting to see how 3nm FinFET compare to 3nm GAA.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/16041/where-are-my-gaafets-ts...

edit:

>After that, transistor structures begin to change. Samsung and TSMC are manufacturing chips at 7nm and 5nm based on today’s finFETs. Samsung will move to nanosheet FETs at 3nm. Intel is also developing GAA technology. TSMC plans to extend finFETs to 3nm, and then will migrate to nanosheet FETs at 2nm around 2024.

https://semiengineering.com/the-increasingly-uneven-race-to-...

[ksec]

I want to add some context for those who dont follow Semi closely.

Samsung Foundry have a history of over promise and under deliver. This 3nm launch will likely be similar to their EUV node which they claim to be industry first but wasn't shipping in any real volume. So arguably they are not lying, but it is a marketing spin.

TSMC is an extremely pragmatic company. It either work or it doesn't, there is no need to save faces. No need to push industry first GAA or FinFET, push for whatever it works within the timeframe with respect to yield and cost. What is the point of having the best tech in 2022 when they cant produce it with enough volume that any of their customer would want?

That is not to say Samsung Foundry are evil or anything, they are pushing very very hard to try and catch up to TSMC and stays competitive in the market. ( Look at what happen to Global Foundry ). And now Intel is coming. Pat Gelsinger seems to be doing all the right thing.

[1-6]

> TSMC is an extremely pragmatic company.

After listening into their earnings call, their CEO really pushes aside quick profits (such as raising prices) and prefers long-term stability and keeping their existing clients happy. The investors wanted TSMC to raise chip prices and expand their operations.

[ksec]

> After listening into their earnings call,

People should really listen to earning calls, it shows the company's true character. From Nvidia, Intel, AMD or Apple. I have yet to see any media does a decent job and translating it to mainstream news. Mostly because Tech news (site) aren't really focused on Finance and only cares about the tech, while Finance / Investors doesn't care or known enough about about Tech and wouldn't cover it in the Finance news.

> and prefers long-term stability and keeping their existing clients happy.

That is why people partner with TSMC. As Morris Chang calls it the Grand Alliance. Unlike Samsung and Intel, TSMC is Pure Play, which means they dont have chips that compete with their clients. They are also transparent about their progress. TSMC originally put GAA on 3nm, but it was clear the tech isn't going to be mature enough in time. So they changed it to something else. Let their customer knows, let them decide if they should move on to a more mainstream node like a cost reduced 4nm, or stick to leading edge on 3nm FinFET.

Unlike Intel which lied to all of their Custom Foundry partners leaving some of them with a two years 5G delayed rollout. Or Samsung which despite having the cheapest per wafer, the cost advantage doesn't translate well when you dont have enough of them for your inventory needs.

[zibzab]

Counterpoint:

What is the point of having the best tech in 2021 if all capacity is allocated to a single customer?

[MangoCoffee]

"To be clear, wafer agreements are signed 2-3 years before the chip makes it into HVM and TSMC can build fabs faster than that so there will be no N3 shortages for anyone who signed a wafer agreement (apple, AMD, NVIDIA, QCOM, etc…). If they need more chips than what they signed up for, which happens, there may be shortages. This is how TSMC and the foundry business works. It’s all about the wafer agreements."

https://semiwiki.com/semiconductor-manufacturers/302408-tsmc...

[ksec]

Because that single customer paid in advance and book those capacity?

That is how it works in literally all other industry supply chain.

[zibzab]

In practice, how is that different from not having the capacity to serve others?

[ksec]

That is not how capacity planning works. You dont built it and hope for them to come.

If others were willing to paid, take the risk and book in advance they will have the capacity the need. But rarely anyone was will to pay the price premium. They wait for it to become a little more mainstream.

[hajile]

Intel's switch to FinFET was equivalent to almost 2 node jumps. If they nail GAA, then it will probably be much better, but it will also be enormously more expensive to produce the chips.

Intel has loads of cash and would pay that money in a second, but I suspect that most other companies would rather hold off a bit longer in exchange for much cheaper products.

[baybal2]

> I believe GAA is the next gen tech for the node process. Samsung is the first foundry to do GAA w/3nm while TSMC is sticking w/FinFET for their 3nm. It'll be interesting to see how 3nm FinFET compare to 3nm GAA.

Comparing Apples to Oranges, and doing doing a comparison on taste vs. size.

The device may well be awesome, but first ICs using it not so.

The biggest advancements in under 14nm were in metal, not so much with the device, process, or materials.

Even if Samsung will produce a better device design, they will still have to catch up to TSMC in so many, many other areas.

Only single digit number of people on this planet will ever know the exact measurements of FinFet vs. GAAFet

But one thing for sure, Samsung saying that they pioneered a new device ahead of TSMC does indeed sound very, and impressive to a certain category big co. people regardless of actual performance.