By: Mr. Camel (no.delete@this.thanks.com), November 2, 2020 2:14 pm
Room: Moderated Discussions
David Kanter (dkanter.delete@this.realworldtech.com) on November 2, 2020 12:53 pm wrote:
> Doug S (foo.delete@this.bar.bar) on November 1, 2020 8:45 am wrote:
> > Michael S (already5chosen.delete@this.yahoo.com) on October 31, 2020 8:53 am wrote:
> > > I am not sure that it makes sense economically for FPGA company to become an early adapter of the
> > > new process. Very new chips are tiny part of the revenue, so why overpay for their production?
> > > It seems, typically FPGAs start to ship production parts on the process that is 1-1.5 years old.
> > > With likes of Apple overpaying for new stuff, may be, by now it should e closer to 2 years.
> >
> >
> > New chips may be a tiny part of their revenue, but if they can get customers to pay high enough prices
> > for them that they make a nice profit why not sell them? If you assume they will go to that latest process
> > eventually, they are going to have to pay the design/mask costs anyway it is just a matter of when.
> >
> > Also not sure why you think Apple is "overpaying" for new stuff. Apple is able to use all the new
> > transistors they get with each process - most of them went into the NPU on the A13->A14 jump so they
> > obviously have some reasons for that. In a couple years they will probably have their own modem ready
> > and that will be their use for the additional billions of transistors N3 will provide.
> >
> > Anyway, supposedly the reason Apple gets first crack is not because they are paying more than others but
> > because they are paying TSMC well in advance. Having a guaranteed customer of Apple's scale providing a
> > lot of the funding and thereby reducing the risk makes it easier for TSMC to stay on the leading edge.
>
> That's correct. I believe Huawei might have been more $ than Apple. But Apple funds new process development.
>
> David
With Apple helping to fund TSMC process dev, it seems like TSMC is likely to maintain its process lead for many years to come.
Intel may have had a chance to win Apple's business but blew it. They probably feel pretty stupid now that they won't have access to Apple's coffers.
> Doug S (foo.delete@this.bar.bar) on November 1, 2020 8:45 am wrote:
> > Michael S (already5chosen.delete@this.yahoo.com) on October 31, 2020 8:53 am wrote:
> > > I am not sure that it makes sense economically for FPGA company to become an early adapter of the
> > > new process. Very new chips are tiny part of the revenue, so why overpay for their production?
> > > It seems, typically FPGAs start to ship production parts on the process that is 1-1.5 years old.
> > > With likes of Apple overpaying for new stuff, may be, by now it should e closer to 2 years.
> >
> >
> > New chips may be a tiny part of their revenue, but if they can get customers to pay high enough prices
> > for them that they make a nice profit why not sell them? If you assume they will go to that latest process
> > eventually, they are going to have to pay the design/mask costs anyway it is just a matter of when.
> >
> > Also not sure why you think Apple is "overpaying" for new stuff. Apple is able to use all the new
> > transistors they get with each process - most of them went into the NPU on the A13->A14 jump so they
> > obviously have some reasons for that. In a couple years they will probably have their own modem ready
> > and that will be their use for the additional billions of transistors N3 will provide.
> >
> > Anyway, supposedly the reason Apple gets first crack is not because they are paying more than others but
> > because they are paying TSMC well in advance. Having a guaranteed customer of Apple's scale providing a
> > lot of the funding and thereby reducing the risk makes it easier for TSMC to stay on the leading edge.
>
> That's correct. I believe Huawei might have been more $ than Apple. But Apple funds new process development.
>
> David
With Apple helping to fund TSMC process dev, it seems like TSMC is likely to maintain its process lead for many years to come.
Intel may have had a chance to win Apple's business but blew it. They probably feel pretty stupid now that they won't have access to Apple's coffers.
