4 ms·
All this on Samsung 8nm (~61 MT/mm2). They didn't even feel the need to use TSMC 7nm (~100 MT/mm2). Probably keep the price down and to reserve capacity at TSMC
by en4bz 6y ago
All this on Samsung 8nm (~61 MT/mm2). They didn't even feel the need to use TSMC 7nm (~100 MT/mm2). Probably keep the price down and to reserve capacity at TSMC for the A100.
This is like the anime hero/villain (depending on your perspective) equivalent of fighting at half power.
- ZeroCool2u 6y agoOn the slide in the presentation it did say something like Samsung Nvidia Custom 8NM process, so perhaps Nvidia made such significant contributions to the process that it's not really Samsungs process anymore?
- wmf 6y agoTSMC's "customized" 12FFN process just had a larger reticle, so the burden should be on Nvidia to explain any customization. I don't think they deserve any benefit of the doubt here.
- gpm 6y agoWhy would Nvidia willingly explain any customization? Surely keeping that secret is a competitive advantage.
- ss248 6y ago>They didn't even feel the need to use TSMC 7nm They just couldn't get enough wafers. They tried to force TSMC to lower the prices and it backfired.
- pdimitar 6y agoHow did it backfire?
- npunt 6y agoYeah, impressive for the node. TSMC's latest N5 process is 173 MT/mm2, which Apple is using now and AMD (probably in N5P form) will start using next year. EUV is really a big step up.
- lend000 6y agoI don't have a source on hand, but my understanding is that Samsung significantly undercut TSMC on pricing, likely to stay alive in the high end fab business. Samsung is probably making extremely low margins on these, hence the lower than expected MSRP.