27 ms·
Apple orders entire supply of TSMC's 3nm chips for iPhone 15 Pro and M3 Macs
- napolux 4y agoConsidering how failed was the launch of the iPhone 14 Pro (I had to wait for 45 dayss before getting mine) and sales of the "iPhone 14" (which is just an iPhone 13, basically) this is just expected
- dmitriid 4y agoI'd put heavy quotes around "failed". There was a general slump in the smartphone market, and Appel was the only one increasing their sales in some months.
- mobilio 4y agoPlus there was pandemic issue in China factory and logistic chain.
- hotpotamus 4y agoSaying that the launch failed because it had such a long wait time (assuming due to popular demand) has a sort of Yogi Berra quality that I appreciate. He was the one who said, "No one goes there anymore; it's too crowded". If the launch was delayed because of technical issues then that would be another matter. I'm really not too up on the differences between phones and the specifics of one launch or another these days. When my current iPhone (which I'm reasonably sure is an 11) encounters some issue, I'll go and get whatever number is current at that time.
- napolux 4y ago> Saying that the launch failed because it had such a long wait time (assuming due to popular demand) has a sort of Yogi Berra quality that I appreciate. He was the one who said, "No one goes there anymore; it's too crowded". Do we really know what happened? Lack of silicon? high demand? logistic fails?
- matwood 4y agoHas everyone already forgotten all the covid lockdowns in China?
- post_break 4y agoWe're you around for the 6+ and 6s+? Those phones were unobtanium for months and months. The 14 Pro being unavailable for 45 days is nothing. And the 14 not selling because people saw right through apple.
- napolux 4y ago> We're you around for the 6+ and 6s+? yep, but I bought it late in its lifecycle
- wkat4242 4y agoI think that was still the trailing edge of the whole "lining up outside the shop at 2am". I also did this once for the first iPad release :) Which really did turn out to be a groundbreaking product release though the actual hardware itself was still quite flawed. It needed a few iterations to become mature.
- newaccount74 4y ago> which is just an iPhone 13, basically It's a repairable iPhone 13. I went with an iPhone 14 over the 14 Pro because of that -- I don't care as much about the "Pro". What I care about is that I don't want the repair costs for a cracked glass to be so high that it's cheaper to buy a 2 year old used phone.
- sylware 4y agoI wonder how many transistor shrink steps we once EUV High-NA tools are in production. Namely, before it becomes insane and too much unreliable to be reasonable.
- mschuster91 4y ago> Namely, before it becomes insane and too much unreliable to be reasonable. Well, the question are the yield rates... but even low yield rate can be enough if the product can be priced expensively enough.
- BirAdam 4y agoEvery generation of shrink has pushed a company or two out of the fab business. I would guess that around 10-12 angstroms TSMC, Samsung, or Intel will cease being competitive at the leading edge and fold. Most likely that will happen one more time before the shrinking is no longer physically possible while maintaining chip function.
- cubefox 4y agoPhysical impossibility probably won't be a factor, since, long before that, process improvements will become so expensive that they don't make economic sense. It doesn't help having a marginally more efficient chip for a much higher price.
- chrisjc 4y ago"When" that happens, I'm extremely curious how and if the remaining incumbents will be able to leverage their dominant positions/technology/ip/etc to establish a footing in whatever new technology supplants the existing. I'm not really talking about whether they'll be too ignorant to recognize the impending existential risk and take action, but these companies are much more than just ASML customers that know how to use lithograph machines. They have layered stacks of mind boggling processes, expertise and experience. Will this new technology be so revolutionary and disruptive that all their advantages are rendered obsolete insofar as competing in this new arena. I guess if anyone could answer any of these questions they wouldn't be sitting around here talking about it on HN :)
- Waterluvian 4y agoThese headlines always make it sound like the chips are fungible. Is it that they’re basically saturating the entire production capacity with their orders?
- zrail 4y agoYes, that is exactly what happened.
- Aromasin 4y agoDepends on your definition of "supply". The argument is mainly just semantics. They're not wrong per-se. A better phrase might have been "production" rather than supply. I agree, supply sounds like I'm buying an off the shelf component, not a custom designed wafer. In short, Apple is set to purchase every wafer that TSMC produces when they launch their N3 node. How long for should have, but hasn't, been specified. It's safe to assume that by "entire supply" they mean "until TSMCs next node", at which point TSMC will take orders from other companies for their N3 node.
- sigmar 4y ago>It's safe to assume that by "entire supply" they mean "until TSMCs next node" Is that really safe to assume? Maybe the original paywalled story is more precise with language, but the use of "all available orders" and "100% of the initial N3 supply" seems so vague to me. Could initial mean first month of full scale production?
- ChoGGi 4y agoLooks like all production till somewhere around Q4 2024. https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-15th-gen-arrow-lake-tsmc-delay https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-15th-gen-arrow-lake-...
- edude03 4y agoYeah that's exactly what's happening - TSMC predicts they can make N chips per Y period, and apple has said they'd like 100% of Y period to be dedicated to making chips for Apple.
- warrenm 4y agoWhy hasn't Apple just bought TSMC?
- _kbh_ 4y agoGiven how expensive (and risky) chip fabrication is at the cutting edge doesn't it make more sense to just pay extra to use whoever has the cutting edge node and not take on the R&D risk?.
- John23832 4y agoGeopolitical Risk
- asah 4y agoAnti-trust
- John23832 4y agoWhat would run afoul of antitrust laws? I don’t see it.
- sofixa 4y agoTSMC is a critical supplier of Apple and a bunch of Apple's competitors. Making it Apple-exclusive would kill AMD, Nvidia and most Android phones (Samsung and Huawei are the only exceptions using subpar non-TSMC chips) overnight. There is no way in hell that any antitrust regulator allows Apple to destroy their competitors with an anticompetitive purchase of a supplier.
- asah 4y ago...but meanwhile it's still fine to corner the market on 3nm... (nevermind that modern chips are a hybrid of different feature sizes...)
- 4y ago
- warrenm 4y agofeel like this Intel story's related: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34894943 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34894943
- deanc 4y ago> Compared to 5nm process, the first-generation 3nm process can reduce power consumption by up to 45%, improve performance by 23% and reduce area by 16% compared to 5nm, while the second-generation 3nm process is to reduce power consumption by up to 50%, improve performance by 30% and reduce area by 35%. What kind of real-world impact are we likely to see on the 3nm chips for the new iPhone and M3 macs? These figures seem outstanding and generationally impactful if true.
- nsteel 4y ago> reduce power consumption by up to 50%, improve performance by 30% and reduce area by 35% To be clear, you don't get all three. Also, are these Apple's numbers? They are better than what TSMC say (1st gen) 3nm silicon provides: > N3 technology will offer up to 70% logic density gain, up to 15% speed improvement at the same power and up to 30% power reduction at the same speed as compared with N5 technology https://www.tsmc.com/english/dedicatedFoundry/technology/logic/l_3nm https://www.tsmc.com/english/dedicatedFoundry/technology/log...
- jb1991 4y agoI’m curious why not? Apple Silicon so far has improved performance, and reduced power consumption. Does that mean that it’s a larger chip than the others that came before it?
- maven29 4y agoThey got there by skimping on IO
- manmal 4y agoPlease elaborate. IO is really not an issue in the M* machines I‘ve used - on the contrary.
- adgjlsfhk1 4y ago
- jojobas 4y agoWhy does TSMC do that? When Apple has better options TSMS will be dumped, as with IBM and Intel before. Why hurt goodwill with other customers?
- Octoth0rpe 4y agoBecause Apple showed up with a big bag of money, presumably.
- culturestate 4y agoAnd, importantly, Apple continues to show up with even more big bags of money. Giving Apple de facto right of first refusal for new node capacity is as much about maintaining TSMC's relationship with its most important customer as it is about this year's bottom line.
- jojobas 4y agoI bet they could ask the same amount for 80% of the capacity and Apple would agree.
- kijin 4y agoThis is not the first time I've heard of TSMC reserving a very large portion of their production capacity for a single customer, especially in the early days of a new process node. I guess there's an inherent risk in being the launch customer for a new node (unexpected delays, low yield, bugs, etc.) that can only be offset by exceptionally large volume. Maybe there's a gentleman's agreement among Apple, Samsung, AMD and nvidia that somebody's gotta buy those early wafers, but nobody can do that every single time?
- _kbh_ 4y agoAnother part of the reason is that Apple reportedly bankrolls a large amount of the R&D for new nodes for TSMC
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- HarHarVeryFunny 4y agoThe article has no information on what this statement means. I'm sure TSMC hasn't just walked away from their other customers like NVidia and AMD. TSMC is still in process of ramping up production of their 3nm process (the article mentions they'll reach 45,000 wafers per month by March), so the only sensible reading of this statement seems to be that Apple are getting first X months (where X is unspecified) of production capacity until capacity has ramped up. It'd be interesting to try to correlate this 45,000 wafers/month number to Apple sales. The only readily available info I could find is that these are 12" wafers and will cost ~$20,000 each. I'm not sure how many good die Apple are getting out of each wafer. So that's about $1B/month apple is spending on CPUs apparently.
- jb1991 4y agoIt is interesting that Intel suddenly announced that they would be delaying their orders of this exact chip.
- HarHarVeryFunny 4y agoAre Intel getting cutting edge (3nm) chips made by TSMC ? I know they're outsourcing production of some of the older nodes, but that would be a bit surprising. Semiconductor manufacturing is all about scale - selling enough of each generation to fund development of the next generation (which is astronomically expensive). If Intel are buying cutting edge chips from TSMC then that would seem to be an act of desperation - helping their competitors because they have no choice due to their own troubles.
- jb1991 4y agoHere’s more context: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34894943 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34894943
- HarHarVeryFunny 4y agoWow - desperation indeed. It's amazing how Intel, who had such process expertise, managed to screw up like this, while TSMC and Samsung have adapted to new generations without any real hiccups.
- xiphias2 4y agoM2 was a skip generation for me, looking forward to M3. Maybe the same with iPhone. I generally care about process node as the main feature of a computer.
- newaccount74 4y agoThe M2 Pro chips finally allow 8k displays! That's a pretty significant new feature (at least on Macs, Windows has supported 8k displays for some time already).
- dewey 4y agoI know zero people with a 8k display, I wouldn't call that a significant new feature.
- hbn 4y agoI know people have made naive comments about computers for years, "why would you ever need more than 8MB of RAM?", etc But I genuinely believe 4k is the upper limit where you stop seeing benefits in increased resolution for a monitor. Our eyes do have limits after all! I have pretty good vision and 4k is enough, and at that point I'd prefer focus on other aspects of picture quality like color accuracy and higher refresh rate. It's already annoying enough how large a screenshot of your monitor comes out (just tested on my desktop and it came out to 10MB). 8k is unnecessary in the vast majority of cases.
- nordsieck 4y ago> But I genuinely believe 4k is the upper limit where you stop seeing benefits in increased resolution for a monitor. Our eyes do have limits after all! I think it depends on how big the monitor is. You're probably right for 27" monitors. But running a 43" TV as a monitor, the pixel density is quite a bit lower than I'd like.
- moffkalast 4y ago
- bookofjoe 4y ago>Apple’s iPod, by comparison, was made far more pocketable thanks to the inclusion of a 1.8-inch Toshiba hard drive. The story behind how Apple came to acquire these hard drives for the original iPod is interesting. >Jobs had expressed interest in building a portable music player in late 2000 and had tasked Jon Rubinstein with making it happen. The problem, however, was that Jobs wanted a player that was small and sleek like the flash-based music players of the time but that held as many songs as the hard drive-based players at the time (the flash ones would only hold between 10 and 20 songs depending upon how you compressed the music). >Rubinstein told Jobs that the components necessary to make a small music player with a lot of storage didn’t exist yet. This was in late 2000, according to the story, which is well-documented in Walter Isaacson’s book. >However in February of 2001, Rubinstein was in Japan meeting with Toshiba when the following scene played out, according to Isaacson (page 384 of "Steve Jobs"): >At the end of a routine meeting with Toshiba, the engineers mentioned a new product they had in the lab that would be ready by that June. It was a tiny, 1.8-inch drive (the size of a silver dollar) that would hold five gigabytes of storage (about a thousand songs), and they were not sure what to do with it. When the Toshiba engineers showed it to Rubinstein, he knew immediately what it could be used for. A thousand songs in his pocket! Perfect. But he kept a poker face. Jobs was also in Japan, giving the keynote speech at the Tokyo Macworld conference. They met that night at the Hotel Okura, where Jobs was staying. “I know how to do it now,” Rubinstein told him. “All I need is a $10 million check.” Jobs immediately authorized it. So Rubinstein started negotiating with Toshiba to have exclusive rights to every one of the disks it could make, and he began to look around for someone who could lead the development team. >"Exclusive rights to every one of the disks it could make" is the key takeaway here. Fast forward to later in the year – October 23, 2001, to be exact – and Apple would roll out a $400 pocketable MP3 player that could hold a thousand songs thanks to a hard drive no other company could use for competing products. The scroll wheel was pretty cool, too. Source: https://techland.time.com/2013/10/23/watch-steve-jobs-unveil-the-ipod-12-years-ago/ https://techland.time.com/2013/10/23/watch-steve-jobs-unveil...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- notjustanymike 4y ago
- amoss 4y agoThis makes sense for Apple - they are aiming at the premium end of the market. Having a process advantage over the competition will translate into a performance / battery win. After all, this is what Intel did for decades while they could.
- obert 4y agoand when time comes and AI can run on a laptop, Apple will be 3-4 years ahead of everyone else…
- cubefox 4y agoRemember how Apple bought up most of the 5nm capacity for their M1 chips? Qualcomm was then forced to go with Samsung, which resulted in the Snapdragon 888 and 8 Gen 1 SoCs being pretty inefficient compared to the TSMC competition, like the Mediatek Dimensity 9000. Will something like this now happen again?
- Kukumber 4y agoQualcomm was not forced, Qualcomm was not able to compete with M1 chips Qualcomm is a for profit, they are not forced to be bad, being bad mean less profit, they are just inefficient and had a different strategy, they saw competition coming and they panicked, they are not used to innovate they prefer milk their customers with small and insignificant upgrades every once in a very while as well as making use of their influence with the deep state to kill any weak competition (Samsung's Exynos)
- nfriedly 4y agoPerhaps the parent should have said "lead to" rather than "forced", but the point still stands that Qualcomm went to Samsung's foundries, which provided lower quality results. The Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 was a hot turd. In contrast, "plus" variation, which was the exact same chip but manufactured by TSMC instead of Samsung, got significantly better performance/power numbers. (BTW, I think you're getting downvoted into oblivion because of the "deep state" nonsense. The rest of what you said is reasonable.)
- Kukumber 4y agoThat's not non-sense, that's the reality [1] It happened with Japan, look at them nowadays [2] It also happened with Europe, Alcatel and Nokia, look at them nowadays [3] For some reason, only Microsoft can get away with bribing foreign countries [4, 5] We seen the extension of it with the ban of chinese's 5G and multiple tech companies, including huawei, wich later unveiled novel EUV patents [6], they maybe knew what they were cooking TSMC's developing story is also quite revealing, with US officials suggesting sabotaging TSMC [7] "deep state" nowadays has negative connotation because the government wants it to be that way ('it's a conspiracy' argument), look, it works [8] And it's not just with tech, there are some suspicious stories in other industries, car [9] and metal manufacturing [10] for example After all these stories, seeing Samsung having to drop plans for a homemade chip with advanced homemade fabs instantly ring bells, specially when the house was tainted with similar stories [11] [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_exceptionalism [2] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1987/04/18/sanctions-imposed-on-japan/f0daac66-74fe-4f5c-96ce-3aa08898b4bd/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1987/04/18/s... [3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcatel-Lucent#Lawsuits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcatel-Lucent#Lawsuits [4] - https://www.theregister.com/2022/03/25/microsoft_accused_of_corrupt_business/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/03/25/microsoft_accused_of_... [5] - http://techrights.org/2014/05/28/microsoft-brazil/ http://techrights.org/2014/05/28/microsoft-brazil/ [6] - https://www.techspot.com/news/97072-huawei-patents-euv-lithography-tools-used-make-10nm.html https://www.techspot.com/news/97072-huawei-patents-euv-litho... [7] - https://eurasiantimes.com/us-taiwan-should-destroy-its-semiconductor-industry-to-deter-china/ https://eurasiantimes.com/us-taiwan-should-destroy-its-semic... [8] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_state_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_state_in_the_United_State... [9] - https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affaire_Carlos_Ghosn https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affaire_Carlos_Ghosn (i couldn't find english coverage) [10] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric_Pierucci https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric_Pierucci [11] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Kun-hee#Scandals_and_controversies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Kun-hee#Scandals_and_contr...
- ajaimk 4y agoWhen this says 45,000 Wafers in March, are we talking about Wafer Starts of finished wafers? What's the cycle time for 3nm?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- yieldcrv 4y agoIf an M3 mac has over 128gb RAM, I’m upgrading again 96gb is just under the threshold where it makes a difference, for me
- xedrac 4y agoImagine how popular the M3 and friends would be if people could buy it off Newegg/Amazon and use an operating system of their choice?
- EricE 4y agoNo more popular than it is today. The vast majority of regular people don't give two cents about what is under the hood - just what a computer can or can't do with them.
- gautamcgoel 4y agoJust curious: what do you need 128GB of RAM for? I have 16GB on my desktop and never feel constrained.
- jlokier 4y agoI've seen my Firefox process peak at 67GB (uncompressed) when viewing certain webapps, and it regularly goes over 16GB (uncompressed; about 10GB compressed). With only 16GB RAM that's too much swapping. It's slow due to the swapping. I can't even do that any more, as that swap also needs more free disk space than I have. I feel constrained in 16GB all the time, and it's mostly due to browser memory usage, whichever browser I use (Firefox, Safari or Chrome). However there are other things running too such as Discord, Telegram, VMware, Libre or MS Office; the GBs add up. If I dare to compile something big, I have to close other things. I'm not even one of those media creators or gamers using heavy graphics! So, I currently have a late 2013 MBP with 16GB which is going strong still. It's still great, except for RAM and battery. I'm thinking of upgrading to an M2 Max 64GB or 96GB, because I don't want to be caught short with only 24/32GB the way I've felt heavily constrained by 16GB a few years after buying the 2013 MBP. And I want to get into modern graphics, physics simulations, blockchain simulations, terabyte-scale database engine design, neural nets and chip design more than I have been. I expect those to be memory heavy, enough that even 96GB RAM will be a design constraint. (Then again that's what I said when I bought the 2013 MBP, and in practice I ended up using datacentre servers for the heavy stuff, so I'm still weighing up the purchasing decision, whether it's worth it).
- spenvo 4y agoConsider the sourcing here -- Digitimes rumors are notoriously baseless.
- smilespray 4y agoAnybody who follows Apple and their relationship with TMSC knows that this scenario is very likely. Digitimes gets to be the broken clock that's right twice a day.
- Havoc 4y agoAt what point does this become a monopoly issue? Sure others could have outbid hypothetically so it is on paper fair but Apple has a lot of cash.
- joaogui1 4y ago2 issues in fact, one is TSMC being the only one capable of making these amazing chips and the second is Apple buying their entire supply. Now if any of that counts as a monopoly I don't think so
- e40 4y agoAnd the entire yield coming from a region of the world that China has said it will annex (at some point).
- dom96 4y agoWhy aren't there other companies outbidding Apple?
- bgirard 4y agoPresumably they're trying and that's driving up the price for Apple?
- selectodude 4y agoBecause Apple has more money and higher margins than they do.
- jonplackett 4y agoApple is the only company to sell an insanely highly mass produced product at insanely high prices. Usually you have to pick one or the other. So the reason is that no-one can afford to out bid them.
- seabrookmx 4y agoThey can't. Apple is the most valuable company in the world and has more cash on hand than many medium sized countries.
- ouid 4y agotime to add more OS bloat so that only the 3nm process can support it.
- bitL 4y agoDo we know if Apple is getting rid of the notch for M3 macbooks in favor of the "dynamic island" solution from iPhone 14 Pro?
- Tagbert 4y agothat would make no sense in the context of a MacBook. The phone notch and dynamic island is a freestanding element. The notch on the MacBooks is embedded in the menubar. There would be no “island”. It might be possible for Apple to add Live Activities to the notch on the MacBook (That is what those dynamic notices are called) but only if more software publishers put in the effort.
- bitL 4y agoI am talking mostly about replacing the ugly cut-off at the top with a "smaller hole" instead, not really caring about any software functionality from iPhones.
- Tagbert 4y agothat notch contains a camera, a couple of sensors and some mounting hardware. Eventually Apple might be able to engineer a smaller version and maybe eventually have them under the display but so far that has proven difficult. In the meantime, the notch is a cleaver method to increase the screen size without making the overall case larger and it does so by making use of a part of the screen that is normally little used.
- bitL 4y agoThey already did the miniaturization with iPhone 14 Pro which is why I asked. I don't really need to go through a rationalization why this ugly hack is good for me.
- Tagbert 4y agothe components on the iPhone trade surface size for depth. They are much thicker than the lid of a laptop using much of the thickness of the phone’s body.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y agoGet ready for all of the posts about Apple silicon trouncing Intel and AMD.
- mmaunder 4y agoA put on Apple stock might be a great hedge against China invading Taiwan.
- josephcsible 4y agoIt feels somehow unfair and anticompetitive to buy up all the stock of the best processors so PCs and Android devices can't have any.
- wvaske 4y agoThey don't really compete with desktop processors. During the initial phases of production, there are still relatively high defects per wafer. But the mobile chips are small so you lose a small percentage of chips per wafer due to these defects. After the defect rate decreases enough then the larger chips will start to get made (GPUs, and CPUs). If this is true, Apple is getting exclusive access for a period of time when the failure rates are highest then other customers will get their allotments down the road when defect rates are at acceptable levels for the size of their chips.
- keyme 4y agoAnd the rest of us plebs are to be stuck with the Samsung fab again. Great.
- ghqst 4y agoRich company pays large sum of money to other rich company for special treatment, peasants HORRIFIED.
- bdlowery 4y agoBuy an iPhone then :)
- wallace_yc 4y ago[flagged]
- kalleboo 4y agoWhy do you think Samsung is any better?
- mepian 4y agoThe world really needs Intel Foundry Services to succeed, this doesn't look like a healthy market.
- jiggawatts 4y agoIntel is installing high-NA lithography tools from ASML in their new fabs and should be able to manufacture 3nm chips soon. Unfortunately they’ll certainly reserve 100% of that capacity for themselves.
- UncleOxidant 4y agoOnce again we see that Apple is highly exposed to geopolitical risk should China decide to take action against Taiwan. TSMC's US fabs won't be ready for at least a couple of years yet.
- sourcecodeplz 4y agoIt's good to have deep pockets...
- apatheticonion 4y agoYaay, I can't wait to have more battery life on my "professional" laptop that has no/poor support for anything I use (games, containers, etc)! /sarcasm All that extra screen time will help me wait for the day that Linux is stable on the platform!
- jononomo 4y agoCan anyone explain to me why these chips don't suffer from quantum tunneling? Isn't there a limit to how small you can go?
- jlokier 4y agoThere is a limit, but it depends on the materials and transistor geometry because those shape the potential wells, which affect tunelling. For example, high-κ dielectric materials. From Wikipedia: > As the thickness [of the gate insulator] scales below 2 nm, leakage currents due to tunneling increase drastically, leading to high power consumption and reduced device reliability. Replacing the silicon dioxide gate dielectric with a high-κ material allows increased gate capacitance without the associated leakage effects. In other words, the limit hasn't been reached yet. Also bear in mind 3nm is a marketing number which has a tenuous connection to a technical feature of the lithography. These days it's really just a number which shrinks with each generation to indicate which generation. The transistors are not actually 3×3 nm in size; they are larger.