GlobalFoundries Stops All 7nm Development: Opts To Focus on Specialized Processes
by Anton Shilov & Ian Cutress on August 27, 2018 4:01 PM EST- Posted in
- Semiconductors
- CPUs
- AMD
- GlobalFoundries
- 7nm
- 7LP
GlobalFoundries Press Release
GlobalFoundries Reshapes Technology Portfolio to Intensify Focus on Growing Demand for Differentiated Offerings
Semiconductor manufacturer realigns leading-edge roadmap to meet client need and establishes wholly-owned subsidiary to design custom ASICs.
Santa Clara, Calif., August 27, 2018 – GLOBALFOUNDRIES today announced an important step in its transformation, continuing the trajectory launched with the appointment of Tom Caulfield as CEO earlier this year. In line with the strategic direction Caulfield has articulated, GF is reshaping its technology portfolio to intensify its focus on delivering truly differentiated offerings for clients in high-growth markets.
GF is realigning its leading-edge FinFET roadmap to serve the next wave of clients that will adopt the technology in the coming years. The company will shift development resources to make its 14/12nm FinFET platform more relevant to these clients, delivering a range of innovative IP and features including RF, embedded memory, low power and more. To support this transition, GF is putting its 7nm FinFET program on hold indefinitely and restructuring its research and development teams to support its enhanced portfolio initiatives. This will require a workforce reduction, however a significant number of top technologists will be redeployed on 14/12nm FinFET derivatives and other differentiated offerings.
“Demand for semiconductors has never been higher, and clients are asking us to play an ever-increasing role in enabling tomorrow’s technology innovations,” Caulfield said. “The vast majority of today’s fabless customers are looking to get more value out of each technology generation to leverage the substantial investments required to design into each technology node. Essentially, these nodes are transitioning to design platforms serving multiple waves of applications, giving each node greater longevity. This industry dynamic has resulted in fewer fabless clients designing into the outer limits of Moore’s Law. We are shifting our resources and focus by doubling down on our investments in differentiated technologies across our entire portfolio that are most relevant to our clients in growing market segments.”
In addition, to better leverage GF’s strong heritage and significant investments in ASIC design and IP, the company is establishing its ASIC business as a wholly-owned subsidiary, independent from the foundry business. A relevant ASIC business requires continued access to leading-edge technology. This independent ASIC entity will provide clients with access to alternative foundry options at 7nm and beyond, while allowing the ASIC business to engage with a broader set of clients, especially the growing number of systems companies that need ASIC capabilities and more manufacturing scale than GF can provide alone.
GF is intensifying investment in areas where it has clear differentiation and adds true value for clients, with an emphasis on delivering feature-rich offerings across its portfolio. This includes continued focus on its FDXTM platform, leading RF offerings (including RF SOI and high-performance SiGe), analog/mixed signal, and other technologies designed for a growing number of applications that require low power, real-time connectivity, and on-board intelligence. GF is uniquely positioned to serve this burgeoning market for “connected intelligence,” with strong demand in new areas such as autonomous driving, IoT and the global transition to 5G.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
127 Comments
View All Comments
drwho9437 - Tuesday, August 28, 2018 - link
The first shoe has dropped.I used to work for IBM Research, though not in the part they sold to Global Foundries, but in the part where they invented the new wrinkles to make better transistors and such. I finished my doctorate in 2012. It was just about a year after I finished that the deal with GF was announced. When this happened I was not sure how much longer IBM would invest in the physical science research for such things. They promised five years I believe. But it made me think about the business case for transistors and I concluded there was not much of a future left.
Simply put quantum effects and statistical effects hurt you more and more as you go smaller, it also blows up in cost. We can debate the end of Silicon scaling till we are blue in the face. Will it be 7 nm or 5 nm or will it be 10-12-14 or something else. It doesn't matter costs go up and amortizing your cost is the better business play at some point.
Can we research something to replace Silicon? Yes. But silicon has 40+ years of investment, you are not likely to invent a technology to overtake it in a few years or for a few dollars. Do you choose to invest in research or driving down the cost of building 14 nm fabs?
I though there would be a break point in 5-6 years where the CEOs would have to choose: amortize or invest a massive amount in researching something totally new. I fully expected them to choose the former. GF just did. Will Intel or Samsung choose differently? I doubt it. Which means a big brick wall is coming. Mr. Moore we have reached the end.
evanh - Tuesday, August 28, 2018 - link
My sole argument is economies of scale is what defines the cost.evanh - Tuesday, August 28, 2018 - link
My sole argument is economies of scale is what defines the cost.Follower - Wednesday, August 29, 2018 - link
If future need to be in our hands, then 7nm drop out may not be a good idea though, as it plays a major role after 5-10 years.richmaxw - Wednesday, August 29, 2018 - link
IBM paid Global Foundries $1.5 billion to take over their foundries. They also gave them patents. In return, Global Foundries said they would provide IBM 10 nm CPUs. How are Global Foundries not in breach of that agreement? AMD is obligated to buy a certain number of CPUs from Global Foundries each year. If they don't buy the minimum amount, they have to pay anyway. But what if Global Foundries is producing out-of-date products? Would AMD have signed that agreement knowing GF was going to just give up on research suddenly? Not only is this decision a waste of the research and development they have already put into 7 nm, it also appears to be dishonest and underhanded to IBM and AMD. I hope they are compensating IBM and AMD for going back on their word.Holliday75 - Wednesday, August 29, 2018 - link
Looking back at previous announcements I am now under the impression that AMD and most likely IBM have known this was coming a long ways off so they could adjust their strategies as needed.As to the agreements in place, if AMD and/or IBM were getting screwed over due to this change I am sure a lawsuit would have already been announced.
Alien959 - Wednesday, August 29, 2018 - link
What i find interesting is that their 7nm process is more or less developed and surly that has some value to someone that has deep pockets and want to be even more vertical integrated like apple. Yes its a huge investment, but does anadtech readership thinks there is a chance that Apple would be interested in getting in the fab business.eastcoast_pete - Wednesday, August 29, 2018 - link
Apple tied itself to TSMC (and vice versa). In return for Apple booking huge quantities and making TSMC their exclusive supplier, TSMC gave Apple first right of refusal for their 7 nm capacity. They both took a risk, but that deal deal gave TSMC what GloFo was missing: a full order book for 7 nm silicon with the attached large, guaranteed revenue stream (many billions of $$$) that made TSMC's investing the necessary multi-billion $$$ into 7 nm tech possible. Right now, I simply don't know any other (fabless) company except Apple that would (or could) sign a two-figure billion dollar purchase order like that; AMD simply doesn't have anywhere near that volume, or the financial muscle, and it looks like even Qualcomm and Huawei had to settle for 7 nm table scraps at TSMC's.While some here have commented on the coming end of Moore's Law, that scenario may have to be amended: in addition to physical limitations to how much one can shrink semiconductor structures, it looks more and more that the costs of shrinking nodes will put the brakes on that development even before we hit the actual physical limits.
@Anandtech: if you guys have the numbers, could you publish a plot of node sizes/nm vs. estimated costs to get a fab up-and-running. This seems to approach an (inverse) exponential function as we go from 14 nm to 10 nm to now 7 nm.
Sahrin - Wednesday, August 29, 2018 - link
GF has been very aggressive in growing the company through private equity acquisition - which means debt, which means interest payments. It'd be interesting to see how the transaction and financing costs of the acquisitions factor into this.GF would not be the first company sunk by ownership's shitty business strategy. Blaming it all on R&D is the idiot's way out. AMD, eg, was sunk by borrowing to buy ATI - not by overspending on R&D.
del42sa - Thursday, August 30, 2018 - link
bunch of loosers....