News:

Willkommen im Notebookcheck.com Forum! Hier können sie über alle unsere Artikel und allgemein über Notebook relevante Dinge disuktieren. Viel Spass!

Main Menu

Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:

Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by S.Yu
 - July 18, 2023, 06:24:33
Quote from: paviko on July 17, 2023, 19:16:193nm, really? The last true nm metrics should be used for Intel 10nm, later named Intel 7. TSMC, Samsung since "10" part name in their products has unknown nm value. A bit closer to reality would be number of transistors per mm^2. TSMC 3 is probably quite different than Samsung 3. Just guess Samsung 3nm == TSMC 5nm == Intel 7nm (Intel 4).
Beating a dead horse, but those numbers seem about right.
Posted by paviko
 - July 17, 2023, 19:16:19
3nm, really? The last true nm metrics should be used for Intel 10nm, later named Intel 7. TSMC, Samsung since "10" part name in their products has unknown nm value. A bit closer to reality would be number of transistors per mm^2. TSMC 3 is probably quite different than Samsung 3. Just guess Samsung 3nm == TSMC 5nm == Intel 7nm (Intel 4).
Posted by S.Yu
 - July 17, 2023, 15:11:33
55-60% is a ~9% gap, not a lot...and TSMC's probably could be pushed to higher clocks with less leakage, as usual.
Posted by Redaktion
 - July 17, 2023, 14:14:12
A new report says TSMC's 3 nm node has yields of just 55%. On the other hand, Samsung Foundry is faring much better at 60%. AMD is rumoured to use Samsung Foundry for some of its upcoming parts.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/TSMC-reportedly-lags-behind-Samsung-Foundry-in-3-nm-yields.734727.0.html