Behind the Closed Doors of AMD's Chip Production 151
rokali writes "Tom's Hardware is running an article
on AMD's chipmaking procedure, plants, and future. Check out the pictures
of Fab 36, their new plant slated to open in 2006, which will put of the next
generation of 65nm chips. From the article: 'Currently, AMD's devices in
Dresden are still produced on 200 mm wafers; the new APM 3.0 using 300 mm wafers
won't be ramped up until Fab 36 opens. Production startup at the new facility
is slated for the beginning of 2006, at which point the company will have invested
an additional $2.5 billion.'"
So many shiny toys! (Score:2, Funny)
Question (Score:4, Insightful)
Anyone know anything about this? What makes Dresden so interesting to AMD?
Re:Question (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Question (Score:3, Interesting)
History [bbc.co.uk]
As a result I believe it was rebuilt to be a rather industrial place.
Re:Question (Score:4, Funny)
And now, Germany is quite popelicious, too.
Surely I am going to hell for that statement.
Re:Question (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Question (Score:2, Funny)
What makes Dresden so interesting to AMD?
They both have problems coping with heat.
Re:Question (Score:1)
Re:Question (Score:5, Informative)
I know for a fact that not even Intel does everything in house, so it's highly unlikely that AMD does. Essentially there are just far too many different types of highly complex technologies and processes involved for one company to do it all. Having as much of that infrastructure located in the same general vicinity can save a lot of time, money and aggravation. Which is why we have manufacturing sites in both Silicon Valley and Dresden, amongst others...
Re:Question (Score:1)
Re:Question (Score:2)
Re:Question (Score:1, Informative)
"AMD said it has secured $700 million from a consortium of banks, and a series of lucrative guarantees and grants from the governments of Germany and Saxony."
http://news.earthweb.com/bus-news/article.php/3
I think that number has grown to over $1 billion now.
Dresden Nuclear Power Station (Score:1)
Well, how about the Dresden Nuclear Power Station?
Wait! No! That's in Illinois! Sorry. Never mind.
Re:Question (Score:5, Informative)
Dresden was one of the centers of GDR microelectronics. The GDR was the technolocial leader in microelectronics of the entire east block and the gourvernment poured billions into it. However, COCOM [wikipedia.org] succeeded in keeping them technologically way behing the western countries. Nevertheless, Dresden was the birthplace of Honeckers infamous 1 mbit (scroll down) [cpu-museum.com] chip.
After the reunificiation there was a huge skilled workforce in microelectronics readily available in Dresden. This was, and is, aside from gouvernment incentives a major reason to build fabs there. Siemens (and now Infineon) were the first to take advantage of this. AMD came later.
The fabs have been extremely successful so far. Infineons fab was the first to have mass production on 300mm wafers world wide. AMDs fab managed to ramp the copper/low-k metallization process in record time.
Btw. some of the GDR semiconductor companies still live on in form of ZMD (Dresden), X-FAB (in Erfurt) and the IHP (Frankfurt/Oder). However they mostly specialize in niche products now.
From the Article:
Check out the pictures of Fab 36, their new plant slated to open.
You wish. There is no photo showing the actual production at an AMD site. One photo shows some support level, another photo does actually show the production of an entirely different company.
Agree (Score:1)
Re:Question (Score:2)
Dresden used to be the area where East German computers and chips (more or less illegimate clones of the IBM PC and the Intel 8080/8086 running a Russian clone of DOS) were produced before 1989. Afterwards, the state government invested into maintaining computer and chip production there and bring it to Western level, and AMD was attracted also by the fact that there was a skilled workforce available in the Dresden area which needed no fundamental retraining fo
They're made from PEOPLE! (Score:3, Funny)
I was reading from the FUD PR put out by Intel about AMD.
A chip is a chip, except when you put salsa on it.
Or have it with some Java.
Motherboards (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Motherboards (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Motherboards (Score:1, Informative)
Although AMD never got the USB working right on their 751(?) chipset, major reason nobody used it.
Re:Motherboards (Score:2)
That's because the first VIA chipset for the AMD Athlon (Apollo KX133) didn't ship until about 6 months after [anandtech.com] the Athlon (and AMD 750 chipset) launch [anandtech.com]. I'd expect a brand new chipset (with PC133 and AGP 4x) to outperform and have more features than a six-month-old chipset (with PC100 and AGP 2x).
If I remember correctly, AMD has said they are not in the chipset business (
Re:Motherboards (Score:2)
And they will probably get some ATi Mobo's assuming ATi doesn't fold after the x700 fiasco.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Chipsets would suffice (Score:3, Informative)
I think the 8000 series chipsets are still made, but generally are only put in Opteron systems. They had not yet made a PCIe replacement for the 813x chips. I think that update will become necessary in the next year to keep pace in the server market, though PCI-X seems to still be going pretty strong.
Re:Chipsets would suffice (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Motherboards (Score:2, Informative)
Intel's motherboards are just re-branded Asus motherboards.
So buy an AMD chip and get an Asus motherboard for it. Doesn't take a rocket scientist...
Re:Motherboards (Score:2)
I have as many complaints about AMD as anyone, but this stability BS has got to die, because it's just blatantly untruce.
Re:Motherboards (Score:2)
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mainboards/display/2 0 040702071453.html [xbitlabs.com]
And btw, AMD *does* make their own chipsets, for use on server (Opteron and Athlon MP) boards:
AMD-8000(TM) Series Chipset [amd.com]
AMD-760(TM) MPX Chipset [amd.com]
Re:Motherboards (Score:3, Interesting)
With Intel having HT it's probably 6(1) or 1/2 dozen t'other, but I like my nForce.
Re:Motherboards (Score:1)
In fact, SiS makes chipsets too, at least in terms of stability. The boards that use them aren't always built to the best standards, but the chipsets themselves are fine.
Re:Motherboards (Score:1)
Moore's Law (Score:1, Redundant)
Re:Moore's Law (Score:1)
btw last time I check SATA was also IDE.
Re:Moore's Law (Score:1)
Re:Moore's Law (Score:1)
Re:Moore's Law (Score:1)
However, I have toyed around with some of the newer machines, and in comparison to my two year old machine, the difference is negligible (maybe a few seconds off of an Excel spreadsheet, for example)
It seemed like not too long ago, just a jump of two or three hundred megahertz made quite a bit of difference, especially for games... But as pro
Re:Moore's Law (Score:2)
That was probably because games were CPU limited, as opposed to GPU limited as they are now. Remember, games used to have the T&L all be processed on the CPU as opposed to on the graphics card.
Re:Moore's Law (Score:2)
Department of Redundancy Department (Score:2)
You're not sure whether you're sure?
Crystal ball sees press release -- (Score:5, Funny)
"Dell considering building machines with AMD thanks to new fab capacity"
Early '06 + 1 week:
"Dell sticking with Intel"
Well, at least it will help remove one of the theories (AMD supposedly not having the capacity).
New toys aren't cheap (Score:4, Informative)
Re:New toys aren't cheap (Score:2)
AMD seems to be aiming at a different market - 2k is not that much for a server that can handle the web hits their new chips should be able to...... if they can get their reliability up with Intel's....
Re:New toys aren't cheap (Score:4, Interesting)
More and more I get my hopes up that Intel is doing research into a 64-bit enhancement for the Pentium-M, and I believe this to be the only reason we haven't seen Dual Core Pentium-M's yet. We're just now starting to see a move for the Pentium-M to the desktop, which is a good start, but without the cutting edge memory controllers present on new chipsets, it doesn't stand a chance.
I believe Intel is also probably investigating adding memory controllers to their next Xeon line, which is definitely going to extend the amount of time in which we expect to see it. Intel really would see this as defeat, but as DDR2 becomes prime, Opteron's with DDR2 controllers will be able to completely smash any Intel offering, simply because it can get the data faster, get it processed, and pumped back out, while the Intel chips still wait for the laggy north bridge memory host to allocate the resources.
Reliability will always be in Intel's court, simply because they control all factors of production, beginning to end. AMD's trying to take this approach, and by opening new fab facilities, maybe they can get into competition in other chip segments (like the Turion vs the Pentium-M). It also doesn't help that AMD is no longer making chipsets, but I believe a new fab facility will open this up as a possibility once again.
Oh I love competition.
Re:New toys aren't cheap (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:New toys aren't cheap (Score:4, Informative)
If you want to build a 4/8 way machine (which is the only reason to buy from the 8x series) $1500 is not a bad price for a chip at all, and $2149 for the dual-core is only ~40% markup! If you want cheap.. buy a normal PC, after all the extra CPU's won't make your games faster and many of the server boards that take these chips don't even bother with high-speed graphics ports since they're designed to be servers. Opterons are cheap (err.. inexpensive) compared to Itaniums or other 64 bit architectures out there.
Re:New toys aren't cheap (Score:2, Insightful)
Your suggestion of using more less expensive processors works for x86 processors too. Why use an opteron 8xx when you could use a few Athlon-64s? That's the sort of approach Google takes, redundant arrays of inexpensive computers.
Re:New toys aren't cheap (Score:2)
Frankly, you've summarized exactly what I said into two short sentences.
And G5's do qualify for this argument, because they are cheap, 64-bit chips, even if they do run on a different archetecure. And they've been shown to have a higher IPC (Instruction Per Cost) ratio, making them a more
Re:New toys aren't cheap (Score:1)
Re:New toys aren't cheap (Score:2)
Compared to Pentium/Xeon, sure! But what about when comparing to Athlon64/Opteron?
And considering that in your original post you compared dual-core 8xx-series Opteron (capable of 8-way SMP, that would mean 16 cores on single system) to G5 (single-core CPU limited to 2-w
Re:New toys aren't cheap (Score:4, Insightful)
Okay, but the Opteron in question is a DUAL-CORE chip, for servers only (desktop chips are much less expensive), still unreleased, and it's only the MSRP, whereas the real price you can buy them for will surely be lower.
Besides, that is the high-end Opteron. The low-end dual-core chip is the 165 for $637.
Yes, but people that need an 8-way system can't just use 4x 2-way systems, otherwise they'd be doing that! Just as people that bought a 64-bit system so they could use 16GBs of memory, can't just have 4GBs of RAM in 4 different systems instead...
If they wanted the equivalent of an XServe, they'd be going with lower-end Opterons, such as the $637 one. The parent even said as much in the first sentence, which you completely ignored. Show me an 8-way G5 system, and then you can compare prices...
Re:New toys aren't cheap (Score:2)
I know there are still situations where an 8-way machine could be nessicary, but these days aren't like they used to be; processors are damned fast. Applications have hit barriers
Re:New toys aren't cheap (Score:2)
There is another reason to have large n-way systems as well. Strange as it may sound, there is still some very expensive software
Re:New toys aren't cheap (Score:5, Informative)
Here [digitimes.com] is the source article for the price leak from DigiTimes. The prices for the 1 and 2 level chips are much less:
165 chip: $637
265 chip: $851
Don't believe the FUD.
Here's a question... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Here's a question... (Score:4, Interesting)
When I was at school, the walls were painted "bright spark yellow". According to our teacher, studies had been done and it was found that this particular colour made people think more productively. He had entire studies to give us and everything, being 11 I'm not quite sure what we did with them.
Re:Here's a question... (Score:2)
When was your school built? It seems like a very mid-70s sort of thing to do...
Re:Here's a question... (Score:2)
Re:Here's a question... (Score:2, Funny)
personally I thought it was kind of like golden, but that's just me
Here's an answer (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Here's a question... (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Here's a question... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Here's a question... (Score:1)
I was under the impression that modern chip fabrication environments [ibm.com] were all automated and didn't require the full garb since all the wafers are enclosed and pushed around on air. As is explained in the 3rd paragraph of that article. Of course, I'll let you know in a few weeks, since we're taking a field trip
Re:Here's a question... (Score:1, Interesting)
However, I recently visited a new cleanroom in the same fab, ma
Re:Here's a question... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Here's a question... (Score:1)
Don't open the door, I'm Developing CPUs! (Score:4, Interesting)
As many have stated here, if the window is tinted yellow, the room inside infact has all yellow (amber) lighting. This is because much as a photo negative will expose under more than the slightest infrared lighting, CPUs will not be etched correctly if exposed to UV rays in the wrong areas.
The entire building is not yellow, as only certain processes are UV sensative, and once the part has been given the needed chemical baths they are no longer light sensitive.
White light would burn out the chips about to be etched as surely as opening the door to a dark room before the film/photo paper can be given it's chemical bath to 'crystalize' the paper/films light sensitivity.
Re:Here's a question... (Score:1)
Working under normal light would ruin any wafer with photoresist. Working in total dark would be ideal, but yellow is supposed to be some good compromise between working conditions and process issues.
Allthough th
Re:Here's a question... (Score:2)
Photo areas in wafer fabs use chemicals (photoresist) that harden when exposed to UV light, which ordinary fluorescent lights emit in very small amounts (and mostly the harmless UVB type). Fluorescent lights around photoresist have "yellow" (more amber, actually) coatings to absorb the UV.
Re:Here's a question... (Score:1)
The yellow light is not a problem, you get used of it within minutes. Then yellow will appear as white to you. But beware when you leave the clean room - everything will look quite funny until your eye recalibrates.
Re: Answer's from a former AMD intern (Score:1)
The yellow light comes from the aggressive filtering of blue (and UV) light in the photolithography processing area. This is to prevent premature development of the wafer's photoresist during transport of wafers between processing tools.
The photo in the article is actually of a subfloor region, the equipm
the dual hardware trend (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm betting the same people who bought SLI configs are going to buy dual core...
the problem with dual core vs. SLI is that people can buy one video card now and one later...
which is not the case with dual core
anyway I wonder if this all started people buying two of the same ram modules for more bandwidth performance
and I wonder if this trend will continue?
Any market for single-core-only rejects? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Any market for single-core-only rejects? (Score:2)
Re:Any market for single-core-only rejects? (Score:2)
I also wonder what will happen when people discover that one core can be overclocked more than another core.
At $1600+ for a 4way config, I don't think anybody is going to be overclocking these bad boys.
Re:Any market for single-core-only rejects? (Score:2)
Re:Any market for single-core-only rejects? (Score:3, Insightful)
That is like saying people who plunk down a few hundred thousand dollars for a really nice (or at least expensive) car or boat will not tune it. $1600 is dirt cheap for a 4-way configuration; I expect that the overclockers will give it a lot more attention than they give current quad-cpu offerings.
Exactly. At $300k, you're buying a pretuned car that is damn fast and difficult to improve on. A $1600/cpu 4way box starts at around $10k or more and is useless for games. I can't see overclockers spending the
Re:Any market for single-core-only rejects? (Score:2)
"If you have a lot of money. this is a great board for gameing if you set it up right using to dual operations and full all the banks with 8 Gbs of pc 3200. Best board ever."
Rich gamer,12/15/2004 2:07:24 PM
(from a review of a TYAN Thunder K8SR [newegg.com] Dual Opteron board on Newegg)
Re:Any market for single-core-only rejects? (Score:3, Interesting)
As to overclocking, there's only one bus and one clock driving both chips, so you can't clock them differently.
Lions and Tigers and Chips, oh my... (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, that's the main question here, and no way you are going to find out that answer. Yield. How many chips are good in a wafer?
You can guess, but the answer may speak alot about AMD and Intel. It could very well be (here comes the flames) that Intel has an advantage in being consistent in volume and yield that allows them to keep large-scale contracts.
It is a big question in my mind if AMD can currently provide the large-scale on demand volume that the big companies require in some product lines. Could an HP, a Gateway rely exclusively on AMD for chips? (I don't know)
Certainly, it seems that have one fab plant only could be a big bottleneck or issue to make major vendors concerned and place a cloud on that question.
Toss in this which the fact that you can get chipsets (heck, network chips if you'd like) from Intel as well, and you have a real competitive advantage that is tough to beat. All your motherboard bits, one vendor.
And, sure, Intel chips have disadvantages, but in real-world experiences, the performance of similarly priced AMD and Intel desktop solutions aren't so obviously different that most people will notice enough to overcome those other issues at play.
Just a thought.
Re:Lions and Tigers and Chips, oh my... (Score:5, Interesting)
But we are talking about the Dresden Fab 30, which was for a long time considered the most advanced fab in the world.
"In May 2001, Fab 30 was awarded the coveted "Fab of the Year" title by Semiconductor International. The magazine recognized Fab 30 as the first facility in the world specifically designed to produce microprocessors with copper interconnects." http://www.amdboard.com/amdfab30.html [amdboard.com]
With over 150,000 square feet of clean-room, it could, and does, handle the load.
As a side note, here's AnandTech's tour of Fab 30: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.html? i=1773 [anandtech.com]
Re:Lions and Tigers and Chips, oh my... (Score:2)
And just for the record, I believe that both AMD and Intel have top-notch fabrication apabilities, which, for all the arguments about one company vs. the next, we do reap the benefit of as consumers. You know, you get a pretty amazing chip for less than 200$ these days.
Frankly, I want both companies to stick around for a while.
Thunderbirds? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Thunderbirds? (Score:2, Informative)
200 & 300 mm??? (Score:1)
When I was in college mm stood for millimeter, which would mean we're talking about 8-inch wafers now, and 12-inch wafers with the new APM (rounded to nearest inch). Am I misunderstanding the mm abbreviation, or was this mis-typed in the article and supposed to be something else?
Re:200 & 300 mm??? (Score:2, Informative)
Remember, a great many chips are made from each
wafer (the same pattern, or die, is repeated many times across the wafer surface, which allows for many chips to be made in parallel). They are cut into chips with a saw at the last stage.
Re:200 & 300 mm??? (Score:1)
This is about the same size as a LP (you know, the black disks we used to have music on before the CD?)
Deactivated L2 cache (Score:2)
> In the new 90nm model of the Athlon 64 with Winchester core, half of the L2 cache is deactivated; the production process for the chips is identical to that of the larger variants.
Any one know whether this deactivation is reversible?
I know if I was building such a chip I would make it so either half of the cache could be activated. That way in case of a production fault, either half of the cache could be used. Consequently yields would go up and AMD gets more dollars in the ban
Re:Deactivated L2 cache (Score:2)
No. The traces are cut by a laser before the CPU ships.
Re:Deactivated L2 cache (Score:2)
300mm wafers thanks to Intel (Score:2)
Re:300mm wafers thanks to Intel (Score:1)
Intel paving the way, probably. They are definitely a driver, and it it was not last year. I think Intel is running 300mm fabs for over 3 years already.
Re:down the drain (Score:3, Informative)
Re:down the drain (Score:3, Informative)
1999 Q1: ($128.4M)
1999 Q2: ($162.0M)
1999 Q3: ($105.5M)
1999 Q4: $65.1M
2000 Q1: $189.3M
2000 Q2: $207.1M
2000 Q3: $408.6M
2000 Q4: $178.0M
2001 Q1: $124.8M
2001 Q2: $17.4M
2001 Q3: ($97.4M)
2001 Q4: ($15.8M)
2002 Q1: ($9.2M)
2002 Q2: ($185.0M)
2002 Q3: ($254.2M)
2002 Q4: ($854.8M)
2003 Q1: ($146.4M)
2003 Q2: ($140.1M)
2003 Q3: ($31.2M)
2003 Q4: $43.2M
2004 Q1: $45.1M
2004 Q2: $32.2M
2004 Q3: $43.9M
2004 Q4: ($30.0M)
2005 Q1: ($17.4M)
At the vert least, 2000 did seem to be a good year f
Re:Enemies Closer... (Score:2)
Re:Enemies Closer... (Score:2)
Re:Intel is better... (Score:1)