Chartered and Microsoft Sign 65-nm Manufacturing Agreement for Xbox 360 CPU

[Megadrive1988]

http://www.charteredsemi.com/media/corp/2006n/20060420_microsoft.asp

MILPITAS, Calif. and SINGAPORE - April 20, 2006 -

Chartered Semiconductor Manufacturing , one of the world's top dedicated semiconductor foundries, has signed an agreement with Microsoft for the manufacturing of CPU products-using 65-nanometer (nm) Silicon-on-Insulator (SOI) semiconductor technology -for Microsoft's Xbox 360 game consoles. Production is expected to begin in the first quarter of 2007, and will support the Xbox 360's growing demand and expanding market reach. The announcement follows Chartered's successful manufacturing of 90nm SOI CPU products for the Xbox 360 console's launch, through an agreement with IBM.

"We look forward to working with Chartered on the production of such an important component of our Xbox 360 system," said Larry Yang, General Manager of Xbox Console Development at Microsoft. "Chartered's ability to demonstrate the manufacturability of IBM's advanced SOI technology in Fab 7 was key to our selection. We plan to continue with our strategy of dual sourcing from Chartered and IBM's fabs, which are operationally aligned and compatible, to give us the consistent product quality and flexibility we will need."

"We are excited to expand our manufacturing relationship with Microsoft and leverage the innovative 65nm SOI technology made available to us through our agreement with IBM," said Kay Chai "KC" Ang, senior vice president of fab operations at Chartered. "This is both a recognition of Chartered's 300mm manufacturing excellence and increasing customer confidence in our ability to enable cutting-edge technologies as products transition to 65nm. By working closely with IBM to enable manufacturing compatibility and dual-sourcing capability, our goal is to continue to be a reliable manufacturing source to Microsoft."

"Together, Chartered and IBM offer a unique dual source capability that delivers superior redundancy and flexibility," said Jim Comfort, vice president, Microsoft Client Executive, IBM. "Chartered's decision to adopt our advanced Silicon on Insulator technology at 65nm is further evidence of the success of the IBM/Chartered Common Platform strategy."

so, 65-nm Xenon CPUs for Xbox 360 in 2007. I was hoping both of Xbox 360's main processors would be on 65-nm in time for Christmas :/

 

[pc999]

Meybe (probably) we will get a price cut by then.

 

[NANOTEC]

What does this mean for the die size? Will the die be half as small? What about power consumption? Would MS still need the heatpipe?

 

[pc999]

What does this mean for the die size? Will the die be half as small? What about power consumption? Would MS still need the heatpipe?

The die size should be around 1/2, the power consumption should be much smaller too.

 

[Mythos]

interesting...wonder if seeing that Sony announced first the 65NM deal with snyopsis that it MAY BE a MS reactionary announcement against cell hitting 65NM at launch (indirect confirmation?)...?

 

[Carl B]

This isn't too much of a surprise, though it's coming about a quarter earlier than I would have expected it. It was an arbitrary expectation of mine though...

Anyway it's good to see MS being aggressive about their process shrinks. One would hope that with the delay and the fab efforts on Sony and IBM's parts that PS3 might see 65nm for launch, but if not, well I guess we can assume no later than Q107 for Sony as well.

Has there been any announcement yet on a process shrink arrangement for Xenos to 65nm? I think I read somewhere that they were going to do the 80nm step with TSMC, yeah?

 

[NANOTEC]

I'm thinking Xenos daughter die might skip 65nm and jump to 55nm. For the mother die 65nm before the end of next year.

 

[Megadrive1988]

I'm thinking Xenos daughter die might skip 65nm and jump to 55nm. For the mother die 65nm before the end of next year.

that's quite a prediction to try to nail down

 

[Akumajou]

Well since Chartered is also producing the Cell proc I wager PS3 will be introduced at 65nm

 

[NANOTEC]

that's quite a prediction to try to nail down

I think it's reasonable. Notice I said before the end of next year which is end of 2007. Since the eDRAM is manufactured by NEC and on a separate die, it doesn't have to use the same 65nm process as the mother die in 2007. NEC plans on using 55nm soon after 65nm instead of waiting for 45nm. Who knows they might even make it a single die for both mother/daugther dies using 65nm. Is that possible at 65nm?

 

[Legend]

Well since Chartered is also producing the Cell proc I wager PS3 will be introduced at 65nm

didn't Kuturagi say PS3 will initially release with 65nm? or was that 90nm?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

KK said they were aiming for 65nm but were disappointed that it'd be launching on 90nm, but that's just the way things go and you don't always hit targets. If that was with the expectation of a Spring launch, they may be back to considering launching with 65 nm 6 months later.

 

[London Geezer]

I think it's reasonable. Notice I said before the end of next year which is end of 2007. Since the eDRAM is manufactured by NEC and on a separate die, it doesn't have to use the same 65nm process as the mother die in 2007. NEC plans on using 55nm soon after 65nm instead of waiting for 45nm. Who knows they might even make it a single die for both mother/daugther dies using 65nm. Is that possible at 65nm?

I'm sure it's possible, and it would also be a much better and also cheaper solution. EDRAM in a separate die always felt a bit strange to me...

 

[Mintmaster]

I'm not sure if it's cheaper yet. I think any fab capable of 65nm production right now would charge a premium for it per transistor, simply because it offers lower power consumption and possibly higher speed, especially in the future as it matures. I remember some ATI guys on the forum were saying 0.15 um was cheaper than 0.13 um per transistor back during in the R300/NV30 days.

Sony has already put in the effort of tweaking the 90 nm process, and the tapeout costs are already sunk. They've probably engineered the cooling system also for this size chip. My guess is they'll launch at 90 nm and 65 nm will come when it actually is cheaper after all factors are taken into account.

 

[Carl B]

I'm not sure if it's cheaper yet. I think any fab capable of 65nm production right now would charge a premium for it per transistor, simply because it offers lower power consumption and possibly higher speed, especially in the future as it matures. I remember some ATI guys on the forum were saying 0.15 um was cheaper than 0.13 um per transistor back during in the R300/NV30 days.

Sony has already put in the effort of tweaking the 90 nm process, and the tapeout costs are already sunk. They've probably engineered the cooling system also for this size chip. My guess is they'll launch at 90 nm and 65 nm will come when it actually is cheaper after all factors are taken into account.

Fabs aren't going to be charging Sony a premium though, simply because Sony owns the fabs. East Fishkill and Nagasaki 2 both are essentially 'Sony zones,' (granted I'm not saying Sony owns Fishkill) so I think that whether or not PS3 launches at 65nm or not will have more to do solely with their ability to ramp and get decent yields/volumes to meet the present timeframe. That's not guaranteed by any stretch, so I think 90nm is still quite likely, but if 65nm does miss the boat, it won't be because Sony was going to face a premium on outsourced fabbing - indeed, for the most part their fabbing isn't outsourced.

 

[NavNucST3]

Fabs aren't going to be charging Sony a premium though, simply because Sony owns the fabs. East Fishkill and Nagasaki 2 both are essentially 'Sony zones,' (granted I'm not saying Sony owns Fishkill) so I think that whether or not PS3 launches at 65nm or not will have more to do solely with their ability to ramp and get decent yields/volumes to meet the present timeframe. That's not guaranteed by any stretch, so I think 90nm is still quite likely, but if 65nm does miss the boat, it won't be because Sony was going to face a premium on outsourced fabbing - indeed, for the most part their fabbing isn't outsourced.

I'm not sure how it works in that field, but when I was in oil for Schlumberger, one part of the company would grossly overcharge another part of the company, so its not out of the realm of possibility, evreyone has their own P&L.

 

[Carl B]

I'm not sure how it works in that field, but when I was in oil for Schlumberger, one part of the company would grossly overcharge another part of the company, so its not out of the realm of possibility, evreyone has their own P&L.

Well, I seriously doubt Sony Semi would overcharge SCE - if you look at their most recent available set of slides, you'll see one of their overarching mission goals is to provide low-priced chips for the Playstation effort.

http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/info/Semiconductor/2005/qfhh7c000007vqvd.html

Anyway we can debate the possibility of Sony being overcharged by their own people, sure, I just wanted to make clear that insourcing will comprise a lot of the Cell acquisition vs outsourcing. I include East Fishkill in the 'insourcing' category by the way, since Sony has a material interest in that plant.

...About 36 billion (approximately $340 million) will be invested a 300-mm SOI line at IBM's East Fishkill fab. Sony will get a portion of the output from the U.S. fab, though the exact volume was not disclosed. Both the IBM and Nagasaki Fab2 300-mm production lines will make 65-nm generation chips such as the "Cell" processor based on SOI process technology...

http://www.techweb.com/wire/26804065

 

[Mintmaster]

Fabs aren't going to be charging Sony a premium though, simply because Sony owns the fabs. East Fishkill and Nagasaki 2 both are essentially 'Sony zones,' (granted I'm not saying Sony owns Fishkill) so I think that whether or not PS3 launches at 65nm or not will have more to do solely with their ability to ramp and get decent yields/volumes to meet the present timeframe. That's not guaranteed by any stretch, so I think 90nm is still quite likely, but if 65nm does miss the boat, it won't be because Sony was going to face a premium on outsourced fabbing - indeed, for the most part their fabbing isn't outsourced.

Okay, I forgot about that. You're right, but I still think my second paragraph will hold true. Transistor for transistor, 65nm won't be cheaper than 90nm at first, and the transition will happen when it is.

 

[Synergy34]

Okay, I forgot about that. You're right, but I still think my second paragraph will hold true. Transistor for transistor, 65nm won't be cheaper than 90nm at first, and the transition will happen when it is.

Cheaper or not, I don't think the cost of the process would stop them from starting it ASAP. Earlier the better so they can hammer out the bugs. Plus even if it is more expensive you have to factor in potential cost reduction in areas the shrink would or could allow. PS3 cooling solution maybe cheaper, power supply might not be as big, console size could be affected(less materials to make it), more chips on less wafers, I'm sure there could be other things thrown in there. Am I off base here? I'm not sure those potential cost reductions would really amount to anything significant.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

May I ask, if 65nm is more costly than 90nm, what causes the price of 65nm to drop and who uses it until then? I though costs reduce as the systems develop, based on using them, so if no-ne used 65nm it's price would stay high (?). If 65nm costs more than is it only cutting-edge technology that needs the smaller process for speed/heat issues who use 65nm?

People talk of the price decreasing over time, but it's not like if Sony build a 65nm fab that'll produce chips at $100 each, and then don't use it for a year, when they return it'll produce chips at $50 each! So what exactly are the changes that happen to decrease costs?