Nvidia deeply unhappy with TSMC, claims 22nm essentially worthless

Re:Nvidia deeply unhappy with TSMC, claims 22nm essentially ... by katane on Friday March 23, 2012 @01:20PM (#3746147)

I feel like this is a tech-problem that will have a tech-solution. No idea how that fits into an "International Trade Partner Conference".

That said, you can't outsource your complete manufacturing process only to come back later and wish for "virtual IDM" partnerships. Thats all of the benefits and none of the risk.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia deeply unhappy with TSMC, claims 22nm essentially ... by ak217 on Friday March 23, 2012 @01:35PM (#3746215)

Rhetoric aside, Nvidia is the designer who keeps breaking transistor count records and is a dominant OEM supplier. That makes them both a technology and business leader among TSMC's customers, so it makes sense for TSMC to devote resources to them, since the experience they get in working with them can't be gained elsewhere and is applicable to their other customers down the road.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia deeply unhappy with TSMC, claims 22nm essentially ... by ajross on Friday March 23, 2012 @01:39PM (#3746234)

Pretty sure most of the (logic) transistor count records are held by FPGAs, no?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia deeply unhappy with TSMC, claims 22nm essentially ... by pmjordan on Friday March 23, 2012 @01:41PM (#3746251)

Not at the clock speeds that nvidia chips run at.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia deeply unhappy with TSMC, claims 22nm essentially ... by ak217 on Friday March 23, 2012 @01:46PM (#3746272)

I guess you're right:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor_count

But they are very different beasts with different technology and a different (much smaller) market, right?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nvidia deeply unhappy with TSMC, claims 22nm essentially ... by vtail on Friday March 23, 2012 @01:48PM (#3746283)

You are right: 2.6B for CPU, 4.3B for GPU and 6.8B for FPGA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transistor_count

[ Parent | on HN ]