TSMC Will Reportedly Charge $20,000 Per 3nm Wafer

Wafer
(Image credit: Shutterstock)

TSMC will reportedly hike the pricing of wafers processed using its leading edge N3 (3nm-class) process technology by 25% compared to N5 (5nm class) production node. This will immediately make complex processors like GPUs and smartphone SoCs more expensive, which will make devices like graphics cards and handsets costlier. Meanwhile, prohibitively high costs will make multi-chiplet designs more appealing.

One wafer processed on TSMC's leading edge N3 manufacturing technology will cost over $20,000 according to DigiTimes (via @RetiredEngineer). By contrast, an N5 wafer costs around $16,000, the report says.

There are many reasons why making chips on N5 and N3 production nodes is expensive. First up, both technologies use extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography pretty extensively for up to 14 layers in N5 and even more with N3. Each EUV tool costs $150 million, and multiple EUV scanners have to be installed in a fab, which means additional costs for TSMC. Also, it takes a long time to produce chips on N5 and N3, which again means higher costs for TSMC.

Anton Shilov
Contributing Writer

Anton Shilov is a contributing writer at Tom’s Hardware. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.

  • TechieTwo
    This is called "telegraphing". It's a means to condition consumers for significant price hikes on coming products.
    Reply
  • logainofhades
    As long as yields are good, you get more chips per wafer, on a smaller node, which should help alleviate some of the brunt of this price increase.
    Reply
  • elforeign
    Pretty soon modern electronic devices are going to become extremely cost prohibitive for the mainstream individual. More and more the technologies used to power our devices, being manufactured on the cutting edge, are just not going to be affordable.

    I don't really see how we will get costs under control given the extremely low tolerances for defects in many of the production steps for semiconductors, on top of the extremely low tolerances for impurities in everything from the ultra-pure water to the etching and deposition, and overall in the sourcing of the rare-earths and raw materials that compose the lithography machinery and the end products.
    Reply
  • PlaneInTheSky
    Taiwan's monopoly on chips, motherboards and many other electronics is bad for everyone. It's bad for human development worldwide.
    Reply
  • logainofhades
    PlaneInTheSky said:
    Taiwan's monopoly on chips, motherboards and many other electronics is bad for everyone. It's bad for human development worldwide.

    It isn't a total monopoly. Intel makes most of their own chips and chipsets. I think they outsource some older nodes, but their cutting edge stuff, I believe is all them. Samsung is another player in the game, for electronics, and based in Korea, with plants all over the world. Micron is a US based company with manufacturing sites all over the world. Texas Instruments is another US Based company. SK-Hynix is Korean with fabs in multiple countries as well.
    Reply
  • PiranhaTech
    AMD's chiplet strategy is making a lot of sense. Smaller, simpler chiplets for the new stuff, plus some things like the I/O being on a more solid, older node just makes sense

    GamersNexus had an interview with an AMD engineer that was really good
    Reply
  • So much for the promise of cost reduction on EUV.
    Reply
  • kjfatl
    elforeign said:
    Pretty soon modern electronic devices are going to become extremely cost prohibitive for the mainstream individual. More and more the technologies used to power our devices, being manufactured on the cutting edge, are just not going to be affordable.

    I don't really see how we will get costs under control given the extremely low tolerances for defects in many of the production steps for semiconductors, on top of the extremely low tolerances for impurities in everything from the ultra-pure water to the etching and deposition, and overall in the sourcing of the rare-earths and raw materials that compose the lithography machinery and the end products.
    There was a time, not too long ago where electronic products had long lifecycles. When I was a young pup, my manager told me a story about when he first started work. He was hired in the 1950's and his first project was an electronic multiplier for a business machine. Vacuum tube electronics. The product worked well, but the company put it on the shelf for 10 years. In the early 1960's the company pulled it off the shelf and sold it for over 10 years. We are headed in the same direction with IC's. The Intel I-19 and the Ryzen 17000 may have 20 year lifetimes. There will still be a place for exotic high end machines, but their use will be limited. Intel's tic-toc might still happen, with a new rev every 5 years.
    Reply
  • kjfatl said:
    There was a time, not too long ago where electronic products had long lifecycles. When I was a young pup, my manager told me a story about when he first started work. He was hired in the 1950's and his first project was an electronic multiplier for a business machine. Vacuum tube electronics. The product worked well, but the company put it on the shelf for 10 years. In the early 1960's the company pulled it off the shelf and sold it for over 10 years. We are headed in the same direction with IC's. The Intel I-19 and the Ryzen 17000 may have 20 year lifetimes. There will still be a place for exotic high end machines, but their use will be limited. Intel's tic-toc might still happen, with a new rev every 5 years.
    I wouldn't mind that to be honest. It's a race who's the fastest no matter what now. They could, I mean AMD, Intel, Nvidia take their time and refine their technologies.
    I read once, people did things with Amiga that it wasn't designed for. Simply because it was as it is. No option to upgrade. Now they just slam it with more compute power and don't care about the rest.
    Reply
  • kjfatl
    I suspect that gaming as a major technology driver is over. The next big thing is probably self driving vehicles. This market will be quite different though with 50 or fewer real customers like GM and Toyota choosing what is 'good enough' for most vehicles. The hard part for vehicles is keeping the compute costs under $5000/vehicle and still getting the job done. On the other side, repurposing the powerful vehicle computers as a gaming machines could be quite interesting.
    Reply