Reports are saying Nvidia and Qualcomm might work with Samsung for their 2nm chips. Is this a good move or just a bluff to negotiate better prices with TSMC? Share your thoughts!
So, are Samsung fans celebrating too early? I mean, what if we find out in six months that the production yields are still terrible?
Samsung hasn’t done much with their advanced processes lately. Even Exynos 2500 was delayed because of manufacturing issues, and there’s talk they might shift some production to TSMC. Why would Nvidia or Qualcomm trust Samsung with this?
@Devi
Actually:
- The W1000 chip is using Samsung’s SF3 process.
- Exynos 2500 isn’t canceled—it’s delayed but still planned for certain devices.
- Nvidia and Qualcomm might not use Samsung for their flagship products, but they could use it for mid-range chips where cost savings are more important. Samsung could handle those well enough.
@Devi
Just a few months ago, reports came out that Samsung was struggling with its 2nm process. Moving flagship chips to an untested process seems risky, especially when their 3nm process still has issues.
@Mal
Nvidia and AMD usually wait before using new processes, even with TSMC. Samsung merging SF3P with SF2 might mean better results by late 2025. It’s not about top-end chips but finding something that works for mid-range products.
@Devi
Didn’t the W1000 chip use the 3nm process?
@Devi
Exynos 2500 isn’t completely scrapped. It just won’t be in the S25 series, but it might show up in foldable or FE models.
Jordan said:
@Devi
Exynos 2500 isn’t completely scrapped. It just won’t be in the S25 series, but it might show up in foldable or FE models.
Even if Samsung uses it in lower-volume devices, poor yields could make each chip way more expensive. They could lose money on every device sold if they push ahead without fixing these issues.
@Kai
True, but foldable devices are low volume, and Samsung might just push through to improve their process.
Jordan said:
@Kai
True, but foldable devices are low volume, and Samsung might just push through to improve their process.
Fair point, but low volume doesn’t mean cheap. If the yields are bad, those chips could cost more than they’re worth.
I hope they make it clear which models use Samsung chips. I’d avoid those.
Addison said:
I hope they make it clear which models use Samsung chips. I’d avoid those.
I get why you’d say that, but we should all hope Samsung improves. Without competition, TSMC can charge sky-high prices, and that’s bad for everyone.
@Noor
True, but Samsung and Intel only have themselves to blame. They’ve mismanaged their foundries for years, while TSMC kept delivering.
Merritt said:
@Noor
True, but Samsung and Intel only have themselves to blame. They’ve mismanaged their foundries for years, while TSMC kept delivering.
You’re not wrong, but fixing the industry is more important now. We need Samsung and Intel to step up, or we’ll stay stuck with TSMC holding all the cards.
Merritt said:
@Noor
True, but Samsung and Intel only have themselves to blame. They’ve mismanaged their foundries for years, while TSMC kept delivering.
The real bottleneck is ASML. Everyone depends on them.
Addison said:
I hope they make it clear which models use Samsung chips. I’d avoid those.
Samsung talking about 2nm? Meanwhile, TSMC’s N3P process is already in action.
Addison said:
I hope they make it clear which models use Samsung chips. I’d avoid those.
Samsung talking about 2nm? Meanwhile, TSMC’s N3P process is already in action.
What’s N3P?
Feels like a bluff to negotiate prices. I want Samsung and Intel to do better, but the same old leadership issues keep holding them back.
Yikes, and Google Pixels just switched from Samsung to TSMC.