【MES】要450mm ，先給糖吃，其餘免談

2008.10.23

看到這篇文章有「他鄉遇故知」的感受。猶記得參加2007 Taiwan Semicon時，Applied Materials以及其他主要設備廠商都信誓旦旦的說，450mm的R&D經費太龐大，而建造一座450mm的晶圓廠需要天文的投資成本。在投資報酬率的考慮之下，並不可行，而極力說服以提高現階段300mm的設備的效能與生產力為後續研發的主軸。如今在此科技劇烈競爭激盪的時代，無論是設備廠商、IC設計廠商、或是晶圓的製造商無不焦灼等待何時「必需」加入，以期獲得企業永續經營的機會。歷史殷鑑不遠：8 吋晶圓廠興起，6吋廠相繼應聲倒地；之後，12吋廠旗鼓大張，許多8吋廠不得不面臨關閉的行列。因此，450mm戰局的投入只是時間點的引爆。

誠如作者預言：450mm廠的林立，將迫使晶圓廠「大者恆大」的局面，而將來只會有更多的Fabless IC設計公司出現。在現今消費者講究產品「輕、薄、短小」的風潮之下，產品的設計也必須滿足客戶此種需求，而450mm晶圓廠邁入16nm的技術所製造的產品相信會帶來更多不同的應用領域，將過去認為不可能的變成可能的生活必需品。然而，在目前經濟如此不景氣的情況之下，有誰能主導這場遊戲規則呢？這也許是半導體的龍頭大老莫屬，例如：Intel、Samsung 與TSMC。如果這三家公司在設備的支出佔所有設備廠的60%-70%，那被掐著命脈的設備廠諸如Applied Materials、ASML也不得不從。在RD經費緊縮的現在，設備廠商說「不」，也或許期望龍頭晶圓廠能挹入更多研發經費，加速450mm計畫的實現。目前已經450mm 的Prototype晶圓廠在位於Austin的ISMI與在位於日本的Murato Corp進行測試當中，也是個很好的証明。

450mm的來臨並不需要悲觀，相反地，它可帶來龐大的商機，但也同時讓半導體行業的競爭更加劇烈。除了機台設備必須到位之外，舉凡IT的Infrastructure與應用系統等，都必須有個新的思維，才能以更快的速度，提供即時正確的資訊。那時目前獨立的、號稱處理速度快的獨立伺服器會消逝嗎﹖那些無法與目前資訊科技相比擬的CIM技術會被新的取代嗎？還有資料庫如何應付更龐大的不同結構的資訊，以及時提供企業決策使用？還有整個管理模式如何去因應此種變化，而3rd Party廠商又如何提供專業化的諮詢，來滿足客戶的需求？這些都是很好的思考方向。

深入閱讀

 When Is No Really a No? 


Author : David Lammers
October 23, 2008

An executive at a major IC manufacturer likes to tell the story about a meeting in 1996 to discuss 300 mm wafers. One after another, CEOs of the major equipment companies said that they wanted nothing to do with 300 mm equipment, that they had no plans for 300 mm R&D. “I’m out of it,” they said, one after another. The next morning, the executive took a series of phone calls from the same set of CEOs, who told him, “What I said yesterday was just our public position. I want you to know that we want to work with you on 300 mm equipment.”

The executive believes the same kind of “melodrama” is going on now. All of the major equipment companies have 450 mm R&D programs going on, he said. The companies making automation equipment, wafer carriers, and the like, are either participating in the Interoperability Test Bed, now underway by the International Sematech Manufacturing Initiative (ISMI) in Austin, or are working at a similar automation test bed at a Murato Corp. facility in Japan.

At the ISMI Symposium on Manufacturing Effectiveness in Austin, others took a much different view of things. One source said he had canvassed his friends in the equipment industry who said they believed the willingness to do 450 mm tool development is declining. “It’s gotten less likely than at West. The resistance is getting higher.” The economy is much worse, and a quick scan of the headlines shows major equipment companies laying people off and struggling to make any gross profit.

Another source said he believes Applied Materials has a 450 mm development program going, initially aimed at a PVD tool. Another said a friend at a company he deals with has seen an ASML exposure tool rigged up with a prototype 450 mm stage. And an Intel materials scientist said the four major wafer manufacturers all are starting to make 450 mm single crystal wafers, though they don’t want to talk about it publicly.

At Semicon West in July, there were plenty of executives who said they were dead set against 450 mm, that it doesn’t make economic sense, now or ever, that the industry should focus on reducing cycle times for 300 mm tools, and so on. Executives at Applied Materials, ASML, Novellus, all have been adamant in their opposition to 450 mm. SEMI has reflected their members’ views in an aggressive series of white papers and public meetings, arguing for focused attention on 300 mm productivity improvements.

Is this series of “No’s” a means of wresting R&D dollars out of the major device makers? For a couple of years now, discussions have been going on about creation of an R&D fund that would take money from the IC manufacturers that back 450 mm and divvy it out to the equipment makers. While that would seem to make perfect sense in a time of squeezed R&D budgets, nothing has been decided, ISMI managers said at the symposium.

So who to believe? Are the major IC manufacturers which back the 450 mm transition -- which include Intel, Samsung, and TSMC – big enough to get what they want? If a handful of companies control 60-70% of the equipment spending, at some point are they going to get what they want?

It takes some listening skills to figure out which way the wind is blowing in 450 mm development. It is like a kid who asks his mother for a new bike. She says ‘No, but if you turn off the TV and get out there and rake the leaves, Santa Claus might bring you something good.’

Meanwhile, the technical investigation continues. A source at a lithography maker said one question is whether the 450 mm wafers can be made flat enough. By the time 450 mm factories are built, leading edge device makers will be using 16 nm generation technology, he said. That could put the onus on wafer flatness like never before. Exposing ultra-thin photoresists on the much larger wafers could prove to be an engineering challenge. In response, the Intel materials scientist said that if EUV lithography is in use then, the improved depth of field provided by EUV could help in that regard. “There are so many challenges, it is hard to say that flatness is the biggest. But we will figure out how to solve these problems,” he said.

That seems to be one school of thought. That this time around is no different than the transitions to 200 mm or 300 mm wafers. The same technical and business challenges, the same posturing, with the end result being adoption of the larger wafer size.

That may be how things will go this time around. The Big Three will get even bigger, the smaller chip companies will go fabless, and the push to do 450 mm will be aided by a pool of R&D dollars for the equipment industry. One by one, challenges will be overcome, both technical and economic.

Somehow, however, the No’s coming from the equipment industry this time around seem different than a dozen years ago. It feels different. If equipment CEOs are saying No in public and Yes in private to big customers like Intel and Samsung, that would qualify some of them for Acadamy Awards in acting. More likely, they are sitting down with long faces and saying, ‘Give us enough money to get the ball rolling.’ In today’s business climate, that seems a reasonable survival strategy. But the leaves sure are piling high.

From: http://email.semiconductor.net/cgi-bin2/DM/y/hBAgI0N3Sdn0Xjk0Dkqp0EL&rid=828757675


Response:

October 23, 2008
In response to: When Is No Really a No?
Stephen Frenkel commented:

David, You address an important point. It's important for players to realize the confusion and misunderstandings that arise when they contradict themselves. Developers are left wondering whether they should invest in the research and technology, sometimes going back and forth and, at the very least, not moving forward at full force. Should the equipment industry indicate their true intentions, they'd probably have the resources and technology much faster because the developers would know that moving forward with technology development is a wise investment. This brings to mind two points about asking questions - the first is, when someone indicates they don't like your proposal, it's important to follow up. Don't just shrug and move on, ask questions - Why don't they like the proposal? How doesn't it meet their needs? With answers to those questions, you find out more about what's important to them and more about what you should be focusing on. The second point is to state the obvious - something like "I'm confused, with my limited understanding, I think the benefits of moving to 450mm would be beneficial for these reasons (and list them). Is that not something you're interested in? How should I know if "no" means "no" given what happened with the 300 mm development?" Asking open ended questions about their needs and intentions, probing for more information that gives you a full picuture and then earnestly listening for the answers is the best and only way to discern where the industry is going. This will give you a better sense of whether to invest in 450 mm technology or to work on 300 mm productivity improvements. The funny part of all this is that the players probably know what they want (and experience with 300 mm technology proves that). What they don't realize is that they have a much worse chance of getting it (especially quickly) if they don't ask or indicate their interest. Thanks again for raising a valid point. It's important to recognize the impact to the industry when there's miscommunication that leads to lost opportunities for development. Stephen Frenkel Director of Negotiation Programs MWI sfrenkel@mwi.org www.mwi.org