News China-made DDR5 memory chips use less advanced chipmaking technology — chips are nearly 40% larger than Samsung's DDR5

[Admin]

CXMT's DDR5 memory is here, but the company uses outdated process technology and trails behind market leaders both in terms of performance and costs.

China-made DDR5 memory chips use less advanced chipmaking technology — chips are nearly 40% larger than Samsung's DDR5 : Read more

 

[hwertz]

I assume you are joking about the 'can trhe compete on pricing' part. The RAM makers have been running a cartel for decades, paying price fixing fines every couple years from the massive profits on RAM and SSD storage. Of course CXMT can compete om pricing.

 

[usertests]

the die size of CXMT's 16 Gb DDR5 memory IC is 40% larger than that of a competing Samsung chip, which means that it is significantly more expensive to build due to the use of less advanced chipmaking technology.

If the less advanced node is cheaper, that could balance out the larger die sizes. Having them larger and less power efficient is not desirable though.

Maybe the node is very expensive from using quadruple-patterning DUV instead of EUV or something. Cost issues can be forgiven if it can act as a reliable domestic supply of DRAM.

 

[thth]

It is expected, given that CXMT's process node for DDR5 is estimated to be 17.5nm to 18nm, whereas Samsung currently uses an EUV based 12nm process. However, they managed to make it smaller and faster than Samsung's first generation DDR5

 

[4m12020]

This held grudge has no truth to it. It’s been a very long time since the collusion and they get sued every few years and the charges are dropped for lack of evidence

 

[4m12020]

If the less advanced node is cheaper, that could balance out the larger die sizes. Having them larger and less power efficient is not desirable though.

Maybe the node is very expensive from using quadruple-patterning DUV instead of EUV or something. Cost issues can be forgiven if it can act as a reliable domestic supply of DRAM.

Less advanced larger nodes are always more expensive than smaller nodes.

 

[usertests]

Less advanced larger nodes are always more expensive than smaller nodes.

Not true, cost per transistor has stagnated.

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-i...nsistor-stopped-dropping-a-decade-ago-at-28nm

 

[pug_s]

It is expected, given that CXMT's process node for DDR5 is estimated to be 17.5nm to 18nm, whereas Samsung currently uses an EUV based 12nm process. However, they managed to make it smaller and faster than Samsung's first generation DDR5

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-i...nsistor-stopped-dropping-a-decade-ago-at-28nm

It is not like CXMT can buy EUV Litography machines anyways so they probably counldn't make it in a lower process anyways. Also, the cost per transistor basically was at its lowest at 28nm.

 

[nrdwka]

Not true, cost per transistor has stagnated.

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-i...nsistor-stopped-dropping-a-decade-ago-at-28nm

After re-reading the article, it stated what the cost for new nodes is stagnating or even increasing .

But total cost for older nodes can become cheaper.
Does this ddr5 prod build with used or new lito machines?
Does the yeld is better due to optimized for years manufacturing for older nodes (and that is common thing for more mature nodes)?

There is not enough info to make a conclusion on the subject of cost.

It is not for no reason many electronics a produced on older nodes, and many are bigger than 28nm.

 

[genz]

If the less advanced node is cheaper, that could balance out the larger die sizes. Having them larger and less power efficient is not desirable though.

Maybe the node is very expensive from using quadruple-patterning DUV instead of EUV or something. Cost issues can be forgiven if it can act as a reliable domestic supply of DRAM.

The first paragraph is all I care about. Being able to make DDR5 on a less advanced and thus cheaper node is an innovation that should have been pursued by Western DDR5 makers a long time ago but nooo, they wanted to price gouge instead. Go China.... Lol. Someone has to fix this mess before AM4 goes out of production.

 

[mitch074]

This is where the state-sponsored hacking groups come in to steal all of the data on how Samsung did it, then they'll subsidize everything and drive everyone out of business.

We should just have a blanket 50-100% tax on every Chinese company at this point to offset the R&D costs they skipped over.

And who will pay for it ? The US end user. In China ? No tax. In the rest of the world ? Nothing either.
This is a protectionist measure, and like most of them, will soon be counterproductive.
All it shows is that China can produce the latest DDR tech 100% domestically. Is it more expensive ? Yes. Does it keep that spent money inside the country ? That too. Does it allow forms of subsides ? Definitely.
Is it illegal ? Well, Boeing still exists because of this, so... Yes.
Does it allow cost effective R&D ? Sure does ! But note, unlike the USSR that stole R&D piecemeal and copied it without making sure it actually worked (Concordski) , the Chinese actually do excellent work at reverse engineering stuff, copying it properly and selling equivalent if not better stuff than the original for cheaper.
This is a form of 'innovation' that Edison revelled in, Bill Gates built his empire on, Steve Jobs was better than Bill at, and Musk is trying his bestest best at making the only legal way of innovating so pot, this is kettle.