Xref: utzoo comp.lsi:679 comp.arch:8961 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!ucsd!rutgers!apple!voder!pyramid!prls!mips!mark From: mark@mips.COM (Mark G. Johnson) Newsgroups: comp.lsi,comp.arch Subject: predicted yield of BIG microprocessors Message-ID: <15878@obiwan.mips.COM> Date: 24 Mar 89 00:27:25 GMT Reply-To: mark@mips.COM (Mark G. Johnson) Lines: 69 A useful table appeared in EE TIMES, (20 Mar 1980) page T18 -- "Chip sans killer defects". It provides a relatively unbiased projection of current and future state of the art in MOS manufacturing yields. Basically, chip yield falls off exponentially as (A * D), where A is the die area and D is a measure of the dirtyness of the fab (the "defect density"). The article provides values of D for various years, both past and future. Note that these are just one author's *opinion* of defect density; tain't necessarily correct. Nevertheless the projections are useful for provoking amusing discussions: Year 1984 1987 1989 1992 Defect density [cm^(-2)] 1.83 1.16 0.72 0.38 If these are correct (a *big* if, not a given at all...) then one can prognosticate about yields of current and future MOS microprocessors. Just for a grin, let's look at two different die sizes: a 10x15 millimeter chip, and a really monstrous big chip having 50% more area at 15x15. (recall the i860 is 10x15). Let's assume 6 inch wafers: Defect # Die sites on Percent # Good Die Year Density a 6-inch wafer Yield Die ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 10x15 1987 1.16/cm2 85 18 % 15 10x15 1989 0.72/cm2 85 34 % 28 15x15 1987 1.16/cm2 49 7.4 % 3 15x15 1989 0.72/cm2 49 20 % 9 So we can see that right now, today, 1Q-1989, the industry ought to be able to get 15-28 defect-free, i860-sized microprocessor dice per wafer. Furthermore, we could design a bigger chip having 50% more area (15mm x 15mm) and still produce 3 to 9 defect-free microprocessor dice. (mounting the soapbox) This is, of course, only useful to estimate whether or not a chip is manufacturable. If the expected yield is *extremely* small (say, below 1 die/wafer), we'd have to be very worried. But, with an expected 3-to-9 die, we'll get a relatively smooth flow of good chips from the fab. What yield is *NOT* good for, is estimating product cost. It only measures die cost. To that you must add test cost(s), burn-in cost, depreciation on the $100M fab, depreciation on the array of $5M testers, package cost, QA and Reliability screen costs, design cost, and so forth. Particularly for microprocessors, die cost is a *negligible* fraction of selling price. (dismount) So we can conclude that (*if* the defect density numbers in EE TIMES are correct) "reasonable" folks who want guaranteed steady flow of die can build them at 15x15 millimeters, today, in 1989. {Note: in the table above, percent yield was calculated using the "Poisson" model, which is known to be rather pessimistic. According to this model, percent yield == exp( -1.0 * A * D ). In practice it is usually observed that yields are higher than the Poisson model predicts. There are more accurate, more complicated models available but this one is the most well-known formula.} -- -- Mark Johnson MIPS Computer Systems, 930 E. Arques, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 ...!decwrl!mips!mark (408) 991-0208