Intel 18A wafer-to-wafer yield issues fixed, report claims — says production up to 15,000 wafers per month at both sites
Intel has resolved wafer-to-wafer yield variability issues with its 18A process technology, according to a report from BlueFin Research Partners (via @jukan05). If the report coming from an unofficial source is accurate, then Intel can expect consistent and predictable yield improvements for its products made using the latest 1.8nm-class node from now on.
“Intel 18A wafer-to-wafer yield issue resolved; ramp to 12-15K wpm at both sites ongoing,” BlueFin Research Partners wrote in a note to clients.
If the information is accurate, then products made using Intel’s 18A process technology will no longer be plagued by wafer-to-wafer variability, an issue where good wafers and poor wafers are produced in the same production flow. However, wafer-to-wafer variability is only one contributor to yield loss, so fixing it means that Intel can now consistently improve product yields, but it does not necessarily mean overall yield is where Intel wants it to be.
Generally, a die yield defined by multiple factors, including defect density (which in turn is defined by random defects and systematic defects), within-wafer variability (differences between the center and edge of the same wafer when it comes to things like critical dimensions uniformity, line edge roughness, or stochastics; something that Intel has been improving recently), wafer-to-wafer variability (die yield and/or parametric yield differ from wafer to wafer), and packaging yield. When it comes to actual products, we should mention parametric yields (dies may be defect-free, but they do not meet performance and/or power specifications) as well as reliability screening (dies are functional and meet required specifications but fail burn-in tests).
That said, saying that Intel has ‘fixed wafer-to-wafer yield issues’ most likely means the process is now much more consistent from wafer to wafer, which clearly reduces lot-to-lot variation and makes production more predictable. However, it does not mean that defect density has reached target levels, parametric yield is optimal, and overall economic yield is where Intel wants it to be. What it does mean is that at a consistent yield improvement level (Intel once mentioned 7% per month for 18A), Intel is set to reach its target goals within a predictable timeframe.
In addition, the report claims that Intel now has capacity of around 30,000 wafer starts per month across its D1X development fab (presumably module 3) in Oregon and Fab 52 high-volume fab in Arizona (confirmed by @Alex_Intel_), which is a solid result at this point of the ramp cycle. However, without information about overall die yields and parametric yields of Intel’s 18A products, it is hard to assess whether Intel can now produce enough Core Ultra 3 ‘Panther Lake’ and Xeon 6+ ‘Clearwater Forest’ processors. Meanwhile, it should be noted that using a development facility for high-volume manufacturing (HVM) is costlier than using a fab that was designed to be an HVM fab from the start.
Meanwhile, it looks like Intel is set to continue such a practice with its next-generation 14A (1.4nm) fabrication process, according to BlueFin. The company plans to make ‘D1X the initial HVM fab for 14A,’ whereas the first phase of Intel’s Ohio One semiconductor manufacturing site in Ohio will serve as the second HVM facility to make 14A chips, BlueFin claims. Intel recently confirmed that it intends to initiate high-volume production of chips using 14A in 2029. Ohio One first phase (Mod 1) is set to be completed in 2030, which means that it will come online ‘between 2030 and 2031,’ according to Intel.
