Samsung begins production of first-gen 3nm chips

30 June 2022
Compared to 5nm, it's up to 45% more power efficient, has 23% better performance, and is 16% smaller.

Sort by:

  • S
  • S Yu
  • vU9
  • 03 Jul 2022

AnonD-762416, 01 Jul 2022First of all, many "people" are known fake compla... moreTSMC's 5nm volume is decent enough for them to be taking GPU orders, what you're missing is that TSMC's nodes are far better so have far higher demand accordingly. Samsung's 1st gen 3nm...if they're lucky they could get it to match TSMC's mature 5nm node in efficiency and performance, if they're *lucky*.

    • D
    • AnonD-762416
    • Sec
    • 02 Jul 2022

    walkman8, 02 Jul 2022You were prob one of the guys in 1950s who'd call some... moreProjection, projection, projection. Lie as much as you like, reality does not care.

      • I
      • Ishit Gandhi
      • 7k4
      • 02 Jul 2022

      the real realitity, 02 Jul 2022I work in industry and have worked in R&D for many year... moreWhat a heat Samsung is bringing in the processor industry....

        • t
        • the real realitity
        • L6L
        • 02 Jul 2022

        Anonymous, 01 Jul 2022you could be right, but there is also another option. as al... moreI work in industry and have worked in R&D for many years and I know how development processes work and the cost pressures they are under.
        They can't do 4nm or 5nm or 6nm production technology properly, all the Exynos so far have been efficiency disasters and get extremely hot and even SD8G1 gets hot as a cooker top.
        The so-called competition only wastes and destroys valuable resources (people as well as raw materials) and leads to immature bad products. The users who buy the "crap stuff" for a lot of money are dumbed down and blinded by marketing and propaganda promises and degraded to beta users.
        I could write a whole book from my own experience about what is going on in reality, but that would not change anything, so I will leave it at that.

          • m
          • missing the point
          • L6L
          • 02 Jul 2022

          veryangrynerd, 01 Jul 2022because the 2nd generation is already possible to manufactu... moreYou are missing the point I was making.
          I work in industry and have worked in R&D for many years and I know how development processes work and the cost pressures they are under.
          They can't do 4nm or 5nm or 6nm production technology properly, all the Exynos so far have been efficiency disasters and get extremely hot and even SD8G1 gets hot as a cooker top.
          The so-called competition only wastes and destroys valuable resources (people as well as raw materials) and leads to immature bad products. The users who buy the "crap stuff" for a lot of money are dumbed down and blinded by marketing and propaganda promises and degraded to beta users.
          I could not write a whole book from my own experience about what is going on in reality, but that would not change anything, so I will leave it at that.

            AnonD-762416, 01 Jul 2022Reality vs your attempt to sell a lie? Like we've alre... moreYou were prob one of the guys in 1950s who'd call someone a liar for blaming cigarettes on getting cancer.

              • D
              • AnonD-762416
              • Sec
              • 01 Jul 2022

              walkman8, 01 Jul 2022What the hell does that have to do with delivering a bucklo... moreReality vs your attempt to sell a lie? Like we've already established, you're living in a fantasy bubble. Discussing this is pointless.

                AnonD-762416, 01 Jul 2022First of all, many "people" are known fake compla... moreWhat the hell does that have to do with delivering a buckload of faulty smartphones?

                  • D
                  • AnonD-762416
                  • Sec
                  • 01 Jul 2022

                  walkman8, 01 Jul 2022Stop living in your fantasy land and go search past your no... moreFirst of all, many "people" are known fake complainers. That is what chiPhone manufacturers and their American subsidiary, Apple, does. They know they can't compete on tech so they do the reality distortion field nonsense. You know, the thing you pretend to do. Second of all, this is the fact of the day: Samsung is now delivering 3nm next gen fabric while TSMC is forced to ask customer to go back to 7nm as they can't deliver 5 or 4 nm in decent volumes.

                    Kangal, 01 Jul 2022I actually do. You profiled me, and was mistaken. If you... more(Firstly, I made a typo at the end there, it was meant to be 2+0+6, and not 2+0+4)
                    Moving on, from the above options listed, I'm mostly excited about; 0+5+0, 0+3+5, and 1+2+5. And here's why:

                    0+5+0: Has lowest latency!
                    5x Cortex-A73 cores which can be miniaturised on the modern TSMC-6nm will run very well. With the cache at a somewhat low (128KB each) amount, they will function similar to Cortex-A55 at low-end but can ramp up performance instantly. We're talking clockspeeds between 2.1GHz all-core, or potentially a 2.6GHz boost. Symmetry is the motto here. Multithreaded software will run fastest in this design, which dictates if this gets the best performance here or the lowest, but it's efficiency should be the higher than other options regardless.

                    0+3+5: Optimal balance!
                    Here we will use the DynamIQ / BIG.little setup, which is a net gain. However, since the software platform on AndroidOS is not fully optimised we have landed on this strange setup. We avoid the inefficient Cortex-X1 processor, and invest all that thermal potential into 3x Cortex-A78 cores (512KiB each) which can work together and CONSISTENTLY hit (2.7GHz) high frequencies. The small cores (64KiB) will also be given breathing room, at 2.0GHz all-core, so they can help if possible. There will be slight latency, but better than the industry standard. All-hands on deck is the motto. Efficiency should be great overall, no surprises.

                    1+2+5: Best Compromise!
                    While the Cortex X1 in general is inefficient and not very useful, there are certain uses for it. Very intensive calculations, particularly with Emulation (Xbox +), or Intensive Games, or Professional Applications may benefit greatly with the pure grunt (1MiB) it delivers. AndroidOS and the platform is somewhat optimised, however, peculiarities will cause delays in the above two options, and not-here. This design allows the X1 to closer to 3.1GHz potential, instead of throttling like other designs. To make the best use of this core, matching it with 2x Cortex-A73 that are small (128KiB) but work efficiently 2.2GHz will prevent from suffering too many stutters in the middle. The five Cortex-A55 small cores (32KiB), can handle idle tasks. They will barely hit the standard 1.8GHz frequency, and are needed to help boost performance in the midrange tasks. Latency begins to become an issue. Race-to-Idle is the motto here. Good efficiency overall, with sacrifices made to provide the option of bonus performance if/when necessary.

                      Kangal, 01 Jul 2022I actually do. You profiled me, and was mistaken. If you... moreTo further add to this, you can have several combinations to spend your thermal allowance.
                      Let's use ARMv8, and DynamIQ as an example. And we will just use standard cores, nothing like Kryo, Mongoose, or Apple's.

                      A+B+C processors, with A= 0,1,2 and B= 0,1,2,3,4 and C=0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8.
                      The use of thermal budget is affected by A, then B, then C. So less A affects B much, but less C doesn't affect B much. Roughly, a single X1 costing same as dual A78 or triple A73 or five A55 cores thermals. A single A78 costing 1.5 times A73 or triple A55 cores thermals. A single A73 costing roughly dual A55 cores thermals. Each having different single-core performance, and different efficiency curves.

                      Here is food for thought / Possibilities:
                      0+0+8 = Cortex A55. Slowest. Has higher battery life, but actually less efficiency than some other options. No balance.

                      0+1+7 = Cortex A78, A55. The cheapest way to improve low-end chipset performance. Actually improves efficiency due to race-to-idle.

                      0+2+6 = Cortex A78, A55. This is the staple of the midrange chips. Performance for the most part is good, but certain aspects suffer, whilst efficiency is further improved. A very balanced system, but held behind mainly by the obsolete Cortex A55 cores.

                      0+3+5 = Cortex A78, A55. Performance nears maximum as the big cores can clock higher and maintain themselves. Probably the most optimal solution for AndroidOS currently.

                      0+4+4 = Cortex A78, A55. Here the largest "big" core, will start competing against each other for energy and somewhat throttle themselves. Extra core hasn't helped multithreaded Apps. The small Cortex A55 won't be hindered much. Somewhat balanced design, this was the classic design of older flagship chips.

                      0+5+0 = Cortex A73, smallest "big" core could be designed smaller and use less power, completely erasing the use of the obsolete Cortex A53/A55 cores. A symmetrical design, without the use of BIG.little or DynamIQ. So everything is managed by the five-identical cores. We've maxed the "thermal budget", no option to use a Very-Big core.

                      1+1+5 = Cortex X1, A78, A55. Here the inefficient X1 will use most of the budget from the big cores. But throttling should be contained. The 5 small cores are not affected if not using 6. This is the second most balanced design.

                      1+2+5 = Cortex X1, A73, A55. Using the small-A73, they're able to balance the demand from the inefficient X1. The 5 Small cores are not affected. This is most balanced design.

                      1+2+4 = Cortex X1, A78, A55. X1 no longer maintaining frequency, with A78 also throttling due to residual heat. Small cores are slightly affected. Not too balanced.

                      1+3+4 = Cortex X1, A78, A55. The X1 chokes itself and the system as the A78 unable to perform well. Small cores are affected. Quite imbalanced system, and doesn't work well and requires a lot of effort.

                      2+2+4 = Cortex X1, A73, A55. The X1 cores choke themselves, the small A73 struggles. The few small cores are able to function well. Very imbalanced system, would require a lot of effort.

                      2+1+5 = Cortex X1, A73, A55. The X1 cores still choke themselves, and the single A73 performs a little better. The few small cores are affected, and relied upon due to throttling. Quite imbalanced system, and wouldn't work well.

                      2+1+2 = Cortex X1, A78, A55. The X1 chokes itself and A78 reduced to single unit. Small cores are affected heavily. Very imbalanced system, won't work well.

                      2+0+4 = Cortex X1, A55. Without the middle-cores the two "very-big" cores don't run much better. Most of the energy is used up, and small cores also get choked slightly. You have some leftover thermal budget for Cortex A55 "small" cores. Unbalanced system, huge latencies, which could work well sometimes but relies on luck. (unless the architecture of the cores were more advanced like Icestorm+Firestorm).

                        Anonymous, 30 Jun 2022You dont understand silicon. The battery life already reach... moreI actually do. You profiled me, and was mistaken.

                        If you look back at my comment, see that I shifted things back to the OEM and Other Parts. It makes me ponder if you know much about chipsets. The Car Analogy from m2k/Anonymous is somewhat okay. However, you absolutely CAN design a System-on-Chip which is aimed for battery life, or in my case; a balance between battery life and performance. This comes to the data-pathways, cache sizes, voltage regulators, choice of co-processors, heat management, transistor count, target frequency, and then the kernel and driver stack. We saw an evolution in these aspects from the QSD 820 upto the QSD 888+.

                        Efficiency curves are one thing, but Software behaviour is another. For certain tasks, the most efficient way of completing it is to run it as slow as possible (marathon) and compute it. While other tasks benefit more (sprint) from "race-to-idle" scenario.

                        As someone below commented, the best chipset available that is aimed for battery life is the A15-Bionic from Apple. It has two (sprint) cores which are more expensive and advanced than the competitors Cortex X/A-Big/Mongoose/etc etc, and it has four (marathon) cores which are also expensive and the most advanced in the world, which can handle the iOS and most tasks swiftly.

                          maketing.., 01 Jul 2022an attentive reader must ask himself - if they already know... morebecause the 2nd generation is already possible to manufacture, but not at the scale necessary for orders that are in millions. you should look up the process that lead up to a production ready chip, you'll understand that chips are designed on avg 4 years before the are produced, because as of now it takes that long to design the architecture, test the architecture, validate the architecture, test in production, sample out to customers, refinement changes, hardware testing, hardware validation. It is currently still very hard to make a product in millions that is general has less than 1% failure rate.

                            • ?
                            • Anonymous
                            • x4{
                            • 01 Jul 2022

                            maketing.., 01 Jul 2022an attentive reader must ask himself - if they already know... moreyou could be right, but there is also another option. as always, companies never offer their best technology instantly. they don't give you the top improvement directly, companies divide their innovations into partial improvements to sell more products till they reach the top of their innovation. you won't get the best 3nm chip currently possible, you will get a mediocre chip, then you will get a good chip, then a very goood one and finally you will get the best possible (or maybe you won't because there might be a brand-new technology coming out before the previous tchnology reached its top tier 😂).
                            that's all for the purpose of profit

                              • ?
                              • Anonymous
                              • gJt
                              • 01 Jul 2022

                              All Android phone lag and overheat , going to an iPhone after 12 years was best thing I did. Never going back.

                                AnonD-762416, 30 Jun 2022If you spam the internet with desperate lies you end up in ... moreStop living in your fantasy land and go search past your nose.
                                Many people are complaining about their s22 units, and rightfully so.
                                They REALLY have faulty units.
                                And I seem to have a faulty unit after realizing that there is no software update that can fix this crap.

                                On the other hand, I was very happy with my Exynos S21 Ultra. But just because I was happy doesn't mean that plenty of people didn't have real issues with it. I can acknowledge that and say that I was lucky to get a normal phone from the very start.

                                  hellotheree, 30 Jun 2022Lots of people slating Exynos chips when most probably have... moreYou were very lucky. Most people (like myself) weren't.
                                  I got a faulty Exynos 2200 unit that runs the chip up to 48 C˙ after playing for 30 mins a 2D game in a room temperature.
                                  My previous Exynos 2100 was no cooler, but it behaved better in the same circumstances.

                                  Some get hardware-wise perfectly fine smartphones while some get faulty chipset, camera or screen. Even though all of them passed the testings before leaving the factory. Which shows that Samsung has a terrible quality control management for their line-ups.

                                    • m
                                    • maketing..
                                    • L6L
                                    • 01 Jul 2022

                                    an attentive reader must ask himself - if they already know all this about the 2nd generation and apparently must have planned it, because how else would they know it - why they don't just start with the much better 2nd generation of chip production.
                                    as always, the master of this NEWS is just marketing bullshit!

                                      • K
                                      • Kuba
                                      • uN{
                                      • 01 Jul 2022

                                      I will believe when i see the real chip. 8gen1 was supposedly to be better than previous chips, but reality is a disaster overheating crap. i had Samsung S22 and barely got 4h screen on time with power saving on, 60Hz etc. Even iphone 13mini easily gets 6h screen on time. Now i have S22 Ultra and battery is also NOT great.

                                        I think I'ma just put a comment here so anyone can mentioned me if there's a fight.

                                          1 of 4