AMD sketches out the next five years

[scaryjim]

It's just interesting if true as it presumably means there's some decent compatibility between the processes at Samsung and GloFo to make porting less difficult.

Not very surprising - the article DwU linked states that Samsung and GloFo were collaborating on the node; although it also says GloFo licensed it from Samsung, which would suggest they weren't that involved in its development.

Either way, you'd expect the nodes to be very similar.

[watercooled]

AFAIK it's Fudzilla's speculation that the process is straight-up licensed from Samsung (there's no mention of licensing in their source article). Considering the talk of their co-operation on the node I'd find it hard to believe GloFo had no involvement with it.

However even the 'same' node isn't necessarily identical on different fabs, there can still be difficulties porting from what I've read, and Intel goes to great lengths to ensure compatibility between their fabs.

[DanceswithUnix]

AFAIK it's Fudzilla's speculation that the process is straight-up licensed from Samsung (there's no mention of licensing in their source article). Considering the talk of their co-operation on the node I'd find it hard to believe GloFo had no involvement with it.

However even the 'same' node isn't necessarily identical on different fabs, there can still be difficulties porting from what I've read, and Intel goes to great lengths to ensure compatibility between their fabs.

Fudzilla seem very sure that the process is licensed by the look of their article yesterday: http://www.fudzilla.com/news/37475-g...ies-14nm-plans

[watercooled]

It's Fudzilla, which generally means take it with a pinch of salt or two. The fact they rarely bother to link sources makes it harder to believe.

However, I did find some proper sources and it is apparently licensed: http://www.samsung.com/global/busine...l?newsId=13364 http://www.globalfoundries.com/newsr...tor-technology