|
WWK's Daren Dance talks about recent EquipmentFutures joint survey |
|
|
|
Jun 27, 2007 at 03:53 PM |
I've known Daren Dance since the early '90s, when he worked on the early cost of ownership models at Sematech and MICRO published some of the first technical articles detailing that CoO work.
I found that Daren could always be counted on for his well-informed opinions---straightforward, at times unvarnished and amusingly irascible---instead of parroting company-line boilerplate. He has shared some nice tidbits of chipmaking insider info over the years, though many such bits have been "OTR," or off the record.
Daren has been on the payroll at Wright Williams & Kelly for quite a few years now, currently stirring the pot as the cost management consultancy's VP of technology. Last week, WWK and survey partner Strategic Marketing Associates issued PR on their latest EquipmentFutures forecast, which is based on respondents' views of when (by year) they expect to see particular process and equipment manufacturing technologies enter production.
Certain findings raised eyebrows in the semiconductor manufacturing community, especially the 39% of respondents who said that 450-mm wafers ain't never gonna see the light of day in production---and that most surveyed don't see 450-mm coming into play until at least 2013. Same goes for the most common response to EUV and imprint litho's probable production insertion points---2013 or beyond.
Daren sent me a survey summary with a bit more granular data, then I fired back some questions via email a few days ago. Here are some of the Q's and A's:
How many surveys went out and how many were answered/returned? What was the demographic of those surveyed---chipmakers, equipment, materials, research, etc.? What was the geographical breakdown of the responses? Did you see any significant differences in the findings/answers between the various demographic groups of respondents?
We did not ask any demographic questions on this survey. The survey was sent to clients, affiliates, and others who have expressed interest or opinions to us on semiconductor equipment over many years. Respondents generally did not answer all areas of the survey. We asked them to respond in areas with which they were most familiar. Since the number of responses varies greatly among the questions, we chose to not release these numbers. We monitored responses to avoid multiple returns, i.e., to prevent stuffing the ballot box. The survey may not statistically reflect all of the opinions in the industry but is sufficient to identify general trends.
Were there any additional comments or equipment trends seen in the results?
We did not allow for additional comments---just "pick a date."
Did different groups of respondents reply to different questions, and if so, what percentages are we looking at by general category (litho, etch and clean, etc.)?
I did not look at percentage response by category at all.
You said that although you weren't surprised that 450-mm wafer timing was seen as 2013+, you were surprised by the 39% who said it will never happen. Were there other findings/answers that surprised you, and if so, what were they, and why?
Direct-write litho was a surprise to me (54% said it would never happen--Ed.)as I think that direct write for a customization layer makes economic sense for a foundry. This is a way of lowering mask costs. But I can agree that it will never become the predominant patterning technology.
What are the implications for such categories as STEM production inspection (40% said it ain't gonna happen) and direct-write litho, for example, which have such prodigious "Never" numbers?
We interpret the results as showing a lot of caution particularly in the lithography technology forecast responses. New litho technologies have a way of falling by the wayside, leaving optical as the industry workhorse. We see the same caution as our respondents look at gate technologies; however, with gate, WWK expects to see multiple advanced gate technologies in use as different technologies have benefits for different architectures and applications. Finally, STEM may be to slow for production and more of a diagnostic tool.
What do you see as some of the key take-aways from the findings in this survey?
Ten years ago (1997) the industry was in the process of converging on common processes, equipment sets, and device architectures. It was not a question of whether 300 mm [would happen]---just when. Now there are a lot of options for semiconductor manufacturing, particularly in manufacturing processes. I think this survey shows that there are significant differences of opinion about manufacturing practices for the next 5 to 10 years. Different approaches have different benefits. Thus, WWK expects to see multiple manufacturing technologies in use for different architectures and applications.
Fifty percent of respondents indicated production use of equipment with energy-saving capabilities by 2009. Although processing equipment is not the largest user of energy in the fab, we expect that given equivalent process and reliability performance, users will choose systems with higher energy efficiency over conventionally designed systems---even if average selling prices (ASP) of more energy-efficient equipment are slightly greater.
|
Blogs 
