Pam, re: The other thing is that there is a growing demand for data storage in cell phones and they all want their phones in a slim form-factor. If products like OneNAND and mDoC or other MCP based solutions can provide data storage as well as code-execution capabilities either on a single chip (OneNAND) or in a MCP form (mDoC) it saves space in the device and gets the job done at a much lower price.
Your general pricing remarks (trends) are obviously valid. Data storage is growing fast for cell phones. But OneNAND and mDoC only provide the cheaper solution when data needs are very big / high end phones (because often more total NAND/SRAM/etc-die area is needed for equal performance). And if current pricing trends do continue long enough, i.e. two years, and if NOR technology would not continue to evolve rapidly then all current NOR will indeed fade away. Still, because of the technical difficulties of scaling NAND at an equal pace as currently all flash manufacturers (NAND and NOR) are changing technologies. E.g. Spansion bet on charge trapping a long while ago, while Samsung is doing something more or less similar now (Numonyx didn't innovate nearly as much). Second example: Both Spansion and Toshiba are implementing SONOS (similar cell sizes for NOR and NAND I/F's); Spansion when entering the 45nm node, and Tosh at least one generation later. In the end (years from now) there might simply be little technology difference between NAND and NOR on memory cell level; the difference will be in the layout and the I/F. If Spansion does execute current faster roadmap after 45nm too then they're in a good position to come out of the transition as the only previous NOR manufacturer still standing and possibly even in good shape. Samsung rather obviously too of course. Not Numonyx though because they're late in shifting memory cell technologies and late with 300mm production.
re: NAND cell has a much smaller feature size
Almost 100% true. 'Almost' because Spansion's just started sampling 4 bits / cell 65nm flash using 300mm wafers that has a cell size comparable with 2 bits / cell NAND at ~50nm. OneNAND die is significantly bigger than standard NAND because of the additional SRAM buffer and NOR I/F + error correction.
re: Toshiba is ready to go into production at 43nm and introduce 3 bits/cell NAND in 1H08 and they are already shipping 16Gb NAND MLC monolithic chips at very mature yields on 56nm today!
Essentially true. Some minor details though: Tosh delayed sampling of 3 bits/cell NAND from end last year to somewhere during H1 '08. 3 bits/cell performance isn't good for code, so it will for a good amount of time only compete with NAND where costs are more important than performance. Die size improvement (I believe I once read 20% reduction) is good but not dramatic because of added die area to compensate for worse reliability (EC).
re: Spansion just announced that they are sampling 1Gb chips at 65nm today. There is absolutely no match here when it comes cost/MB of flash and SPSN will not even be able to catch-up with Toshiba in terms of lowering costs for another 5 years at minimum, if at all! NAND will scale another couple of generations and after that they will move to 3D. NAND is here to stay for and dies will shrink one way or another for at least 5-7 years at minimum.
Spansion has been in production with 65nm ORNAND (2b/cell) since September last year. 1Gb announcement is just for Quadbit (initial sampling density for 65nm Quadbit). Spansion's mainstream flash 2b/cell Mirrorbit NOR hasn't been sampling yet though fafaik. Spansion is moving to 45nm end this year.
Yes of course NAND will scale, but probably not as fast as currently because process technology changes are imo likely to slow it down. Noone will want to move to 3D transistors unless absolutely necessary. That's why they've been delayed time after time so far.
With Mirrorbit (NOR) / ORNAND (Spansion's NAND) / Quadbit Spansion wins out nicely over Numonyx. With products like OneNAND and Flex OneNAND Samsung wins business from Numonyx too. Samsung 'only' wins high end cell phone NOR share from Spansion; I'd be rather curious to what extent this is the case btw.
re: Samsung will have plenty of spare 200mm capacity which is fully depreciated and they would be glad to get whatever RoI they can from these investments because they are not able to do much with this capacity in DRAM and NAND. They will not only take away market share from Numonyx but also from Spansion and others. As for Spansion entering NAND, do you really think they are any match to Samsung or Toshiba with their Mega-Fabs? Even Hynix and IMFT are losing money in NAND against Samsung and Toshiba despite their years of expertise at fabricating semiconductors and ample financial resources. Do you realize that Toshiba/Sandisk together spend a little less than twice the current market-cap of Spansion in capex every Q on NAND? Spansion will not be able to compete in NAND period.
Spansion too has highly depreciated fabs.
Spansion has no chance to compete against NAND flat out, but does have a good chance with NOR+NAND MCP's especially where data needs are not very big.
re: OneNAND is a better solution [than Mirrorbit + ORNAND] and is able to deliver what cell phone makers are looking for at a much lower price and that is what will make it a de facto standard if both Samsung and Toshiba start pushing it without having to pay L&R to each other. Spansion is too late to the NAND party and they need to worry about survival rather than aiming to compete with Samsung and Toshiba in NAND. They are not going to profitable in 2008 or even in 2009.
Your price remark is true only in very high end. It can become true in lower segments too
Spansion is indeed too late to the NAND party, but not the NOR+NAND MCP party.
Spansion does indeed need to worry about survival (see share price) and will indeed not be profitable in 2008, though they could reach break even operating profitability that year. Also they will continue to burn cash at moderate levels because of SP1. 2009 is less clear but the trend is ok currently.
re:
My earlier comment:My view is that both Samsung and Spansion are reasonably likely to continue to gain share in the NOR space at the cost of Numonyx plus the smaller players for some time to come. The cross licensing deal is highly important, but not big enough of a thing that would make Spansion's share gains a thing of the past all of a sudden. The basis for my assumptions here is that I think that technologies like charge trapping and SONOS will win over floating gate and that Numonyx is moving to the newer technologies way too slow. Just my 2c...
Your reply: I disagree. NOR market will decline or remain flat at best and what that means is that industry participants are going to pounce on every design opportunity and kill each other with lower prices to just stay alive in the business. Eventually, some capacity will have to be retired and the weaker players without resources will have to fold-up or get merged with someone stronger. Investors at Numonyx are going to cut expenses aggressively and try and make it profitable so that they can spin-off as an IPO in a couple of years and make a good RoI for their 150mm at risk in the project. Competition in NOR is going to be fierce and making money will get harder and that is the true picture of NOR as I see it and all IMHO.
Partly in line with you I think the NOR market will remain essentially flat for some time and shrink over long term. Numonyx does not have a single fundamental chance to compete (or it must be highly successful phase change; I have to see that to believe it). Competition will indeed be fierce but Numonyx can't lower prices the same way Intel did. Essentially Samsung and Spansion will determine NOR pricing. In general making money in NOR will only get harder, very true.
Regards,
Rink |
