Published in News

Apple rumoured to swap Samsung for TSMC

by on17 April 2015

Terrified by Galaxy S6

Fruity cargo cult Apple is so terrified of the success that Samsung has had with its Galaxy S6 it has taken a chip order away from Samsung and given it to TSMC instead.

The news comes from a KGI Securities analyst Ming-Chi Kuo via Apple Insider Ming has been issuing some very pro-Apple statements of late and some of the Tame Apple Press claim he has Tim Cook's inside trouser measurement. Earlier this week he claimed that Apple Watch pre-orders had hit 2.3 million. Now he said that Apple has recruited TSMC to make chips for the rumoured iPhone 7.

Ming claimed it was because GlobalFoundries, is seeing a yield rate of 30 percent for the A9 chip, which Kuo said is well below Apple's mass-production "basic requirement" of 50 percent.

But he also added that the switch to TSMC could also be blamed on the high demand seen for the Galaxy S6.

Apple is reportedly concerned that, with Samsung supplying the 14nm chips inside its own Galaxy S6 and Galaxy S6 Edge, the company will not match the chip supply that Apple needs.

Apple had apparently looked to Samsung to supply the majority of chips for its next-generation iPhone, according to previous reports.
TSMC's 16nm FinFET Turbo design had exceeded Apple's expectations in yield rate and performance.

It all strikes us as a bit weird as the change is extremely sudden and last minute and is the first comment ever made by anyone that Samsung's process is inferior to TSMC's which so far had been playing catch up. If yields at GloFlo were as low as 30 percent it would be a complete disaster which would have been known about for some time.

TSMC failed to make any note of it in its predictions yesterday, in fact its results suggested disappointment that it had lost ground to Samsung.
Historically Apple could be petty enough to switch suppliers at the last minute if the Galaxy S did really well, but that also would be cutting its nose off to spite its face.

Last modified on 17 April 2015
Rate this item
(7 votes)

Read more about: