1. | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
1.1. | Advanced semiconductor packaging technologies - our scope |
1.2. | Why advanced semiconductor packaging now? |
1.3. | Four key drivers for advanced semiconductor packaging technologies |
1.4. | Evolution roadmap of semiconductor packaging |
1.5. | Overview of interconnection technique in semiconductor packaging |
1.6. | Key metrics for advanced semiconductor packaging performance |
1.7. | Tech development trend for 2.5D packaging |
1.8. | Wafer level vs Panel level Fan-Out: Key differences |
1.9. | Key trends in fan-out packaging |
1.10. | Evolution of bumping technologies |
1.11. | 3D Bumpless Cu-Cu hybrid bonding |
1.12. | Challenges in 3D Hybrid bonding |
1.13. | Advanced Semiconductor packaging - technology benchmark overview (1) |
1.14. | Advanced Semiconductor packaging - technology benchmark overview (2) |
1.15. | Advanced semiconductor packaging technology - highlights from key players - 1 |
1.16. | Advanced semiconductor packaging technology - highlights from key players - 2 |
1.17. | Key markets for advanced semiconductor packaging |
1.18. | HPC chips integration trend - overview |
1.19. | Chiplet roadmap for HPC |
1.20. | How future HPC platform would look like? |
1.21. | Key trend of optical transceiver packaging in high-end data centers |
1.22. | 2D to 3D EIC/PIC integration options |
1.23. | Challenges and future potential of CPO technology |
1.24. | Total CPO market |
1.25. | Key highlights regarding HBM development from Semicon Taiwan 2024 |
1.26. | HBM4 race: SK Hynix vs Samsung |
1.27. | Overview of antenna packaging technologies vs operational frequency |
1.28. | Benchmarking three antenna packaging technologies |
1.29. | Commercialized high density fan-out packaging solutions |
1.30. | Data center CPU: advanced semiconductor packaging unit forecast 2025-2035 (shipment) |
1.31. | Data center accelerator: advanced semiconductor packaging unit forecast 2023-2035 (shipment) |
1.32. | 2.5D advanced semiconductor packaging unit sales for L4+ autonomous vehicles sales forecast 2022-2045 |
1.33. | Advanced semiconductor packaging unit forecast for APE (application processor environment) in consumer electronics 2023-2035 (1) |
1.34. | Advanced semiconductor packaging units in PC forecast 2023-2035 (1) |
1.35. | Advanced semiconductor packaging unit for 5G RAN networks 2023-2035 (cumulative) |
2. | INTRODUCTION TO ADVANCED SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGING |
2.1. | Challenges in transistor scaling |
2.1.1. | The growing demand for data computing power |
2.1.2. | Fundamentals of abundant data computing system |
2.1.3. | Key parameter of growth for processor and memory (1) |
2.1.4. | Key parameter of growth for processor and memory (2) |
2.1.5. | Memory bandwidth deficit |
2.1.6. | Four key area of growth for abundance data computing system |
2.1.7. | Key parameters for transistor device scaling |
2.1.8. | Evolution of transistor device architectures |
2.1.9. | Scaling technology roadmap overview |
2.1.10. | Semiconductor foundries and their roadmap |
2.1.11. | The economics of scaling |
2.1.12. | Challenges in transistor scaling |
2.1.13. | The solution forward: chiplet + advanced semiconductor packaging |
2.2. | The rise of Chiplet |
2.2.1. | The rise of chiplets |
2.2.2. | What is chiplet technology |
2.2.3. | Use cases and benefits |
2.2.4. | AMD Chiplet performance vs cost |
2.2.5. | Advanced semiconductor packaging: The chiplet enabler |
2.3. | The rise of Advanced Semiconductor Packaging technologies |
2.3.1. | General electronic packaging - an overview |
2.3.2. | Advanced semiconductor packaging - an overview |
2.3.3. | The rise of advanced semiconductor packaging |
2.3.4. | The challenges of advanced semiconductor packaging and its challenges |
2.3.5. | Four key drivers for advanced semiconductor packaging technologies |
2.3.6. | Key figures of merit of advanced semiconductor packaging technologies |
3. | ADVANCED SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGING TECHNOLOGIES: DEEP-DIVE INTO 2.5D AND 3D PACKAGING |
3.1. | Four key factors of advanced semiconductor packaging |
3.2. | Advanced semiconductor packaging technologies - overview of technologies |
3.2.1. | Evolution roadmap of semiconductor packaging |
3.2.2. | Semiconductor packaging - an overview of technology |
3.2.3. | Overview of interconnection technique in semiconductor packaging |
3.2.4. | Moving towards 3D packaging: Pros and Cons |
3.2.5. | Interconnection technique - Wire Bond |
3.2.6. | Interconnection technique - Flip Chip |
3.2.7. | Interconnection technique - Interposer |
3.2.8. | Passive vs active interposer |
3.2.9. | Interconnection technique - technology benchmark |
3.3. | 2.5D packaging |
3.3.1. | 2.5D packaging - introduction |
3.3.2. | 2.5D Packaging - benefits and challenges |
3.3.3. | Overview 2.5D semiconductor packaging technology |
3.4. | 2.5D Si-based packaging |
3.4.1. | 2.5D packaging that involves Si as interconnect |
3.4.2. | Interposer Structure |
3.4.3. | Through Si Via (TSV) - now and the future |
3.4.4. | Through-Si-Via (TSV) fabrication process flow |
3.4.5. | Through-Si-Via (TSV) fabrication method |
3.4.6. | SiO2 RDL fabrication |
3.4.7. | RDL layer thickness |
3.4.8. | 2.5D Si interposer: Complete process overview |
3.4.9. | Si Bridge |
3.4.10. | Si interposer vs Si bridge benchmark |
3.4.11. | Case studies |
3.4.12. | Players that have 2.5D Si-based packaging solutions |
3.4.13. | Developing trend for 2.5D Si-based packaging |
3.4.14. | Packaging challenges in 2.5D |
3.5. | 2.5D Organic-based packaging |
3.5.1. | 2.5D packaging - high density fan-out packaging |
3.5.2. | Two types of fan-out: Panel level |
3.5.3. | Two types of fan-out: Wafer level |
3.5.4. | Wafer level vs Panel level Fan-Out: Key differences |
3.5.5. | Key trends in fan-out packaging |
3.5.6. | Fan-out packaging process overview |
3.5.7. | Fan-out chip-first process flow |
3.5.8. | Fan-out chip-last process flow |
3.5.9. | Fan-out chip-last RDL formation - development trend |
3.5.10. | Challenges in future fan-out process |
3.5.11. | Limitations in organic substrate |
3.5.12. | Organic RDL |
3.5.13. | Key Factors to Consider When Choosing material for Electronic Interconnects |
3.5.14. | Electronic interconnects: SiO2 vs Organic dielectric |
3.5.15. | Key parameters for organic RDL materials for next generation 2.5D fan-out packaging |
3.6. | 2.5D glass-based packaging |
3.6.1. | Benefits of glass |
3.6.2. | Roles of glass in semiconductor packaging |
3.6.3. | Value proposition of glass as core material for 2.5D package |
3.6.4. | Overcoming Limitations of Si interposers with Glass |
3.6.5. | Glass core as interposer for advanced semiconductor packaging |
3.6.6. | Glass core (interposer) package - process flow |
3.6.7. | TGV - Player and products benchmark |
3.6.8. | TGV of >15 aspect ratio |
3.6.9. | Samtec TGV |
3.6.10. | Absolic's glass packaging solution |
3.6.11. | Achieving 2/2 um L/S on glass substrate |
3.6.12. | Eight metal layer RDL on glass process flow |
3.6.13. | <3 um micro via |
3.6.14. | 3D Glass Panel Embedding (GPE) package |
3.6.15. | 3D Glass Panel Embedding (GPE) package- process flow |
3.6.16. | Glass vs molding compound |
3.6.17. | GPE vs Glass interposer - 1 |
3.6.18. | GPE vs Glass interposer - specification benchmark |
3.6.19. | GPE vs Glass interposer - process benchmark |
3.6.20. | Glass - thermal management |
3.6.21. | RDL dielectrics on glass substrate |
3.6.22. | Glass interposer - more demonstrated case studies |
3.6.23. | Challenges of glass packaging |
3.7. | Technology Benchmark: Si vs Organic vs Glass |
3.7.1. | Benchmark of materials for interposer |
3.7.2. | Interposer material supplier landscape |
3.7.3. | Advanced Semiconductor packaging - technology benchmark overview (1) |
3.7.4. | Advanced Semiconductor packaging - technology benchmark overview (2) |
3.8. | 3D Hybrid bonding |
3.8.1. | Conventional 3D packaging (No TSVs) |
3.8.2. | Advanced 3D Packaging (W/ TSVs) |
3.8.3. | Advanced 3D Packaging |
3.8.4. | Evolution of bumping technologies |
3.8.5. | µ bump for advanced semiconductor packaging |
3.8.6. | Challenges in scaling bumps |
3.8.7. | Bumpless Cu-Cu hybrid bonding |
3.8.8. | Enhancing Energy Efficiency Through Hybrid Bonding Pitch Scaling |
3.8.9. | Cu-Cu hybrid bonding manufacturing process flow |
3.8.10. | Three ways of Cu-Cu hybrid bonding |
3.8.11. | Technology benchmark between 2.5D, 3D micro bump, and 3D hybrid bonding |
3.8.12. | Performance benchmark of devices based on micro bumps vs Cu-Cu bumpless hybrid bonding |
3.8.13. | Overview of devices that make use of hybrid bonding |
3.8.14. | Challenges in 3D Hybrid bonding |
4. | ADVANCED SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGING TECHNOLOGIES: PLAYER ANALYSIS |
4.1. | Overview |
4.1.1. | Business value chain in IC industry |
4.1.2. | Ecosystem/Business model in the IC industry |
4.1.3. | Role and advantages of players in advanced semiconductor packaging market |
4.1.4. | Players in advanced semiconductor packaging and their solutions |
4.2. | TSMC's advanced semiconductor packaging solutions |
4.2.1. | TSMC's advanced semiconductor packaging technology portfolio |
4.2.2. | TSMC 2.5D packaging technology - CoWoS |
4.2.3. | CoWoS - an update from TSMC at Semicon Taiwan 2024 |
4.2.4. | CoWoS - development progress and roadmap |
4.2.5. | Key development steps for CoWoS to meet future packaging performance |
4.2.6. | Challenges in large interposer manufacturing and its solutions |
4.2.7. | CoWoS-L |
4.2.8. | CoWoS_L process flow |
4.2.9. | Fabrication of Local Si Interconnect (LSI) |
4.2.10. | CoWoS-L key development features |
4.2.11. | Solutions to achieve > 5x reticle interposer area (1) |
4.2.12. | Solutions to achieve > 5x interposer area (2) |
4.2.13. | CoWoS-L > 5x reticle size test vehicle results |
4.2.14. | Solution to go beyond 9x reticle size? |
4.2.15. | InFO_SoW |
4.2.16. | CoW_SoW |
4.2.17. | Tesla's Dojo system-on-wafer (SoW) processor for AI training |
4.2.18. | TSMC CoWoS market |
4.2.19. | TSMC packaging facility overview |
4.2.20. | TSMC 2.5D packaging technology - InFO |
4.2.21. | TSMC 2.5D InFO packaging technologies roadmap |
4.2.22. | TSMC 2.5D packaging technology applications |
4.2.23. | TSMC 3D SoIC Technology |
4.2.24. | Roadmap of SoIC hybrid bonding scaling |
4.2.25. | How bonding pitch size affects system performance |
4.2.26. | TSMC SoIC-P (micro bump) roadmap |
4.2.27. | Key Applications of 3D SoIC packages |
4.2.28. | Combined 3D SoIC and 2.5D backend packaging technologies |
4.2.29. | iOIS - Integrated Optical Interconnection System from TSMC |
4.2.30. | Summary - TSMC advanced semiconductor packaging technology |
4.3. | Intel's advanced semiconductor packaging solutions |
4.3.1. | Intel's advanced semiconductor packaging technology portfolio |
4.3.2. | Introduction to Intel EMIB (Embedded Multi-Die interconnect Bridge) |
4.3.3. | EMIB process flow |
4.3.4. | EMIB process challenges |
4.3.5. | EMIB key parameters |
4.3.6. | EMIB bump size reduction roadmap |
4.3.7. | Products that use EMIB technology |
4.3.8. | Intel 3D FOVEROS technology |
4.3.9. | Intel 3D FOVEROS ODI |
4.3.10. | Intel's 3D FOVEROS roadmap highlights |
4.3.11. | Table of Intel's products that adopts 3D FOVEROS |
4.3.12. | Three key interconnect breakthroughs from Intel |
4.3.13. | Intel 3D FOVEROS Direct hybrid bonding - roadmap |
4.3.14. | FOVEROS Direct: Passive vs Active interposer |
4.3.15. | FOVEROS Direct: Base die orientation |
4.3.16. | Intel interconnect technology - Zero Misaligned Via (ZMV) |
4.3.17. | Intel 3D packaging roadmap: 3.5D (2.5D EMIB + 3D FOVEROS) |
4.3.18. | Intel advanced packaging roadmap overview |
4.3.19. | Intel glass packaging roadmap |
4.3.20. | Intel's test vehicle for glass packaging |
4.3.21. | Intel packaging sites |
4.3.22. | Summary - Intel advanced semiconductor packaging technology |
4.4. | Samsung's advanced semiconductor packaging solutions |
4.4.1. | Samsung's advanced semiconductor packaging technology portfolio |
4.4.2. | Overview of Samsung's targeted applications |
4.4.3. | Samsung Advanced Interconnection Technology (SAINT) |
4.4.4. | Samsung's AI solutions |
4.4.5. | Samsung's advanced semiconductor packaging roadmap |
4.4.6. | Samsung's 2.5D packaging solutions (I-Cube) |
4.4.7. | 2.5D Molded Interposer on Substrate (MIoS) package |
4.4.8. | Samsung's 2.5D packaging solutions (H-Cube) |
4.4.9. | Fan-out packaging portfolio |
4.4.10. | Samsung RDL-first fan-out wafer/panel level package |
4.4.11. | FOPLP for HPC products? |
4.4.12. | Samsung's 3D packaging solutions |
4.4.13. | Samsung's Cu-Cu bonding |
4.4.14. | Summary - Samsung advanced semiconductor packaging technology |
4.4.15. | OSAT's advanced semiconductor packaging technologies |
4.5. | ASE's advanced semiconductor packaging solutions |
4.5.1. | ASE 2.5D technologies - FOCoS |
4.5.2. | ASE's VIPack (Advanced packaging solutions for heterogeneous integration) |
4.5.3. | ASE Advanced Packaging Roadmap |
4.5.4. | ASE FOCoS process flow (1) |
4.5.5. | ASE FOCoS process flow (2) |
4.5.6. | FOCoS - Packaging spec benchmark |
4.5.7. | HVM products based on CL-FOCoS |
4.5.8. | Development Test Vehicle for HBM3 |
4.5.9. | FOCoS-CL Example and Spec |
4.5.10. | FOCoS-B (w/ and w/o TSVs) Examples and Spec - 1 |
4.5.11. | FOCoS-B (w/ and w/o TSVs) Examples and Spec - 2 |
4.5.12. | Pros and Cons of FOCoS chip last |
4.5.13. | 2.5D/3D TSV from ASE |
4.5.14. | RDL spec benchmark (FOCOS vs Bridge vs Si interposer) |
4.5.15. | FOPOP from ASE - process |
4.5.16. | Carrier utilization vs reticle size: Wafer vs Panel |
4.5.17. | ASE approach to panel |
4.5.18. | ASE 300mm Panel Process Overview |
4.5.19. | ASE 600 mm process |
4.5.20. | ASE's proposed fan-out solution for CPO packaging |
4.5.21. | Optical packaging process considerations for silicon photonics - ASE |
4.5.22. | SPIL's advanced semiconductor packaging solutions |
4.5.23. | SPIL's advanced packaging solutions |
4.5.24. | SPIL Fan-Out Embedded Bridge (FOEB) Technology |
4.5.25. | SPIL FOEB Technology process flow |
4.5.26. | SPIL FOEB - Thermal and warpage |
4.5.27. | SPIL FOEB-T |
4.5.28. | FO-EB-T Process flow |
4.5.29. | Performance benchmark: FOEB vs FOEB-T vs 2.5D Si interposer |
4.5.30. | SPIL's Fan-Out Embedded Bridge (FOEB) structure for PIC/EIC integration in CPO |
4.5.31. | SPIL FOEB vs Intel EMIB |
4.6. | Amkor's advanced semiconductor packaging solutions |
4.6.1. | Amkor advanced semiconductor packaging solutions |
4.6.2. | Amkor's 2.5D TSV FCBGA |
4.6.3. | Summary of Amkor's 2.5D TSV technologies |
4.6.4. | Stacked substrate (2.5D packaging) from Amkor |
4.6.5. | High-Density Fan-Out (HDFO) solution from Amkor |
4.6.6. | Amkor's S-SWIFT packaging solution (1) |
4.6.7. | Amkor's S-SWIFT packaging solution (2) |
4.6.8. | Amkor - RDL layers development |
4.6.9. | Electrical characteristics vs different RDL solution |
4.6.10. | Amkor's S-SWIFT package development status |
4.6.11. | Amkor - 3D stacking |
4.6.12. | Amkor - Cu-Cu Hybrid bonding pathfinding on the way |
5. | ADVANCED SEMICONDUCTOR PACKAGING TECHNOLOGIES: APPLICATIONS |
5.1. | Packaging trend for key markets |
5.2. | High Performance Computing (HPC) Chips |
5.2.1. | Chapter introduction |
5.2.2. | Challenges for next generation AI chips |
5.2.3. | The rise and the challenges of LLM |
5.2.4. | Fundamentals of abundance data computing system |
5.2.5. | State-of-the-art high-end AI chips |
5.2.6. | Evolution of AI compute system architecture |
5.2.7. | NVIDIA and AMD solutions for next-gen AI |
5.2.8. | The next step forward to improve system bandwidth |
5.2.9. | How advanced semiconductor packaging can address the challenges? |
5.2.10. | Why traditional Moore's Law scaling cannot meet the growing needs for HPC |
5.2.11. | Key Factors affecting HPC datacenter performance |
5.2.12. | Advanced semiconductor packaging path for HPC |
5.2.13. | Trend in package integration |
5.2.14. | HPC chips integration trend - overview |
5.2.15. | HPC chips integration trend - explanation |
5.3. | Co-Packaged Optics |
5.3.1. | Silicon photonics |
5.3.2. | Overview of key challenges in data center architectures |
5.3.3. | Advancements in Switch IC Bandwidth and the Need for Co-Packaged Optics (CPO) Technology |
5.3.4. | Key trend of optical transceiver in high-end data centers |
5.3.5. | Heterogeneous integration and Co-Packaged Optics (CPO) |
5.3.6. | What is an Optical Engine (OE) |
5.3.7. | Design decisions for CPO compared to Pluggables |
5.3.8. | Key CPO applications: Network switch and computing optical I/O |
5.3.9. | Overview of CPO Packaging Technologies |
5.3.10. | Overview of Interconnection Technique in Semiconductor Packaging |
5.3.11. | EIC/PIC integration by advanced interconnect technique |
5.3.12. | 2D to 3D EIC/PIC integration options |
5.3.13. | Benchmark table of different packaging technologies for EIC/PIC |
5.3.14. | Pros and Cons of 2D integration of EIC/PIC |
5.3.15. | Pros and Cons of 2.5D integration of EIC/PIC |
5.3.16. | Pros and Cons of 3D hybrid integration of EIC/PIC |
5.3.17. | Pros and Cons of 3D monolithic integration of EIC/PIC |
5.3.18. | Three types of CPO + XPU/switch ASIC packaging structures |
5.3.19. | Examples of packaging a 3D optical engine with an IC |
5.3.20. | 3.2 Tb/s CPO module defined by the Optical Internetworking Forum (OIF) - 1 |
5.3.21. | Challenges and future potential of CPO technology |
5.3.22. | CPO Demonstration products benchmarked |
5.3.23. | Total CPO market |
5.4. | High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) |
5.4.1. | Computer memory hierarchy |
5.4.2. | HBM - device architecture and its functionalities |
5.4.3. | HBM vs DDR for computing (1) |
5.4.4. | Drawbacks of High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) |
5.4.5. | Summary of HBM vs DDR |
5.4.6. | HBM vs DDR for computing - market trend |
5.4.7. | HBM generations - specification benchmark |
5.4.8. | Key highlights regarding HBM development from Semicon Taiwan 2024 |
5.4.9. | HBM Packaging |
5.4.10. | HBM packaging challenges - Thinning DRAM wafer |
5.4.11. | HBM packaging challenges - bonding technologies |
5.4.12. | HBM packaging - limitations of micro-bump |
5.4.13. | HBM packaging transition to hybrid bonding |
5.4.14. | Benchmark HBM performance: microbump vs hybrid bonding |
5.4.15. | Approaches to package HBM and GPU |
5.4.16. | SK Hynix |
5.4.17. | SK Hynix: HBM stacking technology roadmap |
5.4.18. | HBM Packaging: TC-NCF vs MR-MUF |
5.4.19. | 8-Hi HBM using MR-MUF |
5.4.20. | SK Hynix: HBM thermal management roadmap |
5.4.21. | Challenges for going beyond 16 Hi |
5.4.22. | Stacking DRAMs using hybrid bonding - a study from SK Hynix |
5.4.23. | C2W bonding for next generation HBM |
5.4.24. | Samsung |
5.4.25. | Packaging for high bandwidth memory (HBM) |
5.4.26. | Hybrid bonding for HBM packaging - Samsung's findings and roadmap |
5.4.27. | Hybrid bonding for HBM packaging - Samsung's findings and roadmap continue |
5.4.28. | HBM4 race: Samsung vs SK Hynix |
5.5. | HPC system Packaging Strategies by Leading Companies |
5.5.1. | NVIDIA |
5.5.2. | NVIDIA data center GPUs based on advanced semiconductor packaging |
5.5.3. | NVIDIA Blackwell GPU |
5.5.4. | Closer look into NVIDIA's state-of-the-art AI system |
5.5.5. | Number of Cu wires in current AI system Interconnects |
5.5.6. | Nvidia's connectivity choices: Copper vs. optical for high-bandwidth systems |
5.5.7. | Moving from Cu to optical interconnects for a high-end AI system |
5.5.8. | Opportunities for swapping copper interconnects to optical connects |
5.5.9. | Nvidia's 3D integration of SoC, HBM, EIC and PIC on co-packaged substrates (TSV interposer) |
5.5.10. | AMD |
5.5.11. | Packaging insights for AMD CPUs |
5.5.12. | AMD chip semiconductor packaging roadmap |
5.5.13. | AMD EPYC server CPU benchmark |
5.5.14. | AMD - 3D V-Cache™ technology |
5.5.15. | AMD 3D V-Cache™: Transforming EPYC Processor Performance |
5.5.16. | AMD's semiconductor packaging choices for CPU |
5.5.17. | Packaging insights for AMD XPUs |
5.5.18. | 3D Hybrid bonding for AMD data center XPUs |
5.5.19. | AMD Instinct MI300 design concept |
5.5.20. | Benchmark: Instinct MI300A vs MI300X |
5.5.21. | AMD Instinct MI300: connectivity |
5.5.22. | Packaging structure for MI300 family |
5.5.23. | AMD patents GPU chiplet design for future graphics cards |
5.5.24. | AMD GPU memory choice for different applications |
5.5.25. | Addressing Power Consumption Challenges in Expanding Computing System |
5.5.26. | Xilinx FPGA packaging |
5.5.27. | Future system-in-package architecture |
5.5.28. | Intel |
5.5.29. | Intel products for HPC |
5.5.30. | Intel Xeon server processor Roadmap |
5.5.31. | Advanced semiconductor packaging for Intel Xeon processors - 1: Sapphire Rapids |
5.5.32. | Advanced semiconductor packaging for Intel Xeon processors - 2: Sierra Forest |
5.5.33. | Advanced semiconductor packaging for Intel Xeon processors - 3: Clearwater Forest |
5.5.34. | Advanced semiconductor packaging for Intel data center GPU: Ponte Vecchio (1) |
5.5.35. | Advanced semiconductor packaging for Intel data center GPU: Ponte Vecchio (2) |
5.5.36. | Advanced semiconductor packaging for Intel data center GPU: Ponte Vecchio (3) |
5.5.37. | Advanced semiconductor packaging for Intel data center GPU: Ponte Vecchio (4) |
5.5.38. | Intel FPGA packaging |
5.5.39. | Intel Lakefield packaging insights |
5.5.40. | Intel Lakefield packaging teardown |
5.5.41. | HPC: Summary |
5.5.42. | How future HPC platform would look like? |
5.5.43. | High-end commercial chips based on advanced semiconductor packaging technology (1) |
5.5.44. | High-end commercial chips based on advanced semiconductor packaging technology (2) |
5.6. | Automotive |
5.6.1. | Future ADAS/Autonomous driving systems: requirements, actions, and current challenges |
5.6.2. | Three transformational pillars in automotive electronics |
5.6.3. | Autonomous vehicles (AVs) - an overview |
5.6.4. | The Automation Levels in Detail |
5.6.5. | Typical Sensor Suite for Autonomous Cars |
5.6.6. | The Coming Flood of Data in Autonomous Vehicles |
5.6.7. | High demand for computing power in autonomous vehicles |
5.6.8. | Semiconductor content increase in AVs |
5.6.9. | Autonomous driving platform - processors and chip packaging |
5.6.10. | The primary differentiators for AVs will be chip design and software |
5.6.11. | Autonomous driving platform - processors and packaging roadmap (1) |
5.6.12. | Autonomous driving platform - processors and packaging roadmap (2) |
5.6.13. | Chip design and packaging choice for AV computing processers from different suppliers |
5.6.14. | NVIDIA's AV computing modules for L5 automotive |
5.6.15. | Self-driving computing module packaging challenges |
5.6.16. | Autonomous vertical integration |
5.6.17. | Automotive advance packaging - TSMC roadmap |
5.6.18. | Autonomous - packaging for sensors |
5.6.19. | Packaging for sensors in ADAS (1) |
5.6.20. | Packaging for sensors in ADAS (2) |
5.6.21. | Future radar packaging choices |
5.6.22. | Radar IC packages |
5.7. | Antenna in Package (AiP) for 5G and 6G |
5.7.1. | 5G&6G development and standardization roadmap |
5.7.2. | Mobile Telecommunication Spectrum and Network Deployment Strategy |
5.7.3. | 5G Commercial/Pre-commercial Services by Frequency |
5.7.4. | mmWave now and future |
5.7.5. | Global trends and new opportunities in 5G/6G |
5.7.6. | Overview of challenges, trends and innovations for high frequency communication (mmWave & THz) devices |
5.7.7. | Navigating Challenges and Solutions in mmWave phased array system |
5.7.8. | Integration requirement for phased array |
5.7.9. | Antenna packaging requirement |
5.7.10. | Benchmarking three antenna packaging technologies |
5.7.11. | The goal of next generation phased array |
5.7.12. | Overview of antenna packaging technologies vs operational frequency |
5.7.13. | Antenna-in-Package (AiP) vs Conventional Discrete Antenna Techniques in Wireless Systems |
5.7.14. | Key Design Considerations for AiP |
5.7.15. | Overview of low-loss materials for phased array substrate |
5.7.16. | Dk and Df comparison of material for phased array substrate |
5.7.17. | Other Material Requirement for Phased Array Substrate |
5.7.18. | Benchmark of substrate material properties for AiP |
5.7.19. | Benchmark of substrate technology for AiP |
5.7.20. | Trend: Choices of low-loss materials for AiP |
5.7.21. | Summary of substrate technology for AiP |
5.7.22. | Flip-chip vs Fan-out AiP: Benchmark |
5.7.23. | Choices of antenna packaging technologies for 6G |
5.7.24. | Antenna on chip (AoC) for 6G |
5.7.25. | Methods to improve antenna performance in AoC |
5.7.26. | Roadmap for antenna packaging development for 6G |
5.7.27. | Key trends for EMI shielding implementation |
5.7.28. | Choices of packaging technology for AiP |
5.7.29. | AiP for 5G mmWave infrastructure shipment forecast 2023-2034 |
5.7.30. | mmWave AiP ecosystem |
5.8. | 5G infrastructure |
5.8.1. | Different RAN architectures |
5.8.2. | Samsung's VRAN solution |
5.8.3. | Ericsson's cloud RAN solution |
5.8.4. | Open RAN deployment based on commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) hardware |
5.8.5. | Ultra-low latency networks require accelerator card |
5.8.6. | Open RAN infrastructure arrangement |
5.8.7. | Software defined radio (SDR) |
5.8.8. | Massive MIMO (mMIMO) |
5.8.9. | Block diagram of MIMO antenna array system |
5.8.10. | Integration of digital frontend with transceivers |
5.8.11. | Si design for Open RAN radio (Analog Devices case) |
5.8.12. | Marvell baseband Si for 5G Open RAN radio |
5.8.13. | Marvell SoC for 5G networks (2) |
5.8.14. | Xilinx's Si solution for 5G radio unit (1) |
5.8.15. | Xilinx's Si solution for 5G radio unit (2) |
5.8.16. | End-to-end 5G silicon solutions from intel |
5.8.17. | Intel's FPGA for 5G radio (1) |
5.8.18. | Intel's FPGA for 5G radio (2) |
5.8.19. | The intentions of 5G system vendors enter Si battleground |
5.8.20. | 5G base station types: macro cells and small cells |
5.9. | Consumer electronics |
5.9.1. | Advanced semiconductor packaging technologies for consumer electronics |
5.9.2. | Commercialized high density fan-out packaging solutions |
5.9.3. | Samsung's new galaxy smartwatch |
5.9.4. | Packaging choices for packaging application processor environments (APEs) in consumer electronics (1) |
5.9.5. | Packaging choices for packaging application processor environments (APEs) in consumer electronics (2) |
5.9.6. | 3D packaging for APE in consumer electronics |
5.9.7. | Future packaging trend for APE in consumer electronics |
5.9.8. | Apple's M1 ultra for workstations uses TSMC's fan-out technologies |
5.9.9. | AMD Stacked 3D V-Cache technology for consumer desktop CPU |
5.9.10. | Intel mobile SoC for laptops (Lakefield) advanced semiconductor packaging |
5.9.11. | Advanced semiconductor packaging in Intel's next generation CPU Meteor Lake |
6. | MONOLITHIC 3D IC |
6.1. | From 2D system to Monolithic 3D IC (M3D) |
6.2. | The driving force for Monolithic 3D IC |
6.3. | 3D Integration technology landscape |
6.4. | Significantly improved interconnect density with M3D (1) |
6.5. | Significantly improved interconnect density with M3D (2) |
6.6. | Heterogenous 3D vs Monolithic 3D |
6.7. | What are the challenges in making monolithic 3D IC |
6.8. | 2D Materials for upper layer transistor in Monolithic 3D IC |
6.9. | CNTs for transistors |
6.10. | CNFET research breakthrough (1) |
6.11. | CNFET research breakthrough (2) |
6.12. | CNFET case study |
6.13. | Solutions? |
6.14. | Future applications of M3D |
6.15. | Future outlook and key takeaway |
7. | MARKET FORECAST SUMMARY |
7.1. | Data center server unit forecast 2023-2035 (shipment) |
7.2. | Intel vs AMD for Server CPUs |
7.3. | Future packaging trend for chiplet server CPU |
7.4. | Total addressable data center CPU market forecast 2023-2035 (Shipment) |
7.5. | Data center CPU: advanced semiconductor packaging unit forecast 2025-2035 (shipment) |
7.6. | Accelerators in servers -1 |
7.7. | Accelerators in servers -2 |
7.8. | Server board layout - with accelerators (1) |
7.9. | Server board layout - with accelerators (2) |
7.10. | Total addressable data center accelerator market forecast 2023-2035 (Shipment) |
7.11. | Data center accelerator: advanced semiconductor packaging unit forecast 2023-2035 (shipment) |
7.12. | L4+ Autonomous vehicles sales forecast 2022-2045 |
7.13. | Total addressable ADAS processor & accelerator sales market for L4+ autonomous vehicles forecast 2022-2045 |
7.14. | 2.5D advanced semiconductor packaging unit sales for L4+ autonomous vehicles sales forecast 2022-2045 |
7.15. | 3D advanced semiconductor packaging unit sales for L4+ autonomous vehicles forecast 2022-2045 |
7.16. | Advanced semiconductor packaging unit forecast for APE in consumer electronics remarks |
7.17. | Unit sales forecast for smartphones/tablets/smartwatches/AR/VR/MR 2023-2035 |
7.18. | Advanced semiconductor packaging unit forecast for APE (application processor environment) in consumer electronics 2023-2035 (1) |
7.19. | Advanced semiconductor packaging unit forecast for APE (application processor environment) in consumer electronics 2023-2035 (2) |
7.20. | Global PC shipment forecast 2023-2035 |
7.21. | Advanced semiconductor packaging units in PC forecast 2023-2035 (1) |
7.22. | Advanced semiconductor packaging units in PC forecast 2023-2035 (2) |
7.23. | 5G radios by MIMO size unit forecast 2023-2035 (cumulative) |
7.23.1. | Estimating the total addressable market for advanced semiconductor packaging in 5G RAN infrastructure 2023-2035 (cumulative) |
7.23.2. | Advanced semiconductor packaging unit for 5G RAN networks 2023-2035 (cumulative) |
8. | COMPANY PROFILES |
8.1. | List of company profiles |