| 1. | EXECUTIVE SUMMARY |
| 1.1. | What does a modern high-performance AI data center look like? |
| 1.2. | Switches: Key Components in Modern Data Center |
| 1.3. | Advancements in Switch IC Bandwidth and the Need for Co-Packaged Optics (CPO) Technology |
| 1.4. | Overview of key challenges in data center architectures |
| 1.5. | Key trend of optical transceiver in high-end data center |
| 1.6. | Design decisions for CPO compared to Pluggables |
| 1.7. | What is Optical Engine (OE) |
| 1.8. | Heterogeneous Integration and Co-Packaged Optics (CPO) |
| 1.9. | Overview of interconnection technique in semiconductor packaging |
| 1.10. | Key CPO applications: network switch and computing optical I/O |
| 1.11. | EIC/PIC integration by advanced interconnect technique |
| 1.12. | 2D to 3D EIC/PIC integration options |
| 1.13. | Benchmark table of different packaging technologies for EIC/PIC |
| 1.14. | Examples of packaging a 3D optical engine with an IC |
| 1.15. | Three types of CPO + XPU/switch ASIC packaging structures |
| 1.16. | 3.2 Tb/s CPO module defined by the Optical Internetworking Forum (OIF) - 1 |
| 1.17. | Nvidia's 3D integration of SoC, HBM, EIC and PIC on co-packaged substrates (TSV interposer) |
| 1.18. | Benchmark of different laser integration technology |
| 1.19. | Challenges and Future Potential of CPO Technology |
| 1.20. | CPO Demonstration Products Benchmarked |
| 1.21. | Future AI Architecture predicted by IDTechEx |
| 1.22. | Optical I/O for AI interconnect CPO Forecast (Units Shipped) |
| 1.23. | Optical I/O for AI interconnect CPO Forecast (Revenue/Market Size) |
| 1.24. | CPO Network Switches (L2 Switches) for AI accelerators Forecast (Units Shipped) |
| 1.25. | CPO Network Switches (L2 Switches) for AI accelerators Forecast (Market Size and Revenue) |
| 1.26. | Total CPO Market |
| 1.27. | Total CPO unit shipped by different EIC/PIC integration technology (millions) |
| 1.28. | System integration of Network Switches (L2 Switches) for AI accelerators Forecast by packaging technologies (Unit shipped) |
| 1.29. | System integration of Optical I/O Forecast by packaging technologies (Units Shipped) |
| 2. | CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS FOR FUTURE AI SYSTEM |
| 2.1. | Introduction |
| 2.1.1. | The rise and the challenges of LLM |
| 2.1.2. | What does a modern high-performance AI data center look like? |
| 2.1.3. | Closer look into NVIDIA's state-of-the-art AI system |
| 2.1.4. | Switches: Key Components in Modern Data Center |
| 2.2. | Challenges in Network Switches interconnect for high-end data centers |
| 2.2.1. | Roadmap of interconnect technology for network switches in high-end data center |
| 2.2.2. | Serdes bottleneck in high-bandwidth systems |
| 2.2.3. | Solutions to Serdes bottlenecks in high-bandwidth systems |
| 2.2.4. | Pluggable optics - what are the bottlenecks? |
| 2.2.5. | On-Board Optics (OBO) |
| 2.2.6. | Co-Packaged Optics (CPO) |
| 2.2.7. | Transmission Losses in a Pluggable Optical Transceiver Connection |
| 2.2.8. | Pluggable optics vs CPO |
| 2.2.9. | Design decisions for CPO compared to Pluggables |
| 2.2.10. | Advancements in Switch IC Bandwidth and the Need for CPO Technology |
| 2.2.11. | L2 Frontside Network Architecture Diagram CPO versus non-CPO |
| 2.3. | Challenges in Compute Switches interconnect (i.e. Optical I/O) for high-end data centers |
| 2.3.1. | High performance connections are required for AI |
| 2.3.2. | Number of Cu wires in current AI system Interconnects |
| 2.3.3. | Limitations in current copper systems in AI |
| 2.3.4. | Nvidia's Connectivity Choices: Copper vs. Optical for High-Bandwidth Systems |
| 2.3.5. | Copper vs. Optical for High-Bandwidth Systems: Benchmark |
| 2.3.6. | Moving from Cu to Optical interconnects for high-end AI system |
| 2.3.7. | Current AI system Architecture |
| 2.3.8. | L1 Backside Compute Architecture with Cu systems |
| 2.3.9. | L1 Backside Compute Architecture with Optical Interconnect: Co-Packaged Optics (CPO) |
| 2.3.10. | Opportunities for swapping copper interconnects to optical connects: |
| 2.4. | Future AI system in high-end data center |
| 2.4.1. | Power efficiency comparison: CPO vs. pluggable optics vs. Copper Interconnects |
| 2.4.2. | Latency of 60cm Data Transmission Technology Benchmark |
| 2.4.3. | Future AI Architecture predicted by IDTechEx |
| 3. | INTRODUCTION TO CO-PACKAGED OPTICS (CPO) |
| 3.1. | What's covered in this chapter |
| 3.2. | PICs Key Concepts |
| 3.2.1. | What are Photonic Integrated Circuits (PICs)? |
| 3.2.2. | PICs vs Silicon Photonics - what are the differences |
| 3.2.3. | PIC Architecture |
| 3.2.4. | Advantages and Challenges of PIC |
| 3.3. | Optical Engine (OE) |
| 3.3.1. | What is Optical Engine |
| 3.3.2. | How an Optical Engine Works |
| 3.3.3. | Optical Power Supplies |
| 3.4. | Co-packaged Optics |
| 3.4.1. | Three key concepts in co-packaged optics (CPO) |
| 3.4.2. | Key technology building blocks for CPO |
| 3.4.3. | Benefits of CPO: Latency |
| 3.4.4. | Benefits of CPO: Power Consumption |
| 3.4.5. | Benefits of CPO: Data Rate |
| 3.4.6. | Overview of value proposition of CPO |
| 3.4.7. | Future challenges in CPO |
| 4. | PACKAGING FOR CO-PACKAGED OPTICS (CPO) |
| 4.1. | Introduction |
| 4.1.1. | Key components to be packaged in an optical transceiver |
| 4.1.2. | Heterogeneous Integration and Co-Packaged Photonics |
| 4.1.3. | CPO for network switch - packaging concept |
| 4.1.4. | Example: 1.6 Tbps Co-packaged optics for network switch |
| 4.1.5. | CPO as optical I/O for XPUs - packaging concept |
| 4.1.6. | CPO as optical I/O for XPUs - packaging concept (follow) |
| 4.1.7. | Example: CPO integration for compute silicon |
| 4.1.8. | Overview of CPO packaging technologies |
| 4.2. | Overview and development roadmap of 2.5D and 3D Advanced Semiconductor Packaging Technologies |
| 4.2.1. | Evolution roadmap of semiconductor packaging |
| 4.2.2. | Semiconductor packaging - an overview of technology |
| 4.2.3. | Key metrics for advanced semiconductor packaging performance |
| 4.2.4. | Overview of interconnection technique in semiconductor packaging |
| 4.2.5. | Overview of 2.5D packaging structure |
| 4.2.6. | Interconnection technique - Interposer |
| 4.2.7. | Passive vs Active Interposer |
| 4.2.8. | Interposer Structure: RDL & Through-Si-Via |
| 4.2.9. | 2.5D advanced semiconductor packaging technology portfolio |
| 4.3. | 2.5D Si-based Packaging technologies |
| 4.3.1. | 2.5D packaging that involves Si as interconnect |
| 4.3.2. | Through Si Via (TSV) - now and the future |
| 4.3.3. | Developing trend for 2.5D Si-based packaging |
| 4.3.4. | Si interposer vs Si bridge benchmark |
| 4.4. | 2.5D Organic-based Packaging technologies |
| 4.4.1. | 2.5D packaging - high density fan-out (FO) packaging |
| 4.4.2. | Redistribution Layer (RDL) |
| 4.4.3. | Electronic interconnects: SiO2 vs Organic dielectric |
| 4.4.4. | Two types of fan-out: Panel level |
| 4.4.5. | Two types of fan-out: Wafer level |
| 4.4.6. | Wafer level Fan-out vs Panel level Fan-out : The differences |
| 4.4.7. | Key trends in fan-out packaging |
| 4.4.8. | Challenges in future fan-out process |
| 4.5. | 2.5D Glass-based Packaging technologies |
| 4.5.1. | Roles of glass in semiconductor packaging |
| 4.5.2. | Glass core as interposer for advanced semiconductor packaging |
| 4.5.3. | Overcoming Limitations of Si interposers with Glass |
| 4.5.4. | Glass vs molding compound |
| 4.5.5. | Glass core (interposer) package - process flow |
| 4.5.6. | Challenges of glass packaging |
| 4.6. | 3D Advanced Semiconductor Packaging technologies |
| 4.6.1. | Evolution of bumping technologies |
| 4.6.2. | Challenges in scaling bumps |
| 4.6.3. | µ bump for advanced semiconductor packaging |
| 4.6.4. | Bumpless Cu-Cu hybrid bonding |
| 4.6.5. | Three ways of Cu-Cu hybrid bonding: benchmark |
| 4.6.6. | Challenges in Cu-Cu hybrid bonding manufacturing process |
| 4.7. | CPO packaging: EIC and PIC integration |
| 4.7.1. | EIC/PIC integration - by conventional interconnect technique |
| 4.7.2. | EIC/PIC integration by emerging interconnect technique |
| 4.7.3. | 2D to 3D EIC/PIC integration options |
| 4.7.4. | Benchmark table of different packaging technologies for EIC/PIC |
| 4.7.5. | Pros and Cons of 2D integration of EIC/PIC |
| 4.7.6. | Pros and Cons of 2.5D integration of EIC/PIC |
| 4.7.7. | Pros and Cons of 3D hybrid integration of EIC/PIC |
| 4.7.8. | Pros and Cons of 3D monolithic integration of EIC/PIC |
| 4.8. | TSV for EIC/PIC integration |
| 4.8.1. | TSV for EIC/PIC integration in CPO |
| 4.8.2. | Why using TSV for PIC and EIC integration |
| 4.8.3. | Cisco packaging architectures of optical engine over generations |
| 4.8.4. | Cisco: 2.5D Chip-on-Chip (CoC) Packaging Architecture for EIC/PIC integration |
| 4.8.5. | Cisco: 3D TSV for PIC/EIC integration |
| 4.8.6. | Key TSV Fabrication Steps and Challenges in CPO - 1 |
| 4.8.7. | Key TSV Fabrication Steps and Challenges in CPO - 2 |
| 4.8.8. | Packaging options for silicon photonics - w/ or w/o TSV? |
| 4.8.9. | Pros and Cons of 2.5D Si interposer for EIC/PIC integration |
| 4.9. | Fan-out for EIC/PIC integration |
| 4.9.1. | ASE's proposed fan-out solution for CPO packaging |
| 4.9.2. | FOPOP from ASE - process |
| 4.9.3. | Detailed analysis of FOPOP vs WB packaging for CPO |
| 4.9.4. | Optical Packaging Process Considerations for Silicon Photonics - ASE |
| 4.9.5. | SPIL's Fan-Out Embedded Bridge (FOEB) Structure for PIC/EIC integration in CPO |
| 4.9.6. | Process flow of integrating PIC and EIC in a FOEB structure |
| 4.9.7. | Process challenges in packaging OE |
| 4.9.8. | Rockley Photonics proposes FOWLP for CPO packaging structure |
| 4.9.9. | Rockley Photonics's FOWLP CPO packaging process flow - 1 |
| 4.9.10. | Rockley Photonics's FOWLP CPO packaging process flow - 2 |
| 4.9.11. | Challenges of using fan-out for EIC/PIC integration |
| 4.10. | Glass-based CPO Packaging technologies |
| 4.10.1. | Glass-based Co-packaged optics - Corning's vision |
| 4.10.2. | Glass-based Co-packaged optics - Packaging structure |
| 4.10.3. | Glass-based Co-packaged optics - process development |
| 4.10.4. | Corning's 102.4 Tb/s test vehicle |
| 4.11. | Hybrid bonding for EIC/PIC integration |
| 4.11.1. | TSMC's advanced semiconductor packaging technology portfolio |
| 4.11.2. | TSMC: Integrated HPC Technology Platform for AI |
| 4.11.3. | Optical Engine Roadmap from TSMC - 1 |
| 4.11.4. | Optical Engine Roadmap from TSMC - 2 |
| 4.11.5. | iOIS - Integrated Optical Interconnection System from TSMC |
| 4.11.6. | Combining EIC and PIC with 3D SoIC bond |
| 4.11.7. | TSMC 3D SoIC Technology |
| 4.11.8. | Roadmap of bond pitch scaling |
| 4.12. | System integration of OE and ASIC/XPU, etc |
| 4.12.1. | Co-packaging vs Co-packaged optics (CPO) |
| 4.12.2. | Three types of CPO + XPU/switch ASIC packaging structures |
| 4.12.3. | Examples of packaging an optical engine with an integrated circuit (IC) in a 2D or 2.5D configuration |
| 4.12.4. | OE integration with ASIC in a 2.5D configuration |
| 4.12.5. | Examples of packaging an optical engine with an integrated circuit (IC) in a 3D configuration |
| 4.12.6. | Future 3D-CPO structure |
| 4.12.7. | Nvidia's 3D integration of SoC, HBM, EIC and PIC on co-packaged substrates (TSV interposer) |
| 4.12.8. | Example of a 51.2 Tb/s switch module based on 3D integration of EIC/PIC |
| 4.12.9. | Process in fabrication of the 3D heterogeneous integration of EIC and PIC on a glass interposer |
| 4.12.10. | Example of a switch module based on 3D integration of EIC/PIC on glass interposer |
| 4.12.11. | Challenges and Future Potential of CPO Technology |
| 4.13. | Optical alignment and Laser integration |
| 4.13.1. | Grating vs. Edge Couplers: Challenges in High-Density Optical I/O for Silicon Photonics |
| 4.13.2. | Optical alignment challenges and solutions - 1 |
| 4.13.3. | Optical alignment challenges and solutions - 2 |
| 4.13.4. | Optical alignment challenges and solutions - 3 |
| 4.13.5. | Two alignment approaches |
| 4.13.6. | Reducing optical fiber packaging complexity |
| 4.13.7. | On-chip light source integration methods |
| 4.13.8. | External Lasers for CPO (1) |
| 4.13.9. | External Lasers for CPO (2) |
| 4.13.10. | Laser attach technology benchmark - 1 |
| 4.13.11. | Laser attach technology benchmark - 2 |
| 4.13.12. | Benchmark of different laser integration technology |
| 4.13.13. | Key technical challenge: the size mismatch between silicon waveguides and planar optical fibers |
| 4.13.14. | Case studies: polymer waveguide on a Silicon-photonics-embedded interposer for CPO |
| 4.13.15. | Processes overview for Silicon-photonics-embedded interposer for CPO |
| 4.13.16. | SHINKO organic substrate with polymer optical waveguides |
| 5. | KEW SWITCH COMPANY CPO DESIGN AND ROADMAP |
| 5.1. | 3.2 Tb/s CPO module defined by the Optical Internetworking Forum (OIF) - 1 |
| 5.2. | 3.2 Tb/s CPO module defined by the Optical Internetworking Forum (OIF) - 1 |
| 5.3. | CPO Demonstration Products Benchmarked |
| 5.4. | Cisco Co-Packaged Optics Demo |
| 5.5. | Cisco: CPO Power Efficiency |
| 5.6. | Cisco: External Lasers (ELFPP) |
| 5.7. | Broadcom |
| 5.8. | Broadcom Switch and Nvidia Switch compared |
| 5.9. | Broadcom's CPO development timeline |
| 5.10. | Broadcom's CPO portfolio |
| 5.11. | Intel Optical Compute Interconnect |
| 5.12. | Intel Optical Compute Interconnect (2) |
| 5.13. | Nvidia: Opportunities for Co-Packaged Optics |
| 5.14. | Nvidia: Challenges and Final Thoughts for Co-Packaged Optics |
| 5.15. | Ranovus products and progress |
| 5.16. | UALink |
| 5.17. | Ayer Labs TeraPHY |
| 6. | MARKET FORECASTS |
| 6.1. | Data Center Forecast Methodology |
| 6.2. | Global Data Center Population and AI Accelerator Unit Forecasts |
| 6.3. | Optical I/O for AI interconnect CPO Forecast (Units Shipped) |
| 6.4. | Optical I/O for AI interconnect CPO Forecast (Revenue/Market Size) |
| 6.5. | CPO Network Switches (L2 Switches) for AI accelerators Forecast (Units Shipped) |
| 6.6. | CPO Network Switches (L2 Switches) for AI accelerators Data Table (Units Shipped) |
| 6.7. | CPO Network Switches (L2 Switches) for AI accelerators Forecast (Market Size and Revenue) |
| 6.8. | Total CPO Market |
| 6.9. | Total CPO by different EIC/PIC integration technology (unit shipment, millions) |
| 6.10. | System integration of Network Switches (L2 Switches) for AI accelerators Forecast by packaging technologies (Unit shipped) |
| 6.11. | System integration of Optical I/O Forecast by packaging technologies (Units Shipped) |
| 6.12. | Table for CPO unit forecast by packaging technologies |
| 7. | COMPANY PROFILES |
| 7.1. | ACCRETECH (Grinding Tool) |
| 7.2. | AEPONYX |
| 7.3. | Amkor — Advanced Semiconductor Packaging |
| 7.4. | ASE — Advanced Semiconductor Packaging |
| 7.5. | Ayar Labs: AI Accelerator Interconnect |
| 7.6. | CEA-Leti (Advanced Semiconductor Packaging) |
| 7.7. | Coherent: Photonic Integrated Circuit-Based Transceivers |
| 7.8. | EFFECT Photonics |
| 7.9. | EVG (3D Hybrid Bonding Tool) |
| 7.10. | GlobalFoundries |
| 7.11. | HD Microsystems |
| 7.12. | Henkel (Semiconductor packaging, Adhesive Technologies division) |
| 7.13. | iPronics: Programmable Photonic Integrated Circuits |
| 7.14. | JCET Group |
| 7.15. | JSR Corporation |
| 7.16. | Lightelligence |
| 7.17. | Lightmatter |
| 7.18. | LioniX |
| 7.19. | LIPAC |
| 7.20. | LPKF |
| 7.21. | Mitsui Mining & Smelting (Advanced Semiconductor Packaging) |
| 7.22. | NanoWired |
| 7.23. | Resonac (RDL Insulation Layer) |
| 7.24. | Scintil Photonics |
| 7.25. | TOK |
| 7.26. | TSMC (Advanced Semiconductor Packaging) |
| 7.27. | Vitron (Through-Glass Via Manufacturing) — A LPKF Trademark |