跳过正文

@NuttyCLD:英特尔的先进封装反攻

目录

摘录
#

为什么 Intel 这样一家晶圆代工厂,会聘请 SK 海力士这类存储公司的一名前 CEO?

目的不是进军 HBM 业务。李锡熙直接向陈立武汇报,负责先进封装、系统整合,以及后段工艺与制造。这里有一个词尤其值得注意:先进封装

如果一直关注 Intel,你可能记得 EMIB 与 CoWoS 的竞争。EMIB(嵌入式多芯片互连桥)不采用 CoWoS 所需的整片硅中介层,而是只在两颗芯片需要互连的位置嵌入一小块硅桥。

第一回合由 CoWoS 获胜。Nvidia 和 AMD 的旗舰 GPU 需要最高带宽和最低延迟;受限于桥接面积和布线密度,EMIB 难以匹敌,因而没能成为主流方案。之后,EMIB 主要用于 Intel 自家的 CPU。这项技术本身没有失败,只是在成为 GPU 标准的竞争中失利。

但局面已经改变。

2026 年的瓶颈不在晶圆,而在封装。CoWoS 产能紧缺,而且整片大型中介层使其成本高昂。EMIB 正好切入这个缺口:只在需要之处放置硅桥,封装更便宜,摆脱光罩尺寸限制,也更适合大型多芯片设计。Google 正在为 2027 年的 TPU v9 评估 EMIB,Meta 也在考虑将其用于 MTIA。定制 ASIC 与推理加速器的爆发,正是 EMIB 的舞台。

短期内,Intel 无法在先进制程节点上击败 TSMC;但封装是一个更年轻、尚未完全固化的层级,而且也是 Intel 真正擅长的领域。若 Intel 有机会在某条战线冲击 TSMC,那会是封装而不是制程节点。

从这个角度看,聘请 SK 海力士前 CEO 是对准 TSMC 的挑战。TSMC 掌握 GPU 与 HBM 整合的核心能力;AI 封装最困难的部分,是 HBM 整合及其高良率量产,而李锡熙正是在 HBM 时代完成过这件事的人。将封装拆为直接向 CEO 汇报的独立事业部,这份组织图本身就是意图声明。

当然,Nvidia 和 AMD 目前被 CoWoS 锁定的量不会一夜之间转移。但方向很清楚:让封装成为独立的竞争武器。

换句话说,TSMC 真正的护城河不只是先进节点,而是“节点加 CoWoS”的组合:AI 加速器及其 HBM 都由同一家公司交付。Intel 下一代封装想做的,是拆开这个组合。TSMC 制造基底芯片,SK 海力士提供 DRAM,逻辑芯片来自其他厂商;无论各部分在哪里生产,最终由 Intel 完成整合。这就是目标。

EMIB 与 CoWoS 封装结构对比
图 1:CoWoS 使用覆盖所有芯片的完整硅中介层;EMIB 只在连接处嵌入小型硅桥。

原文(en)
#

Why would Intel, a foundry, hire the former CEO of a memory company like SK Hynix?

Not to break into the HBM business. Seok-hee Lee reports directly to Lip-Bu Tan, overseeing advanced packaging, system integration, and back-end process and manufacturing. One phrase deserves your attention: advanced packaging.

If you’ve followed Intel for a while, you’ll remember the EMIB-versus-CoWoS war. EMIB (Embedded Multi-die Interconnect Bridge) skips the full silicon interposer that CoWoS lays down, and instead buries a small silicon bridge only where two dies need to connect.

Round one went to CoWoS. Flagship GPUs from Nvidia and AMD wanted maximum bandwidth and minimum latency, and EMIB, limited by the bridge’s area and routing density, couldn’t keep up. It lost the socket. After that, EMIB lived mostly inside Intel’s own CPUs. The technology didn’t fail. It lost the fight to become the GPU standard.

Then the game changed.

In 2026, the bottleneck isn’t the wafer. It’s the package. CoWoS is capacity-short and, thanks to that large interposer, expensive. EMIB walks straight into the gap. Put the bridge only where you need it, and you get a cheaper package, freedom from reticle-size limits, and an edge on large multi-die designs. Google is evaluating EMIB for its 2027 TPU v9, and Meta is weighing it for MTIA. The explosion of custom ASICs and inference accelerators is EMIB’s stage.

Intel won’t beat TSMC at the leading node anytime soon. But packaging is a younger layer, less locked in, and above all, something Intel is genuinely good at. If there’s a front where Intel can land a blow on TSMC, it’s packaging, not the node.

In that light, hiring SK Hynix’s former CEO reads as a challenge aimed squarely at TSMC, which holds the heart of GPU-plus-HBM integration. The hardest part of AI packaging is HBM integration and mass-producing it at high yield, and Lee is the man who pulled exactly that off in the HBM era. Spin packaging out as its own business unit reporting straight to the CEO, and the org chart becomes the statement of intent.

Of course, the CoWoS-locked volume at Nvidia and AMD won’t move overnight. But the direction is unmistakable: make packaging a standalone weapon.

So here’s the picture. TSMC’s real moat isn’t the leading node alone. It’s the node-plus-CoWoS bundle: the AI accelerator and its HBM coming from a single house. What Intel’s next-generation packaging is after is breaking that bundle apart. TSMC’s base die, SK Hynix’s DRAM, someone else’s logic. Wherever each piece is made, Intel does the final integration. That’s the goal.

EMIB vs CoWoS
Figure 1: CoWoS uses a full silicon interposer under all dies; EMIB embeds a small bridge only at the connection.

这里还没有任何文章可以列出。