Qwertious 2 days ago

You need a rectilinear polygon that tessellates, and has the fewest sides possible to minimize the number of cuts necessary. And it would probably help the cutting if the shape is entirely convex, so that cuts can overshoot a bit without damaging anything.

That suggests a rectangle is the only possible shape.

  • timerol 2 days ago

    Why does it need to tessellate if there's only one chip per wafer?

nine_k 3 days ago

Rather I wonder why do they even need to cut the extra space, instead of putting something there. I suppose that the structure of the device is highly rectangular from the logical PoV, so there's nothing useful to put there. I suspect smaller unrelated chips can be produced on these areas along the way.

guyzero 3 days ago

I've never cut a wafer, but I assume cutting is hard and single straight lines are the easiest.

  • sroussey 3 days ago

    I wonder if you could… just not cut the wafer at all??

    • ryao 3 days ago

      I suspect this would cause alignment issues since you could literally rotate it into the wrong position when doing soldering. That said, perhaps they could get away with cutting less and using more.

      • CorrectHorseBat 2 days ago

        They already have a notch or flat for alignment, which is much more critical during the lithography process than during soldering.

      • Dylan16807 3 days ago

        If you want to have nice straight edges to clamp into place, then you only need to shave off four slivers. You can lose a couple percent instead of more than a third.

    • daedrdev 3 days ago

      That's the idea in the article. Just one big chip. But the reason why it's normally done is that there is a pretty high defect rate, so cutting if every wafer has 1-2 defects you still get (X-1.5) devices per wafer. In the article thy go into how they avoid this problem (I think its better fault tolerance, at a cost)

      • gpm 3 days ago

        The article shows them using a single maximally sized square portion of a circular wafer.

        I think the proposal you're responding to is "just use the whole circular wafer without cutting out a square".

    • axus 3 days ago

      Might be jumping in without reading, but the chips you cut out of the wafer have to be delivered to physically different locations.

      • ajb 3 days ago

        Normally yes. But they're using a whole wafer for a single chip! So it's actually a good idea.

        I guess the issue is how do you design your routing fabric to work in the edge regions.

        Actually I wonder how they are exposing this wafer. Normal chips are exposed in a rectangular batch called a reticle. The reticle mask has repeated patterns across it, and it is then exposed repeatedly across the wafer. So either they have to make a reticle mask the full size of the wafer, which sounds expensive, or they somehow have to precisely align reticle exposures so that the joined edges form valid circuits.

yannyu 3 days ago

The cost driver for fabbing out wafers is the number of layers and the number of usable devices per wafer. Higher layer count increases cost and tends to decrease yield, and more robust designs with higher yields increase usable devices per wafer. If circles or other shapes could help with either of those, they would likely be used. Generally the end goal is to have the most usable devices per wafer, so they'll be packed as tightly as possible on the wafer so as to have the highest potential output.

  • Scaevolus 3 days ago

    Right, but they're making just one usable device per wafer already.