"Binning" in electronics manufacture, Intel CPUs - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: TheAmmoniacal
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 05, 2016, 07:43:12 am
content: There's still a mainstream belief that a lot of electronics manufacture sorts by binning, be it performance tiers or tolerance values. But does anyone know exactly how widespread this is? (I believe Dave debunked that it occurred with the brand of resistors he used?)I've come across a few blog posts (and this video youtube.com/watch?v=8AQPIBfIqMk) claiming that Intel manufactures their microarchitecture family processors with the exact same die, and (with Skylake for example) bins them in tiers if i7, i5, i3, Pentium and Celeron based on how it performs in testing. And that high stability versions get a K etc. Low stability are underclocked and so on.Anyone know how much of this is true? How many different CPU brands/models are manufactured with the exact same die? Is it common to bin them based on testing or do they disable those parts on the die as part of the manufacturing to ensure meeting demand on those models?It looks like a tedious way to do it, and with a much lower manufacturing accuracy than I would expect from the likes of Intel. How can they rely on random manufacturing flaws for the numbers of CPUs they produce of the different models?

author: jeremy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 05, 2016, 07:56:42 am
content: I can only repeat what I have heard anecdotally but here goes anyway.Binning is much more common if the fab process is very new, or there is a particular part of the chip which is prone to failure. Toward the middle or end of the product lifecycle after the process has been improved, I've heard of many cases where the high spec parts even test exactly the same as the low spec ones. But the manufacturer just disables stuff by fuses or firmware.See the rigol ds1052 overclocking saga.Also, wide tolerance resistors are almost certainly binned, at least at some manufacturershttps://books.google.com.au/books?id=-sZEY3KZVmsC&pg=PA85&lpg=PA85&dq=resistor+bimodal+distribution&source=bl&ots=tMZHISzB4x&sig=lnM-vWzqe8N3WfJwRjtSLeuIxEI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiG4eikianLAhVGi5QKHaheCs0Q6AEIIzAD

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 05, 2016, 08:51:44 am
content: I doubt binning happens for high stability components because their manufacturing process/construction is usually different. If you look at cheap parts like 1% resistors their price has dropped so much that testing 1 resistor costs as much as an entire reel so I guess they test a few from each batch to check the manufacturing process parameters.And then there is also laser trimming for high accuracy devices where each device needs to be measured and adjusted.

author: elgonzo
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 05, 2016, 09:29:02 am
content: Of course binning makes sense with regard to semiconductor products manufactured as wafers.However, it only makes sense if you are going to market products (CPUs/GPUs/etc.) which have very similar hardware/functional capabilities.Different product models being based on the same die design allow the manufacturer to serve different market segments, while investing in the design process only once and requiring only one production process (i.e. fab setup, wafer testing regimen, etc.) for those models. Ongoing adjustments and improvements of the die design ("stepping") will henceforth benefit not only a single model, but a all of those models sharing the same die design at the same time.After a fab has been setup for the production of a new die design, the yield rate of early production runs (not only) of the higher-spec model is lower than what one can expect a few years later when the parameters of the production process have been further fine-tuned. Thus, binning not only is a means to serve different market segments, it also allows a manufacturer to keep the value per wafer as high as possible.Since die space is a major factor with regard to cost of semiconductor products such as CPUs/GPUs, binning only makes sense where you can economically share a die design across different CPU/GPU models. Hence, do not expect a 6-core i7 to be based on the same die design as a 2-core i3 with much smaller caches. You would be hard pressed to find an 2-core i3 who has the same die as an 6-core i7 while essentially wasting most of its die space for unused cache and cores. That is not say that such a thing could not have happened in the past or will never happen in the future. If during production testing (which will happen before marketing will announce any new CPU models) it becomes clear that (initial) yield rates for high-spec models will be particularly low, then it might entice a manufacturer to bin dies not meeting high-spec specifications as very low-spec models. This could lead to the introduction of a rather low-spec model into the market which essentially is having the same large die as a high-spec model. Also, don't forget that the decision of whether a manufacturer will go forth with a very low-yield production of high-spec parts is a business decision; depending on solvency, current and projected future market situation, gross margin estimations as well as other business-related factors.Now, i can't tell you which particular CPU models would share the same die design and thus would have been binned. As a rule of thumb, if there are feature differences between models that would also indicate significantly different requirements for die space (such as different number of cores, different cache sizes, absence/presence of integrated graphics), expect the models to have different die designs. But as outlined in the last paragraph, you cannot be sure for certain. (If you want to know, i would suggest to search the internet for die photos of CPUs you are interested in and compare them.)Electronic components which are not made in numbers on a single waver might not benefit from binning as much. It could still make sense to bin to account for production tolerances (like resistors, for example), but usually you have to meet certain given production targets without regard to the daily ups and downs within the range of allowable production tolerances. If you have to deliver 10 million 5% resistors, but all your production lines spit out resistors which all meet 1%, you are not wasting time and money to screw around with your production. You will simply declare 10 million of your resistors to be 5% even if your resistor fab happily spits out 1% resistors. (Now, if you can saturate your production facilities by just filling orders of 1% resistors you don't have to worry about those 5% resistor deals.)

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 05, 2016, 10:04:25 am
content: Quote from: nctnico on March 05, 2016, 08:51:44 amRegardless if binning happens or not, every single cheapest part get tested. Without them being tested, it would be almost impossible to assemble any complicated device without faulty parts getting in them.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 05, 2016, 10:16:39 am
content: watch about testing at 5:35

author: elgonzo
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 05, 2016, 10:27:57 am
content: Nice video! It never ceases to amaze me seeing the number and (more importantly) the size of the machines required to make chicken food