Adv Packaging
Comparison Matrix
Advanced semiconductor packaging technologies differ in approach, performance, cost, and target applications. This matrix compares the leading platforms, providing a scannable view for engineers, analysts, and decision-makers.
| Packaging Type | Provider(s) | Integration Method | Performance | Cost | Applications | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CoWoS (Chip-on-Wafer-on-Substrate) | TSMC | 2.5D with large silicon interposer + TSVs | Extreme bandwidth, multi-HBM integration | Very high | AI GPUs, HPC, datacenter ASICs | Mass production (NVIDIA, AMD) |
| InFO (Integrated Fan-Out) | TSMC | Fan-out wafer-level packaging with RDL | High density, thin profile | Medium | Mobile SoCs, consumer electronics | High-volume production (Apple A/M chips) |
| Foveros | Intel | 3D stacking with TSVs and microbumps | High integration, flexible logic-on-logic | High | CPUs, AI accelerators | Ramping in Intel products |
| EMIB (Embedded Multi-Die Interconnect Bridge) | Intel | Small embedded silicon bridges in organic substrate | Localized high-density links | Medium | FPGAs, GPUs, networking ASICs | Commercial deployments |
| I-Cube | Samsung | 2.5D silicon interposer, logic + HBM | Comparable to CoWoS, scalable up to 8 HBMs | High | AI accelerators, HPC | Growing adoption |
| FO-WLP (Fan-Out Wafer-Level Packaging) | TSMC, ASE, Amkor | Reconstituted wafer + RDL redistribution | Thin, moderate density | Low–Medium | Mobile, IoT, automotive | Mainstream |
| SiP (System-in-Package) | Apple, ASE, Amkor, Qualcomm | Heterogeneous dies + passives in one package | System-level integration | Variable | Mobile, IoT, wearables, automotive | High-volume in consumer devices |
| 2.5D Interposer | TSMC, Samsung, Intel | Side-by-side dies on interposer substrate | High bandwidth, heterogeneous dies | High | GPUs, CPUs, networking | Mature technology |
| 3D IC / Hybrid Bonding | TSMC (SoIC), Intel (Foveros Direct), Samsung (X-Cube) | Vertical die stacking with TSVs / Cu-Cu bonding | Highest density, lowest latency | Very high | AI, HPC, advanced mobile | Early adoption, growing |
Key Takeaways
- 2.5D vs 3D: 2.5D interposers remain dominant for GPUs and AI accelerators today, while 3D IC and hybrid bonding are the long-term future.
- Fan-Out vs Interposer: FO-WLP is cost-efficient for consumer and IoT, while interposers target high-performance markets.
- SiP: Best suited for system miniaturization (mobile, wearables, IoT), rather than HPC.
- Vendor Landscape: TSMC leads in CoWoS/InFO, Intel in Foveros/EMIB, Samsung in I-Cube/X-Cube; OSATs dominate FO-WLP and SiP.