三星工艺坏了苹果A9处理器的名声？

We would question why Apple would even take the risk of using two different parts in the same phone....its just begging for comparison & trouble. Just use one part in the 6S and the other part in the 6S plus so you can't compare them. Maybe Apple was forced into this position due to availability issues.

In too much of a rush?
We had pointed out almost a year ago that we were surprised that Samsung would be able to get the 14nm part out in time for the 6S launch. Early yields were low and Samsung would have to ramp faster then ever before to make it in time. Maybe it was just too fast a ramp and the part and the process was never fully perfected leading to the power issues.?..

Intel's schadenfreude...
If this turns out to be true and a significant issue we will likely be able to hear the laughter in the halls of Intel all the way in New York (Intel had their own mathematically challenged processor many years ago). There has obviously been concern over Samsung and TSMC catching up to Intel....well maybe this could potentially prove at least Sasmung moved too fast and took too many risks versus Intels more cautious slowing of their tick tock cadence.

Speaking of Intel, we are pleased with the performance of the stock, nicely and steadily up well over 10% since we turned positive on it a few weeks ago...looking better every day

Leaky faucets and transistors...
Transistors are like faucets turning on and off the flow of electrons or water, however transistors never fully turn off and tend to "leak" a little. This "leakage" is the primary culprit of power consumption in semiconductor devices.

Leakage in transistors is due to a multitude of factors, many of which are interrelated. Transistor design is a big one, especially as the industry has recently switched from "planar" to "FinFET" transistors (which Intel pioneered). Materials and the processing of those materials by semiconductor equipment tools is very critical. Many different tools and materials impact leakage current.

Though the logic design of Samsung and TSMC's A9 is the same, the manufacturing process "flow" is quite different, using different sets of tools and materials and different steps in different sequences. TSMC has strongly made the claim that their 16nm process is superior to competitive offerings in terms of leakage/power consumption.

Samsung is 14nm while TSMC is 16nm...
Smaller is usually better in the semiconductor industry but everyone's measure is not quite the same. Samsungs A9 uses a "14nm" process which results in a smaller die size (chip size), while TSMC uses a 16nm process that results in a larger chip which is usually associated with higher power consumption, but not this time around, making the potential difference even more intriguing.

If Samsungs 14nm process proves to be inferior to TSMC's 16nm process that will be a boon and huge win for TSMC and a huge loss for Samsung on the foundry side (aside from the obvious Apple problems). It could be a huge torpedo in the side of Samsungs Semiconductor business which has been their primary driver of profitability.

What about the equipment companies?
We can already hear the equipment companies taking credit for their equipment making the difference at TSMC and Samsung. If its does turn out to be equipment specific it would obviously have huge impact (Cue Art Z and UTEK) . We would imagine this has to be positive for process control companies like KLAC and smaller cousins Hermes, RTEC, NANO and NOVA etc;. Everyone will clamor to find out the root cause.

This could turn out