editor's blog
Subscribe Now

Going Expensive to Reduce Interposer Cost

Imec has been  working 2,5D IC issues with a particular focus on optimizing costs and, in particular, test yields. Yields can take what might have been straightforward-looking cost numbers and make things not so clear.

In their work on interposers, Eric Beyne took a look at three different ways of routing the signals from a wide-I/O memory. These puppies have lots of connections – like, 1200 per chip. He explored three different ways of implementing the interposer to find out which had the best cost outlook. The idea was to connect two such interfaces, with four banks of 128 I/Os each. Each channel had 6 rows of 50 microbumps. Microbump pitch along a row was 40 µm; along a column it was 50 µm. The two simply needed to talk to each other on the interposer.

The cheapest, most traditional approach is to use PCB (or PWB) technology. An aggressive version would have 20-µm pitch and 15-µm vias. This approach resulted in an 8-layer board; you can see the layout below – lots of routing all over the place. Wire lengths were, on average, 180% of the die spacing.

 

Laminate.png

 

Next was a semi-additive copper process – more aggressive dimensions and more expensive. Line pitch was 10 µm; vias were 7 µm. the tighter routing allowed connectivity with only 4 layers, and the average wire length was 166% of the die spacing. You can see the slightly less colorful result below.

 

RDL.png

 

Finally, they took an expensive approach: damascene metal lines. Moving from the PCB fab to the silicon fab. But this got them down to 2-µm pitch with 1-µm vias, and that was enough to run wires straight across on 2 layers with no extra routing. In other words, wire lengths were equal to the die spacing. You can see this on the following picture.

 

Damascene.png

 

So what happens to the overall cost? The last one is nice, but expensive to build. And here is where yield comes in. Because the “most expensive” option uses only two layers, it has the best yield. And that yield more than compensates for the expensive processing, yielding the cheapest option.

 

They didn’t give out specific cost numbers (they typically reserve those for their participants), but the net result is that they believe the damascene approach to be the most effective.

 

 

 

Images courtesy Imec.

Leave a Reply

featured blogs
Mar 20, 2026
From machines that see and think, to systems that act, and the humans that nudge them along....

featured chalk talk

Nexperia GaN Power Proliferating in All Things Motor Control/Drive
Sponsored by Mouser Electronics and Nexperia
In this episode of Chalk Talk, Art Gonsky from Nexperia and Amelia Dalton discuss the biggest challenges of electric motors and controllers and how GaN power solutions can help solve these issues. They  also investigate how silicon, silicon carbide and GaN power solutions compare and how Nexperia and NXP technologies can get your next motor control design up and running in no time!     
Mar 25, 2026
701 views