Ming-Chi Kuo on Intel's EMIB-T packaging for Google TPU v8e (Humufish)
https://x.com/mingchikuo
Some quick thoughts on Intel's EMIB-T packaging for the new 2H27 Google TPU (Humufish). Based on my industry checks:
【How to read EMIB-T's 90% yield?】
1. Given Intel's track record running EMIB in mass production, hitting 90% technology validation yield on EMIB-T (still under development) is a very positive but reasonable data point.
2. Intel benchmarks EMIB production/assembly yield against FCBGA. Industry FCBGA yield today is generally above 98%.
3. On yield, getting from 90% to 98% is harder than getting from project kickoff to 90%. And technology validation yield ≠ final production yield, especially with some Humufish specs still unfinalized. So long-term, I'm positive on Intel's advanced packaging story. Near to mid-term, I'm staying cautious on how they get there.
【From 90% to 98%. Looks like just a few points. Does Google care? Absolutely】
1. Google recently asked TSMC how much it could save by placing wafer orders for Humufish's main compute die (designed in-house by Google) directly, rather than routing them through MediaTek.
2. Google and MediaTek have run a semi-COT model since day one (8t). MediaTek's mark-up sits mostly on the parts it designs itself, so whether Google places the wafer orders for main compute die directly isn't a key swing factor for MediaTek's earnings trajectory.
3. But Google even probing whether it can squeeze out the pass-through mark-up on wafer orders tells you something: Google has shifted from easygoing buyer to hard-nosed on cost. The reason is simple: to take on Nvidia head-on, cost is Google's edge, which makes EMIB-T production yield Google's problem to solve. For context, TSMC's yield target on 5.5-reticle CoWoS in 2026 also starts at 98%.
【TSMC's position】
1. My understanding is TSMC is still working out how much advanced-node capacity to allocate to Humufish in 2H27, for two reasons: (1) it still wants the back-end packaging orders, though looks unlikely for now, and that's by design on Google's part; and (2) it's still gauging actual back-end output from EMIB-T, to avoid misallocating scarce advanced-node capacity.
2. Humufish's effective back-end output hinges on both EMIB-T and substrates, and both need to be tracked together.
3. On the Humufish semi-COT model, TSMC also prefers MediaTek to place the wafer orders for the main compute die. Beyond the close working relationship, the key point is MediaTek is TSMC's third-largest advanced-node customer in 2025. If TPU orders shift, MediaTek's scale makes it a natural buffer for TSMC to rebalance its wafer allocation mix.
8:49 AM · May 3, 2026,
156.7K Views
Some quick thoughts on Intel's EMIB-T packaging for the new 2H27 Google TPU (Humufish). Based on my industry checks:
【How to read EMIB-T's 90% yield?】
1. Given Intel's track record running EMIB in mass production, hitting 90% technology validation yield on EMIB-T (still under development) is a very positive but reasonable data point.
2. Intel benchmarks EMIB production/assembly yield against FCBGA. Industry FCBGA yield today is generally above 98%.
3. On yield, getting from 90% to 98% is harder than getting from project kickoff to 90%. And technology validation yield ≠ final production yield, especially with some Humufish specs still unfinalized. So long-term, I'm positive on Intel's advanced packaging story. Near to mid-term, I'm staying cautious on how they get there.
【From 90% to 98%. Looks like just a few points. Does Google care? Absolutely】
1. Google recently asked TSMC how much it could save by placing wafer orders for Humufish's main compute die (designed in-house by Google) directly, rather than routing them through MediaTek.
2. Google and MediaTek have run a semi-COT model since day one (8t). MediaTek's mark-up sits mostly on the parts it designs itself, so whether Google places the wafer orders for main compute die directly isn't a key swing factor for MediaTek's earnings trajectory.
3. But Google even probing whether it can squeeze out the pass-through mark-up on wafer orders tells you something: Google has shifted from easygoing buyer to hard-nosed on cost. The reason is simple: to take on Nvidia head-on, cost is Google's edge, which makes EMIB-T production yield Google's problem to solve. For context, TSMC's yield target on 5.5-reticle CoWoS in 2026 also starts at 98%.
【TSMC's position】
1. My understanding is TSMC is still working out how much advanced-node capacity to allocate to Humufish in 2H27, for two reasons: (1) it still wants the back-end packaging orders, though looks unlikely for now, and that's by design on Google's part; and (2) it's still gauging actual back-end output from EMIB-T, to avoid misallocating scarce advanced-node capacity.
2. Humufish's effective back-end output hinges on both EMIB-T and substrates, and both need to be tracked together.
3. On the Humufish semi-COT model, TSMC also prefers MediaTek to place the wafer orders for the main compute die. Beyond the close working relationship, the key point is MediaTek is TSMC's third-largest advanced-node customer in 2025. If TPU orders shift, MediaTek's scale makes it a natural buffer for TSMC to rebalance its wafer allocation mix.
8:49 AM · May 3, 2026,
156.7K Views