3D/2.5D Stacked IC Cost Modeling and Test Flow Selection

被引:0
|
作者
Hamdioui, Said [1 ]
机构
[1] Delft Univ Technol, Comp Engn Lab, NL-2628 CD Delft, Netherlands
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
The industry is preparing itself and putting tremendous effort in place to bring through silicon via (TSV) based 2.5D and 3D-SIC technology closer to market. Such emerging technologies promise major advantages such as increased electrical performance, reduced power consumption due to shortened interconnects, heterogeneous integration, reduced form factor, etc. One of the major challenges that has to be solved before having a successful commercialization of such technologies is overall cost control and optimization. Semiconductor manufacturing is a complex process and consists of many high-precision steps; hence, it is a defect-prone process. Consequently, and as it is the case for any IC, TSV-based 2.5D and 3D-SICs must be tested in order to guarantee the outgoing product quality and reliability. For TSV-based ICs, testing is even more critical as these devices typically contain complex die designs in advanced technology nodes. Moreover, inherent to their manufacturing process, these devices provide several test moments such as pre-bond (before stacking), mid-bond (on a partial stack), post-bond (on a completed stack), and final testing (on a packaged device). This results into a large space of test flows; each with its own cost. The test flow needs to be optimized based on yield and cost parameters of an individual product and that is a complex optimization problem. In addition, different test flows, executed after manufacturing, may require different design-for-test features, which need to be incorporated in the various dies during their early design stages. This talk discusses 2.5 and 3D-SIC cost modelling and presents 3D-COSTAR to optimize test flows of 2.5D and 3D-SICs. 3D-COSTAR uses input parameters that cover the entire 2.5D-/3D-SIC production flow: 1) design; 2) manufacturing; 3) test; 4) packaging; and 5) logistics. It is aware of the stack build-up (2.5D versus 3D, multiple towers; face-to-face or face-to-back) and stacking process (die-to-die, die-to-wafer, or wafer-to-wafer). The tool produces three key analysis parameters: 1) product quality, expressed as defect level (test escape rate) in DPPM (defective parts per million); 2) overall stack cost; and 3) breakdown per cost type. In addition, the talk provides many cases studies analyses and reports about three case studies with respect to 2.5D and 3D-SIC test cost optimization; these are: (a) the impact of the fault coverage of the interposer pre-bond test on the overall cost, (b) whether it is more advantageous to perform pre-bond testing for the active dies using dedicated probe pads or through micro-bumps, and (c) the impact of mid-bond testing and logistics on the overall cost.
引用
收藏
页数:1
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] Factors in the Selection of Temporary Wafer Handlers for 3D/2.5D Integration
    Dang, Bing
    Webb, Bucknell
    Tsang, Cornelia
    Andry, Paul
    Knickerbocker, John
    2014 IEEE 64TH ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS AND TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE (ECTC), 2014, : 576 - 581
  • [12] Turtle Base with Fin Perforated Heat Exchangers for the 2.5D and 3D IC Structures
    Patil, Chandrashekhar. V.
    Suma, M. S.
    2017 12TH INTERNATIONAL MICROSYSTEMS, PACKAGING, ASSEMBLY AND CIRCUITS TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE (IMPACT), 2017, : 97 - 101
  • [13] Improving The Wafer Thinning Flow Robustness For 2.5D & 3D Applications
    Jedidi, Nader
    Kennes, Koen
    Phommahaxay, Alain
    Guerrero, Alice
    Beyer, Gerald
    Beyne, Eric
    2024 IEEE 10TH ELECTRONICS SYSTEM-INTEGRATION TECHNOLOGY CONFERENCE, ESTC 2024, 2024,
  • [14] Development of High Modulus Temporary Bonding Material for 2.5D/3D IC Integration
    Li, Kang
    Huang, Mingqi
    Zhang, Jia
    Liu, Yong
    Liu, Bo
    Li, Jiayun
    Yang, Jinchan
    Liu, Qiang
    Zhang, Guoping
    2024 25TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON ELECTRONIC PACKAGING TECHNOLOGY, ICEPT, 2024,
  • [15] Assesment of CPI stress impact on IC reliability and performance in 2.5D/3D packages
    Kteyan, A.
    Hovsepyan, H.
    Choy, J. -H.
    Sukharev, V.
    2019 IEEE INTERNATIONAL RELIABILITY PHYSICS SYMPOSIUM (IRPS), 2019,
  • [16] Material Technology for 2.5D/3D Package
    Mitsukura, Kazuyuki
    Makino, Tatsuya
    Hatakeyama, Keiichi
    Rebibis, Kenneth June
    Wang, Teng
    Capuz, Giovanni
    Duval, Fabrice
    Detalle, Mikael
    Miller, Andy
    Beyne, Eric
    IEEE CPMT SYMPOSIUM JAPAN 2015, (ICSJ 2015), 2015, : 101 - 104
  • [17] Skeletonization of 3D Images using 2.5D and 3D Algorithms
    Khan, Mohd. Sherfuddin
    Mankar, Vijay H.
    Prashanthi, G.
    Sathya, G.
    2015 1ST INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON NEXT GENERATION COMPUTING TECHNOLOGIES (NGCT), 2015, : 971 - 975
  • [18] Test-Cost Optimization and Test-Flow Selection for 3D-Stacked ICs
    Agrawal, Mukesh
    Chakrabarty, Krishnendu
    2013 IEEE 31ST VLSI TEST SYMPOSIUM (VTS), 2013,
  • [19] 3D and 2.5D AGLID EMS stirring modeling in the cylindrical coordinate system
    Xie, G. Q.
    Li, J. H.
    Li, J.
    Xie, F.
    PIERS 2006 Cambridge: Progress in Electromagnetics Research Symposium, Proceedings, 2006, : 505 - 509
  • [20] Combined 3D and 2.5D modeling of the floating zone process with Comsol Multiphysics
    Wuenscher, Michael
    Menzel, Robert
    Riemann, Helge
    Luedge, Anke
    JOURNAL OF CRYSTAL GROWTH, 2014, 385 : 100 - 105