back

by Panoramix·1y ago·view on hn ↗
Weird article. The energy consumption of an EUV machine is about 1MW, that's why it's interesting to have an efficient alternative, not the actual useful power of the source.
3 comments
That's why they're working on FEL light sources.
That sounds like a lot, but how many of those machines does an average fab have? Seriously I have no idea.
I have visited 3 fabs, only one machine in each. Anecdotal info…
In that case 1MW doesn't sound like a whole lot to be worth optimizing for.
According to Claude, that's about $1M/yr of electricity, assuming 24x7 usage.

I assume the real saving is on the cost of the machine in the first place, and again relying on my AI buddy Claude:

Let me break down the costs of both Nanoimprint Lithography (NIL) and Extreme Ultraviolet (EUV) lithography machines:

NIL Machine Cost:

Basic NIL systems: $1-3 million Advanced NIL systems (like those from Canon/Molecular Imprints): $10-15 million

EUV Machine Cost:

Current ASML EUV systems (like the NXE:3400C): Approximately $150-200 million per unit Latest generation ASML EUV systems (NXE:3600D): Over $300 million per unit Installation and support infrastructure can add $30-50 million

**

So, looks like $200M+ saving going with NIL vs EUV.

The driving CO2 amplifier should be already beyond that figure alone