Build1 publisher3 min readPublished
Rising layer counts multiply ABF film demand faster than accelerator shipments
One Japanese supplier reportedly holds 95% or more of the build-up film under high-end packaging, and demand per accelerator is climbing with footprint and layer count, which is a tighter story than the published figures can price.
The Engineer · Build desk

What happened
- Substrate makers are adding build-up layers to route more signal and power connections, and each added layer needs another ABF layer, which extends manufacturing time.
- Growing the substrate footprint is producing warpage, yield problems and electrical losses inside the package, so the scaling problem is technical as well as a question of volume.
- Intel, Samsung and SK's Absolics are exploring glass-core substrates and other materials to get past the limits of organic ABF.
Compiled by The EngineerSomething wrong?How this is made
Why it matters
- exposure One supplier's film sits under the packaging of Intel, AMD and Nvidia at the same time, and the account names no second source for it, so a single interruption reaches all three programmes together.
- constraint Capacity planned in accelerators per year understates what a site actually draws, because film consumption climbs with layers and area on top of units.
- decision Buyers negotiating late-decade accelerator deliveries have a second set of questions to ask alongside wafer allocation: layer count, panel size and which substrate house holds the slot.
- contradiction The shortage is asserted qualitatively while the only hard numbers are a shipment estimate and a market share, which is not enough to rank substrates against wafer capacity as the binding limit.
The reason the film is unavoidable is geometric. Connection pads on a die sit micrometers apart, while the traces on a motherboard sit hundreds of micrometers to millimeters apart [2]. Something has to fan one pitch out into the other while distributing power and ground and holding the package rigid, and the default part that does that job is a glass-reinforced resin core with successive build-up layers of copper wiring and insulating film on top [3]. Practically every advanced logic and AI chip from Intel, AMD and Nvidia is built on one [9].
The demand figure that matters is units multiplied by build-up layers multiplied by substrate area, and all three terms are rising [18]. Tom's Hardware puts Nvidia's Blackwell shipments at an estimated 3.2 million packages through the end of 2025, every one of them on an ABF substrate [5]. Gigawatt-era sites are being specified at millions of accelerators each [6], which makes a single such site the same order of magnitude as the entire cumulative Blackwell package run to date [19]. On top of that, packages now carry compute, memory and support components together, so the X-Y footprint is growing [11], and layer counts are growing to route the extra signals and power, with each added layer requiring another ABF layer and more manufacturing time [12].
So nameplate capacity understates the real draw. Making the substrate bigger brings warpage, yield loss and electrical losses inside the part itself [13], so the ecosystem is solving two problems at once: build enough advanced substrates, and re-engineer them so they keep scaling without becoming unmanufacturable [14]. Ajinomoto and Ibiden have outlined plans to expand material and manufacturing capacity respectively [15], and Intel, Samsung and SK's Absolics are exploring glass-core substrates to get past the limits of organic ABF [16]. Exploring is the operative word.
The concentration claim is the strong part of this story. Each substrate maker, whether Unimicron, Ibiden, Kinsus, Shinko, Samsung Electromechanics or Nan Ya PCB, laminates its build-up layers using dielectric film from Japan's Ajinomoto, reported to hold 95% or more of the global market [7][8]. A company better known for food seasoning sits at the base of the stack.
The scheduling claim is the weak part. The available account says demand is now growing beyond what the supply chain can comfortably supply [10], and that is a qualitative statement. There are no substrate lead times, no allocation splits and no prices in it [20]. To conclude that substrates rather than wafer capacity set buildout dates, you would need substrate lead time to exceed accelerator lead time at a named customer, or substrate cost per package to move enough to show up in a quote, and neither figure is on the table [20].
What is on the table is a better question to ask a vendor. Layers per substrate, panel size and which substrate house is building it convert an accelerator order into film draw [18]; a unit count does not [12].
What to watch
- Quantified expansion from Ajinomoto or Ibiden, in film volume or panel-line start dates, that can be compared against accelerator output.
- Substrate lead times or per-package substrate prices surfacing in accelerator supply contracts rather than in roadmap talk.
- A glass-core substrate qualified into a shipping AI accelerator instead of a demonstration vehicle.