Pricing for these sort of niche low volume products is guided much more by what the market tolerates paying rather than the production and development costs. A large number of these types of chip never recover their R&D spends.
I would personally estimate around 30 - 50% of that figure. Whatever the number is, it's really funny money in a company such as ADI which sells a large chip catalog. Most of the modules in that chip can be reused in others, and many of them would themselves be reuses of modules from other chips, perhaps with some modifications. So the total R&D cost would in fact be spread amongst many projects and it would be pretty difficult to nail down exactly how much is any one project's share.
You can also often get great pricing for low/medium volume orders if you have built up a history so I've had situations where I had to design a significantly more complex board with a microprocessor that normally cost 10-20 times more than the CPU I would have chosen (from another vendor). The client's supplier for the other most expensive part on the board had too much inventory of a soon to be discontinued processor (that was pin compatible with a newer one, also very expensive) and the account manager's boss was willing to sell us everything we needed at an 80% discount off high volume pricing with pricing guarantees on the newer parts for several years, all to meet some regional sales quota.
As another example, microprocessors often have arduous power up requirements where different voltages have to be supplied in a specific sequence within annoyingly specific timing tolerances. In a project using Marvell microprocessors, it was much faster to just use Marvell's power chips and existing reference design than to waste precious time on modifying designs for cheaper chips from other vendors. The power parts cost five times as much as they would had I chosen my favorite vendor but because the board was a mixed signal design it was extremely expensive to make changes and test prototypes.
A vast catalog of parts is an especially powerful market force if you are a company like TI that has a well developed software tool like WEBENCH which can spit out dynamic reference designs for most of their power chips. Unless I have an existing reference design from a vendor of a major part (like the CPU above), I usually go straight to TI's tool to design any power supplies I need so I can focus on the meat of the PCB. If TI also has parts that do something else I need on the board I will often just choose them instead of researching other vendors (unless it's a really expensive component) and that compounds as I make more and more PCBs, each time becoming more comfortable with TI parts at the expense of others.
Oddly some of the same stuff happens with drugs! https://tonic.vice.com/en_us/article/pg7ez9/pharma-reps-are-...
I would love to know how much DJI was paying for that chip, especially after they went to the effort or replacing it with an in-house one (no name Chinese startup) in more recent batches.
They have been surgically copying/reimplementing advanced technology for over 10 years now. While its still mainly for internal consumption (cars, electronics), western suppliers are steadily pushed out of more and more niches, and some products do get exported (LCD panels for example).
Either way, the drug comparison is apt. The chip/pill is a tiny thing with negligible marginal cost. The plant costs billions. Pricing seems arbitrary, but these huge expenses do need to be recouped somehow.
If anything, the Fab costs should be included in the cost-per-wafer.
And, again, if a project produces more chips, then more of the fab production costs will be amortized across that project. The definition of Non-Recurring Engineering costs are that they are fixed and don't increase as the unit volume goes up: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-recurring_engineering
The way the fab could be considered NRE is if the fab were built only for this chip. (Or if a fixed percent of it was). In advance.
Also, cocaine isn’t usually sold in 2-4g packets in most places. Usually it’s 1g or less. Otherwise (but much less often) it’s ~3.5g.
Drug cartels probably spent a lot of money getting out of legal trouble and dealing with international police
That article does not include any marketing costs, that for large companies like Pfizer may be around 30-40% of the total cost.
I know some medications for sure have struggled because of manufacturing. Whether these are actual problems, or legal problems because some part of the the synthesis is patented, I'm not sure.
So that's where "devops" takes us.
I just hope they leave LT Spice alone, but I’m sure they will fix it until it’s broken.
See the recent Amp Hour episode for some specific discussion I heard about these tools and their development. (https://theamphour.com/392-an-interview-with-matt-duff/)
I find them fascinating.
At 21mm2 on a mature process, yield should be much higher than 50%. More like 90% is reasonable.
The AD9361 require front end filtering, as the 5th harmonic of the 2m ham band falls in a national LTE band; horrible interfence from that wide open front end.