Russia has presented a roadmap that, if fulfilled, would change its position in the global chip manufacturing race: developing EUV lithography and X-ray technology to produce structures from 65 nm down to below 10 nm between 2026 and 2037. The proposal, shared by science communicator Dmitrii Kuznetsov on X (formerly Twitter), combines an aggressive schedule — 40 nm steppers in 2026, 28/14 nm scanners between 2029 and 2032, and 13/9 nm equipment between 2033 and 2036 — with full EUV in 2037 — along with a bet on technologies different from those of ASML: hybrid solid-state lasers, xenon plasma sources (instead of tin), and ruthenium/beryllium mirrors operating at 11.2 nm (compared to the 13.5 nm standardized by Western EUV machines).
It’s not just a schedule. The accompanying discourse argues that 11.2 nm EUV would allow cost reductions compared to 193i immersion DUV at 14–65 nm nodes — because immersion and multi-patterning would no longer be necessary —, reduce energy consumption by a third, and eliminate issues related to tin contamination in the light source. Additionally, there is a geopolitical element: Kuznetsov recalls that a part of the 13.5 nm EUV technology base currently commercialized by ASML “was supported by contributions from Russian scientists,” and predicts that European industry could suffer if Russia’s proposal materializes due to price reductions and technological advantage.
The ambition is clear. The question is whether the clock and reality can accommodate this twelve-year leap.
What Russia has announced: phases, figures, and goals
According to the presentation, the Institute of Microstructure Physics of the Russian Academy of Sciences has defined a roadmap starting in 2026 and summarized as follows:
- 2026 — Stepper for 40 nm nodes, with two-mirror optics and alignment accuracy of 10 nm.
- 2029–2032 — Scanner at 28 nm, capable of reaching 14 nm, with four mirrors, exposure field of 26×0.5 mm, and productivity over 50 W/h.
- 2033–2036 — Scanners at 13 nm and even 9 nm, with six mirrors, 2 nm alignment, and outputs over 100 W/h.
- 2037 — Entry into EUV with sub-10 nm resolution, operating at 11.2 nm wavelength, using xenon source, hybrid solid-state lasers, and Ru/Be mirrors.
It’s worth noting that the West surpassed the 28/14 nm milestone with ASML more than a decade ago, and the Russian route is roughly two rounds behind in schedule. However, for the first time in years, Moscow is providing specific dates and technologies.
What makes it different: 11.2 nm, xenon, solid-state lasers, and Ru/Be mirrors
The current industrial EUV lithography systems used by TSMC, Samsung, and Intel are based on three pillars: 13.5 nm wavelength, tin plasma source excited by CO₂ lasers, and multilayer Mo/Si mirrors optimized for that wavelength. The Russian path differs in four key aspects:
- Wavelength of 11.2 nm
Shortening the wavelength increases resolution potential with similar optical sizes, but demands higher source and optical quality (reflectivity, stability). Russia claims that 11.2 nm “abates” the need for immersion in 14–65 nm, by avoiding immersion and multi-patterning. - Xenon plasma source (without tin)
Classic EUV generates tin plasma; it’s efficient, but dirty. Tin contaminates optics and requires cleaning and mitigation. Using xenon aims for a cleaner process and, according to the presentation, less energy consumption (1/3 of current). The challenge: ensuring brightness at 11.2 nm for industrial yields. - Hybrid solid-state lasers
Replacing the CO₂ laser with solid-state hybrid sources could simplify systems and reduce operational costs, provided power and stability meet EUV plasma requirements. Details on power levels and frequencies are unavailable publicly. - Ru/Be mirrors
Current multilayer Mo/Si mirrors are optimized for 13.5 nm. Moving to 11.2 nm necessitates new multilayer coatings. The Russian plan involves ruthenium/beryllium (Ru/Be). Material adjustments could improve reflectivity at 11.2 nm; practically, this involves complex research, precise metrology, and the supply of ultra-high quality beryllium.
The message from Kuznetsov is that this alternative path could enable cheaper and more efficient EUV operation in mature nodes (14–65 nm) and a competitive sub-10 nm EUV. The technical reality is that each change introduces new challenges: increased reflectivity losses with more mirrors, resistance at 11.2 nm, pellicles, noise, and source stability issues, along with metrology and alignment at 2 nm. These are not impossible; they just require no shortcuts.
More affordable than DUV 193i? The argument and nuances
The presentation summarizes three economic and operational advantages over 193i immersion DUV:
- No immersion or multi-patterning in 14–65 nm → less capex and opex in transitioning fabs.
- Energy consumption reduced by 1/3 → lower opex.
- Cleaner process (no tin) → less maintenance and higher availability.
If 11.2 nm performs as promised, it’s plausible that mature nodes—which produce most automotive, IoT, and industrial chips—could see cost reductions by avoiding immersion and multi-patterning. The big question is whether brightness and optics at 11.2 nm can sustain productivities of hundreds of wafers per hour, as DUV equipment does today with amortized costs and proven cadences. The figures cited—50 W/h and 100 W/h—are in units uncommon for productivity and are not directly comparable to wafers per hour; details are missing.
A nod to the past (and a dig at ASML)
Kuznetsov points out that the “old” 13.5 nm EUV technologies “were partly developed in Russia and by Russian scientists.” He offers no links or references, but the message is clear: they are seeking legitimacy to compete now with a “own” derivation at 11.2 nm. His warning concludes with a prediction: if this costs down EUV, Europe might see ASML’s roadmap stressed due to price drops and “technological delay”.
It’s worth putting this into context. Many contributions from Russia—either in optics or plasma physics—in the 90s/2000s do not alter the fact that ASML has been the one to industrialize EUV through consortiums and suppliers like ZEISS. Industrialization means multiplying by a thousand: tight tolerances, repeatability, supply chain, global service.
What Russia is truly bringing to the table (and what remains to be seen)
Advantages:
- An alternative technical path that, if mature, diversifies industry dependence.
- Specific timelines and annual goals enabling progress tracking (40 nm in 2026, 28/14 nm in 2029–2032…).
- A pragmatic approach: not promising 2 nm tomorrow, but stepping stones to close the gap, starting with nodes with volume.
Challenges to prove (or disprove):
- 11.2 nm source with adequate brightness and stability.
- Ru/Be multilayers with competitive reflectivity for 6 mirrors.
- Resists and pellicles suitable for 11.2 nm.
- Metrology and alignment at 2 nm in an ecosystem still nascent.
- Supply chain (materials, optics, vacuum, stages), which in EUV is global and delicate.
Adding to this is the geopolitical factor: export controls, sanctions, access to components, and the potential for external support—China being the major wildcard, often mentioned as a “never say never” factor by analysts.
What if it works?
- Price pressure in 14–65 nm, where DUV 193i with multi-patterning still dominates.
- An alternative ecosystem that reduces dependence on single global supplier for EUV.
- More players in sub-10 nm with diverging technologies (13.5 vs. 11.2 nm), forcing resists, optics, and metrology to support two worlds.
- Increased risk/fragmentation of standards, but greater resilience in supply.
The baseline scenario remains that Russia arrives late and must prove each step. However, defining 2037 as the EUV target year is, at least, a benchmark that will help distinguish between speculation and reality over the years.
A timer and skepticism: two decades in ten years
Light-based lithography does not forgive shortcuts. ASML took decades — with US-Europe-Japan consortiums — to finalize EUV. Russia aims to cover two decades in twelve years. Is it impossible? Not entirely, but it demands:
- Sustained resources (science, engineering, suppliers).
- Project governance that survives political cycles.
- Public validation (prototypes, tool-in-fab, actual performance) at each milestone.
Kuznetsov himself admits that Russia is “late”, and the milestones for 2029–2032 (28 → 14 nm, 4 mirrors) and 2033–2036 (13 → 9 nm, 6 mirrors) are still behind what the West achieved years ago. Yet, each step forward will reduce the gap if executed properly.
Conclusion: ambition, alternatives… and much to prove
The Russian EUV roadmap for 11.2 nm is both ambitious and disruptive. If Russia achieves xenon sources with industrial brightness, Ru/Be multilayers with sufficient reflectivities, and metrology at 2 nm, it could establish a second path toward advanced lithography, impacting costs and competition. For now, it’s all promises and dates.
Healthy skepticism is warranted; equally necessary is watching immediate milestones: 2026 (40 nm), 2029–2032 (28/14 nm), 2033–2036 (13/9 nm). If they are met, Russian EUV could stop being an easy joke and emerge as a serious alternative. If not, it will remain just another five-year plan that failed to bridge the gap between lab and factory.
Frequently Asked Questions
What differentiates the proposed Russian EUV lithography (11.2 nm) from ASML’s (13.5 nm)?
The Russian route proposes operating at 11.2 nm with a xenon plasma source, hybrid solid-state lasers, and Ru/Be multilayer mirrors. The current industrial EUV uses 13.5 nm, tin plasma excited by CO₂ lasers, and Mo/Si multilayers. On paper, 11.2 nm offers improved resolution and promises lower costs/energy over 14–65 nm; practically, challenges include making source brightness, optical reflectivity, resists, pellicles, and metrology viable for manufacturing.
What are Russia’s announced dates and equipment in their lithography roadmap?
- 2026: stepper for 40 nm, with 2 mirrors and alignment of 10 nm.
- 2029–2032: scanner at 28 nm capable of 14 nm, with 4 mirrors, 26×0.5 mm field, and >50 W/h.
- 2033–2036: 13 nm and even 9 nm; 6 mirrors, 2 nm alignment, and >100 W/h.
- 2037: An independent EUV at 11.2 nm for sub-10 nm.
Why use xenon plasma and Ru/Be mirrors?
The proposal suggests xenon would avoid tin contamination and, with solid-state lasers, lower energy consumption. Ru/Be mirrors are better suited for 11.2 nm than Mo/Si at 13.5 nm. The challenge remains in demonstrating sufficient source brightness and competitive multilayer reflectivity with 6 mirrors to enable industrial yields.
What impact would success have for Europe and ASML if Russia achieves EUV in 2037?
It could pressure prices at 14–65 nm, diversify processing and supply chains, and create a second technological path (11.2 vs. 13.5 nm). However, industrializing EUV needs an ecosystem, suppliers, and global service; ASML has a decades-long advantage. Russia’s roadmap will need milestone-by-milestone validation before impacting the strategic landscape.