The Global Co-Packaged Optics Market 2027-2037

Table of Contents

1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

• 1.1 Report Overview and Key Findings
• 1.2 Key Developments in
• 1.3 Market Definition and Scope
  • 1.3.1 Definition of Co-Packaged Optics (CPO)
  • 1.3.2 Scope of This Report
• 1.4 Key Market Drivers and Restraints
• 1.5 Modern High-Performance AI Data Centre Architecture
  • 1.5.1 Physical Infrastructure Hierarchy
  • 1.5.2 Network Architecture
  • 1.5.3 Power and Cooling Considerations
• 1.6 Switches: Key Components in Modern Data Centres
  • 1.6.1 Switch Architecture Evolution
  • 1.6.2 Switch ASIC Technology
  • 1.6.3 Optical Transceiver Requirements
• 1.7 Advancements in Switch IC Bandwidth and the Need for CPO Technology
  • 1.7.1 Historical Bandwidth Scaling
  • 1.7.2 SerDes Technology Evolution
  • 1.7.3 Electrical Signalling Limits
  • 1.7.4 Front-Panel Density Constraints
  • 1.7.5 Power Consumption Trajectory
  • 1.7.6 The Interconnect Wall
• 1.8 Overview of Key Challenges in Data Centre Architectures
  • 1.8.1 Thermal Management
  • 1.8.2 Power Delivery
  • 1.8.3 Cable Management
  • 1.8.4 Reliability and Serviceability
  • 1.8.5 Standards and Interoperability
• 1.9 Key Trend of Optical Transceivers in High-End Data Centres
  • 1.9.1 Historical Evolution
  • 1.9.2 Technology Migration Path
• 1.10 Design Decisions: CPO vs. Pluggables Comparison
  • 1.10.1 Performance Comparison
  • 1.10.2 Operational Comparison
  • 1.10.3 Economic Comparison
• 1.11 What is an Optical Engine (OE)?
  • 1.11.1 Functional Description
  • 1.11.2 Optical Engine Components
  • 1.11.3 Performance Parameters
• 1.12 Heterogeneous Integration and Co-Packaged Optics
  • 1.12.1 The Heterogeneous Integration Imperative
  • 1.12.2 Integration Approaches for CPO
  • 1.12.3 TSMC's Role in Heterogeneous Integration
• 1.15 Overview of Interconnection Techniques in Semiconductor Packaging
  • 1.15.1 Wire Bonding
  • 1.15.2 Flip-Chip Bumping
  • 1.15.3 Micro-Bumping
  • 1.15.4 Through-Silicon Via (TSV)
  • 1.15.5 Hybrid Bonding
  • 1.15.6 Redistribution Layer (RDL)
• 1.16 Key CPO Applications: Network Switch and Computing Optical I/O
  • 1.16.1 Scale-Out Network Switching
  • 1.16.2 Scale-Up Computing Optical I/O
• 1.17 EIC/PIC Integration by Advanced Interconnect Techniques
  • 1.17.1 Integration Requirements
• 1.18 2D to 3D EIC/PIC Integration Options
  • 1.18.1 2D Integration Architecture
  • 1.18.2 2.5D Integration Architecture
  • 1.18.3 3D Integration Architecture
• 1.19 Benchmark of Different Packaging Technologies for EIC/PIC
• 1.20 Examples of Packaging a 3D Optical Engine with an IC
  • 1.20.1 Configuration 1: EIC-on-PIC with Micro-Bumps
  • 1.20.2 Configuration 2: PIC-on-EIC with Through-Silicon Vias
  • 1.20.3 Configuration 3: 3D SoIC with Hybrid Bonding
• 1.21 Types of CPO + XPU/Switch ASIC Packaging Structures
  • 1.21.1 Type I: Optical Engines on Package Periphery
  • 1.21.2 Type II: Optical Engines Co-Located with ASIC on Interposer
  • 1.21.3 Type III: 3D Stacked Optical Engines
• 1.22 Challenges and Future Potential of CPO Technology
  • 1.22.1 Technical Challenges
  • 1.22.2 Commercial Challenges
    • 1.22.2.1 Future Potential
• 1.23 NVIDIA vs. Broadcom: Strategic Comparison in AI Infrastructure and CPO
  • 1.23.1 NVIDIA's CPO Strategy: Vertical Integration
  • 1.23.2 Broadcom's CPO Strategy: Open Ecosystem
  • 1.23.3 Competitive Dynamics
  • 1.23.4 CPO Product Benchmark: NVIDIA vs. Broadcom
  • 1.23.5 NVIDIA and Broadcom: Divergent CPO Ecosystems
• 1.24 Current AI System Architecture
  • 1.24.1 NVIDIA DGX/HGX Architecture
• 1.25 Future AI Architecture
• 1.26 Co-packaged optics market map
• 1.27 Market Forecasts
  • 1.27.1 Server Boards, CPUs, and GPUs/Accelerators
  • 1.27.2 Optical I/O for AI Interconnect CPO Forecast (Units Shipped)
  • 1.27.3 Optical I/O for AI Interconnect CPO Forecast (Revenue/Market Size)
  • 1.27.4 CPO Network Switches for AI Accelerators Forecast (Units Shipped)
  • 1.27.5 CPO Network Switches for AI Accelerators Forecast (Market Size and Revenue)
  • 1.27.6 Total CPO Market Overview
  • 1.27.7 Total CPO by Different EIC/PIC Integration Technology (Unit Shipments)
  • 1.27.8 System Integration of Network Switches by Packaging Technologies
  • 1.27.9 System Integration of Optical I/O Forecast by Packaging Technologies
• 1.28 Co-packaged optics (CPO) industrial ecosystem
  • 1.28.1 PIC Design Segment
  • 1.28.2 ASIC and xPU Design Segment
  • 1.28.3 Laser Sources Segment
  • 1.28.4 SOI Wafer and Epi-Wafer Segment
  • 1.28.5 EIC, Retimers, SerDes, and PHY Segment
  • 1.28.6 Connectors and Fibers Segment
  • 1.28.7 Foundries Segment
  • 1.28.8 Packaging, Assembling, and Testing Segment
  • 1.28.9 System and Equipment Segment
  • 1.28.10 End Customers (Hyperscalers) Segment
  • 1.28.11 Ecosystem Interdependencies and Strategic Implications

2 CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS FOR FUTURE AI SYSTEMS

• 2.1 The Rise and Challenges of Large Language Models (LLMs)
  • 2.1.1 The Explosive Growth of AI and Generative AI
    • 2.1.1.1 Historical Context and Acceleration
    • 2.1.1.2 Compute Demand Scaling
    • 2.1.1.3 Generative AI Market Expansion
  • 2.1.2 Modern High-Performance AI Data Centre Requirements
    • 2.1.2.1 Compute Density Requirements
    • 2.1.2.2 Network Topology Requirements
    • 2.1.2.3 Availability and Reliability Requirements
  • 2.1.3 NVIDIA's State-of-the-Art AI Systems
    • 2.1.3.1 DGX H100 and HGX H100
  • 2.1.4 Switches: Key Components in Modern Data Centres
    • 2.1.4.1 Switch Hierarchy in AI Data Centres
• 2.2 Scale-Up, Scale-Out, and Scale-Across Networks
  • 2.2.1 Scale-Up Networks: GPU-to-GPU Interconnects
    • 2.2.1.1 NVIDIA NVLink Implementation
    • 2.2.1.2 CPO Value Proposition for Scale-Up
  • 2.2.2 Scale-Out Networks: Rack-to-Rack Communications
    • 2.2.2.1 Ethernet-Based Scale-Out
    • 2.2.2.2 InfiniBand for AI
    • 2.2.2.3 CPO Value Proposition for Scale-Out
  • 2.2.3 Scale-Up, Scale-Out, and Scale-Across Comparison
• 2.3 Challenges in Network Switch Interconnects for High-End Data Centres
  • 2.3.1 Roadmap of Interconnect Technology for Network Switches in High-End Data Centres
    • 2.3.1.1 Technology Generations
  • 2.3.2 SerDes Bottleneck in High-Bandwidth Systems
    • 2.3.2.1 SerDes Function
    • 2.3.2.2 Channel Loss Challenges
  • 2.3.3 Solutions to SerDes Bottlenecks in High-Bandwidth Systems
    • 2.3.3.1 Linear-Drive Electronics
    • 2.3.3.2 Near-Package Optics
    • 2.3.3.3 Co-Packaged Optics
  • 2.3.4 Pluggable Optics: Current Bottlenecks and Limitations
    • 2.3.4.1 Form Factor Constraints
    • 2.3.4.2 Electrical Interface Limitations
    • 2.3.4.3 Thermal Management Challenges
    • 2.3.4.4 Serviceability Trade-offs
  • 2.3.5 On-Board Optics (OBO)
  • 2.3.6 Co-Packaged Optics (CPO)
    • 2.3.6.1 CPO Architecture
    • 2.3.6.2 Key Enabling Technologies
    • 2.3.6.3 Performance Benefits
    • 2.3.6.4 Implementation Challenges
  • 2.3.7 Transmission Losses in Pluggable Optical Transceiver Connections
    • 2.3.7.1 Total Path Loss
  • 2.3.8 Pluggable Optics vs. CPO
  • 2.3.9 Design Decisions for CPO Compared to Pluggables
  • 2.3.10 Advancements in Switch IC Bandwidth and the Need for CPO Technology
    • 2.3.10.1 Bandwidth Scaling Trajectory
    • 2.3.10.2 Physical Constraints at Scale
  • 2.3.11 L2 Frontside Network Architecture Diagram: CPO vs. Non-CPO
• 2.4 Challenges in Compute Switch Interconnects (Optical I/O) for High-End Data Centres
  • 2.4.1 Number of Copper Wires in Current AI System Interconnects
    • 2.4.1.1 NVLink Copper Cable Count
    • 2.4.1.2 SuperPOD Cable Complexity
  • 2.4.2 Limitations of Current Copper Systems in AI
  • 2.4.3 NVIDIA's Connectivity Choices: Copper vs. Optical for High-Bandwidth Systems
    • 2.4.3.1 Current Generation: Copper-Centric
    • 2.4.3.2 Transition Generation: Hybrid Approach
    • 2.4.3.3 Future Generation: Optical-First
    • 2.4.3.4 Strategic Implications
  • 2.4.4 Copper vs. Optical for High-Bandwidth Systems: Benchmark
  • 2.4.5 Migration from Copper to Optical Interconnects for High-End AI Systems
  • 2.4.6 Current AI System Architecture
  • 2.4.7 L1 Backside Compute Architecture with Copper Systems
  • 2.4.8 L1 Backside Compute Architecture with Optical Interconnect: Co-Packaged Optics (CPO)
  • 2.4.9 Opportunities for Swapping Copper to Optical
• 2.5 Future AI Systems in High-End Data Centres
  • 2.5.1 Power Efficiency Comparison: CPO vs. Pluggable Optics vs. Copper Interconnects
    • 2.5.1.1 Power Consumption Breakdown
  • 2.5.2 Latency of 60cm Data Transmission Technology Benchmark
  • 2.5.3 Future AI Architecture (Short to Mid-Term)
  • 2.5.4 Future AI Architecture (Long-Term)

3 INTRODUCTION TO CO-PACKAGED OPTICS (CPO)

• 3.1 Photonic Integrated Circuits (PICs) Key Concepts
  • 3.1.1 What are Photonic Integrated Circuits (PICs)?
    • 3.1.1.1 Fundamental Definition
    • 3.1.1.2 Material Platforms
    • 3.1.1.3 Integration Levels
  • 3.1.2 PICs vs. Silicon Photonics: What are the Differences?
    • 3.1.2.1 Silicon Photonics: A Specific Implementation
    • 3.1.2.2 Why Silicon Photonics Dominates CPO
  • 3.1.3 PIC Architecture
    • 3.1.3.1 Transmit Path Architecture
    • 3.1.3.2 Receive Path Architecture
    • 3.1.3.3 Supporting Functions
  • 3.1.4 Advantages and Challenges of PICs
• 3.2 Optical Engine (OE)
  • 3.2.1 What is an Optical Engine?
    • 3.2.1.1 Optical Engine Composition
    • 3.2.1.2 Optical Engine vs. Pluggable Transceiver
  • 3.2.2 How an Optical Engine Works
    • 3.2.2.1 Transmit Path Operation
    • 3.2.2.2 Receive Path Operation
    • 3.2.2.3 Critical Performance Parameters
  • 3.2.3 Optical Power Supplies
    • 3.2.3.1 Why External Laser Sources?
    • 3.2.3.2 External Laser Source Architectures
    • 3.2.3.3 Optical Power Delivery
• 3.3 Co-Packaged Optics
  • 3.3.1 Three Key Concepts in Co-Packaged Optics (CPO)
    • 3.3.1.1 Concept 1: Proximity Integration
    • 3.3.1.2 Concept 2: Functional Partitioning
    • 3.3.1.3 Concept 3: Coherent Ecosystem Development
  • 3.3.2 Key Technology Building Blocks for CPO
    • 3.3.2.1 Silicon Photonics PIC
    • 3.3.2.2 Electronic IC (EIC)
    • 3.3.2.3 EIC-PIC Integration
    • 3.3.2.4 Fibre Array Units (FAUs)
    • 3.3.2.5 External Laser Source
    • 3.3.2.6 Advanced Packaging Platform
  • 3.3.3 Benefits of CPO: Latency Reduction
    • 3.3.3.1 Sources of Latency in Optical Interconnects
    • 3.3.3.2 CPO Latency Advantages
  • 3.3.4 Benefits of CPO: Power Consumption Reduction
    • 3.3.4.1 Power Consumption Breakdown
    • 3.3.4.2 Why CPO Consumes Less Power
  • 3.3.5 Benefits of CPO: Data Rate Improvements
    • 3.3.5.1 Pluggable Scaling Limitations
    • 3.3.5.2 CPO Scaling Advantages
    • 3.3.5.3 Data Rate Scaling Roadmap
    • 3.3.5.4 The 200G-per-Lane Transition and Silicon Photonics
    • 3.3.5.5 Modulator Technology Roadmap and Emerging Materials
    • 3.3.5.6 Technology Trends in CPO Driven by Rising Data Rates
    • 3.3.5.7 Applicability of Wavelength-Division Multiplexing (WDM)
    • 3.3.5.8 Physical Limits on Fibre Count: The Beachfront (Shoreline) Constraint
    • 3.3.5.9 Increasing the Number of WDM Channels: Technical Challenges
    • 3.3.5.10 The End-to-End Optical Link Budget
  • 3.3.6 Overview of Value Proposition of CPO
    • 3.3.6.1 Value for Hyperscale Data Centre Operators
    • 3.3.6.2 Value for Network Equipment Vendors
    • 3.3.6.3 Value for the Technology Ecosystem
  • 3.3.7 Future Challenges in CPO
    • 3.3.7.1 Manufacturing and Yield Challenges
    • 3.3.7.2 Thermal Management Challenges
    • 3.3.7.3 Serviceability and Reliability Challenges
    • 3.3.7.4 Ecosystem and Standardisation Challenges
    • 3.3.7.5 Cost Challenges
    • 3.3.7.6 Test and Manufacturing Scale-Up
• 3.4 CPO Standards
  • 3.4.1 OIF Co-Packaging Framework
  • 3.4.2 OCI-MSA (Optical Compute Interconnect Multi-Source Agreement)
  • 3.4.3 OIF Standards for 1.6T and 3.2T CPO Module
  • 3.4.4 External Laser Small Form Pluggable (ELSFP) Implementation Agreement
  • 3.4.5 Telemetry and Management
  • 3.4.6 OIF's CEI-112G XSR / XSR+ PAM4
  • 3.4.7 UCIe Standard and Its Relationship to CPO
  • 3.4.8 The CPO Standards Process in China
  • 3.4.9 XPO and Open CPX Initiatives
  • 3.4.10 Near-Package Optics (NPO) as an Intermediate Path

4 PACKAGING FOR CO-PACKAGED OPTICS (CPO)

• 4.1 Introduction to CPO Packaging
  • 4.1.1 Key Components to be Packaged in an Optical Transceiver
    • 4.1.1.1 Photonic Integrated Circuit (PIC)
    • 4.1.1.2 Electronic Integrated Circuit (EIC)
    • 4.1.1.3 Laser Source Interface
    • 4.1.1.4 Fibre Array Unit (FAU)
    • 4.1.1.5 Host ASIC Interface
  • 4.1.2 Heterogeneous Integration and Co-Packaged Photonics
    • 4.1.2.1 Why Heterogeneous Integration for CPO?
    • 4.1.2.2 Heterogeneous Integration Approaches for CPO
    • 4.1.2.3 Integration Hierarchy for CPO
  • 4.1.3 CPO for Network Switch: Packaging Concept
    • 4.1.3.1 Switch Architecture with CPO
    • 4.1.3.2 Package Configuration Options
    • 4.1.3.3 Packaging Requirements for Switch CPO
  • 4.1.4 1.6 Tbps Co-Packaged Optics for Network Switch
    • 4.1.4.1 Integration Approach
  • 4.1.5 CPO as Optical I/O for XPUs: Packaging Concept
    • 4.1.5.1 The Scale-Up Interconnect Challenge
    • 4.1.5.2 XPU-CPO Packaging Concept
    • 4.1.5.3 Implementation Approaches
    • 4.1.5.4 NVIDIA's Approach to XPU Optical I/O
    • 4.1.5.5 Packaging Implications for XPU Optical I/O
    • 4.1.5.6 System Architecture Evolution
  • 4.1.6 CPO Integration for Compute Silicon
    • 4.1.6.1 System Configuration
    • 4.1.6.2 Integration Architecture
    • 4.1.6.3 Thermal Partitioning
    • 4.1.6.4 Enabled Architectures
  • 4.1.7 Overview of CPO Packaging Technologies
• 4.2 Overview and Development Roadmap of 2.5D and 3D Advanced Semiconductor Packaging Technologies
  • 4.2.1 Evolution Roadmap of Semiconductor Packaging
  • 4.2.2 Semiconductor Packaging Overview
  • 4.2.3 Key Metrics for Advanced Semiconductor Packaging Performance
  • 4.2.4 Overview of Interconnection Techniques in Semiconductor Packaging
  • 4.2.5 Overview of 2.5D Packaging Structure
  • 4.2.6 2.5D Package Components
  • 4.2.7 Benefits for CPO
  • 4.2.8 Challenges for CPO
• 4.3 2.5D Silicon-Based Packaging Technologies
  • 4.3.1 2.5D Packaging Involving Silicon as Interconnect
  • 4.3.2 Silicon Interposer Technology
  • 4.3.3 Silicon Bridge Technology
  • 4.3.4 CPO Implications
  • 4.3.5 Through-Silicon Via (TSV): Current State and Future
    • 4.3.5.1 TSV Fabrication Process
    • 4.3.5.2 TSV Technology Generations
    • 4.3.5.3 TSV Challenges for CPO
    • 4.3.5.4 Future TSV Development
  • 4.3.6 Development Trends for 2.5D Silicon-Based Packaging
    • 4.3.6.1 Interposer Size Scaling
    • 4.3.6.2 Routing Density Advancement
    • 4.3.6.3 Cost Reduction Initiatives
    • 4.3.6.4 Integration with Advanced Features
  • 4.3.7 Silicon Interposer vs. Silicon Bridge Benchmark
    • 4.3.7.1 Implications for CPO
• 4.4 2.5D Organic-Based Packaging Technologies
  • 4.4.1 2.5D Packaging: High-Density Fan-Out (FO) Packaging
    • 4.4.1.1 Fan-Out Technology Concept
    • 4.4.1.2 High-Density Fan-Out Variants
    • 4.4.1.3 Advantages for CPO
    • 4.4.1.4 Challenges for CPO
  • 4.4.2 Redistribution Layer (RDL)
    • 4.4.2.1 RDL Fabrication Process
    • 4.4.2.2 RDL Design Considerations for CPO
  • 4.4.3 Electronic Interconnects: SiO2 vs. Organic Dielectric
  • 4.4.4 Panel Level Fab-Out
    • 4.4.4.1 Panel-Level Processing
    • 4.4.4.2 Advantages for CPO
    • 4.4.4.3 Challenges for CPO
  • 4.4.5 Wafer Level Fan-Out
    • 4.4.5.1 Wafer-Level Processing
    • 4.4.5.2 Advantages for WLFO
    • 4.4.5.3 Challenges for WLFO
  • 4.4.6 Wafer-Level Fan-Out vs. Panel-Level Fan-Out
    • 4.4.6.1 Selection Criteria for CPO
  • 4.4.7 Key Trends in Fan-Out Packaging
  • 4.4.8 Challenges in Future Fan-Out Processes
    • 4.4.8.1 Die Shift and Placement Accuracy
    • 4.4.8.2 Warpage Control
    • 4.4.8.3 Yield and Cost
    • 4.4.8.4 High-Frequency Performance
• 4.5 2.5D Glass-Based Packaging Technologies
  • 4.5.1 Roles of Glass in Semiconductor Packaging
    • 4.5.1.1 Glass Properties Relevant to Packaging
    • 4.5.1.2 Applications in Packaging
    • 4.5.1.3 Glass Core as Interposer for Advanced Semiconductor Packaging
  • 4.5.2 Overcoming Limitations of Silicon Interposers with Glass
    • 4.5.2.1 Size Limitation
    • 4.5.2.2 Optical Opacity
    • 4.5.2.3 Dielectric Loss
    • 4.5.2.4 Cost Structure
    • 4.5.2.5 Remaining Silicon Advantages
  • 4.5.3 Glass vs. Molding Compound
    • 4.5.3.1 Implications for CPO
  • 4.5.4 Glass Core (Interposer) Package: Process Flow
  • 4.5.5 Challenges of Glass Packaging
    • 4.5.5.1 Handling and Breakage
    • 4.5.5.2 Via Formation and Metallisation
    • 4.5.5.3 Thermal Conductivity
    • 4.5.5.4 RDL Adhesion
    • 4.5.5.5 Warpage Control
• 4.6 3D Advanced Semiconductor Packaging Technologies
  • 4.6.1 Evolution of Bumping Technologies
    • 4.6.1.1 Solder Bumps (C4)
    • 4.6.1.2 Copper Pillar Bumps
    • 4.6.1.3 Micro-Bumps
    • 4.6.1.4 Hybrid Bonding (Bumpless)
  • 4.6.2 Challenges in Scaling Bumps
    • 4.6.2.1 Mechanical Challenges
    • 4.6.2.2 Electrical Challenges
    • 4.6.2.3 Manufacturing Challenges
    • 4.6.2.4 Implications for CPO
  • 4.6.3 Micro-Bump for Advanced Semiconductor Packaging
    • 4.6.3.1 Micro-Bump Structure
  • 4.6.4 Bumpless Cu-Cu Hybrid Bonding
    • 4.6.4.1 Hybrid Bonding Concept
    • 4.6.4.2 Process Fundamentals
    • 4.6.4.3 Key Characteristics
    • 4.6.4.4 Benefits for CPO
  • 4.6.5 Three Ways of Cu-Cu Hybrid Bonding: Benchmark
    • 4.6.5.1 Die-to-Die (D2D)
    • 4.6.5.2 Die-to-Wafer (D2W)
    • 4.6.5.3 Wafer-to-Wafer (W2W)
  • 4.6.6 Challenges in Cu-Cu Hybrid Bonding Manufacturing Process
• 4.7 CPO Packaging: EIC and PIC Integration
  • 4.7.1 EIC/PIC Integration by Conventional Interconnect Techniques
    • 4.7.1.1 Wire Bond Integration
    • 4.7.1.2 Flip-Chip Integration (2D)
  • 4.7.2 EIC/PIC Integration by Emerging Interconnect Techniques
    • 4.7.2.1 2.5D Interposer Integration
    • 4.7.2.2 3D Micro-Bump Stacking
    • 4.7.2.3 3D Hybrid Bonding
  • 4.7.3 2D to 3D EIC/PIC Integration Options
    • 4.7.3.1 Technology Transition Drivers
    • 4.7.3.2 2D to 3D Integration Evolution
  • 4.7.4 Integration Roadmap by CPO Segment
  • 4.7.5 Benchmarking of Different Packaging Technologies for EIC/PIC
  • 4.7.6 Pros and Cons of 2D Integration of EIC/PIC
  • 4.7.7 Pros and Cons of 2.5D Integration of EIC/PIC
  • 4.7.8 Pros and Cons of 3D Hybrid Integration of EIC/PIC
  • 4.7.9 Pros and Cons of 3D Monolithic Integration of EIC/PIC
• 4.8 TSV for EIC/PIC Integration
  • 4.8.1 TSV for EIC/PIC Integration in CPO
    • 4.8.1.1 TSV Configurations for EIC/PIC
    • 4.8.1.2 Design Considerations
  • 4.8.2 Benefits of TSV for PIC/EIC Integration
  • 4.8.3 Cisco Packaging Architectures of Optical Engine Over Generations
  • 4.8.4 Cisco: 2.5D Chip-on-Chip (CoC) Packaging Architecture for EIC/PIC Integration
    • 4.8.4.1 Architecture Description
    • 4.8.4.2 Manufacturing Considerations
  • 4.8.5 Cisco: 3D TSV for PIC/EIC Integration
    • 4.8.5.1 Architecture Description
    • 4.8.5.2 Benefits of TSV Integration
    • 4.8.5.3 Manufacturing Considerations
  • 4.8.6 Key TSV Fabrication Steps and Challenges in CPO
    • 4.8.6.1 Fabrication Process Flow
  • 4.8.7 Packaging Options for Silicon Photonics
  • 4.8.8 Pros and Cons of 2.5D Si Interposer for EIC/PIC Integration
• 4.9 Fan-Out for EIC/PIC Integration
  • 4.9.1 ASE's Proposed Fan-Out Solution for CPO Packaging
    • 4.9.1.1 ASE Fan-Out CPO Concept
  • 4.9.2 FOPOP from ASE: Process
  • 4.9.3 Analysis of FOPOP vs. Wire Bond Packaging for CPO
  • 4.9.4 Optical Packaging Process Considerations for Silicon Photonics - ASE
  • 4.9.5 SPIL's Fan-Out Embedded Bridge (FOEB) Structure for PIC/EIC Integration in CPO
  • 4.9.6 Process Flow of Integrating PIC and EIC in a FOEB Structure
  • 4.9.7 Process Challenges in Packaging Optical Engines
  • 4.9.8 Challenges of Using Fan-Out for EIC/PIC Integration
• 4.10 Glass-Based CPO Packaging Technologies
  • 4.10.1 Glass-Based Co-Packaged Optics
    • 4.10.1.1 Corning's Glass CPO Vision
  • 4.10.2 Glass CPO Package Architecture
  • 4.10.3 Glass-Based CPO Process Development
    • 4.10.3.1 Corning's 102.4 Tb/s Test Vehicle Demonstration
  • 4.10.4 3D Heterogeneous Integration of EIC/PIC on a Glass Interposer
    • 4.10.4.1 Architecture Rationale
    • 4.10.4.2 Package Architecture
    • 4.10.4.3 Process Flow
    • 4.10.4.4 Representative Switch Module Example
    • 4.10.4.5 Market Trajectory
• 4.11 Hybrid Bonding for EIC/PIC Integration
  • 4.11.1 TSMC: Integrated HPC Technology Platform for AI
  • 4.11.2 iOIS: Integrated Optical Interconnection System from TSMC
  • 4.11.3 Combining EIC and PIC with 3D SoIC Bond
  • 4.11.4 Roadmap of Bond Pitch Scaling
• 4.12 System Integration of Optical Engine and ASIC/XPU
  • 4.12.1 Co-Packaging vs. Co-Packaged Optics (CPO)
  • 4.12.2 Three Types of CPO + XPU/Switch ASIC Packaging Structures
    • 4.12.2.1 Type 1: 2D/2.5D Peripheral Integration
    • 4.12.2.2 Type 2: 2.5D with Embedded Bridge
    • 4.12.2.3 Type 3: 3D Stacked Integration
• 4.13 Future 3D-CPO Structure
  • 4.13.1 Future 3D-CPO Architecture Vision
  • 4.13.2 NVIDIA's 3D Integration of SoC, HBM, EIC, and PIC on Co-Packaged Substrates
    • 4.13.2.1.1 Architecture Overview
    • 4.13.2.1.2 Integration Approach
    • 4.13.2.1.3 Key Innovations
• 4.14 Optical Alignment and Laser Integration
  • 4.14.1 How CPO is Built and the Bottleneck
  • 4.14.2 The fibre attach bottleneck
  • 4.14.3 Interface Between Coupler and FAU
  • 4.14.4 Grating vs. Edge Couplers: Challenges in High-Density Optical I/O for Silicon Photonics
  • 4.14.5 Challenges in High-Density Optical I/O for Silicon Photonics
• 4.15 Fiber Array Unit (FAU)
  • 4.15.1 Optical Alignment Challenges and Solutions
  • 4.15.2 Two Alignment Approaches
  • 4.15.3 Reducing Optical Fiber Packaging Complexity
  • 4.15.4 Key Technical Challenges
    • 4.15.4.1 The Size Mismatch Between Silicon Waveguides and Planar Optical Fibers
  • 4.15.5 Fiber Attach Methods
  • 4.15.6 Key Players in FAU for CPO
  • 4.15.7 Benchmark of Optical Fiber Alignment Structure Variations
  • 4.15.8 Suppliers of Other Optical Components in CPO
• 4.16 Suppliers of Other Optical Components in CPO
• 4.17 Laser Integration
  • 4.17.1 Laser sources for CPO
  • 4.17.2 On-Chip Light Source Integration Methods
  • 4.17.3 External Lasers for CPO
  • 4.17.4 Laser Attach Technology Benchmark
  • 4.17.5 Benchmark of Different Laser Integration Technologies

5 CO-PACKAGED OPTICS MARKET ANALYSIS

• 5.1 CPO Market Definition and Scope
• 5.2 CPO Market Size and Growth Projections
• 5.3 Switch CPO Market Analysis
  • 5.3.1 Market Overview and Drivers
  • 5.3.2 Deployment Timeline and Adoption Phases
  • 5.3.3 Volume Projections and Market Sizing
  • 5.3.4 Market Concentration and Regional Distribution
  • 5.3.5 Pricing Trajectory and Cost Dynamics
• 5.4 XPU Optical I/O Market Analysis
  • 5.4.1 Market Drivers and Value Proposition
  • 5.4.2 Adoption Timeline and Platform Evolution
  • 5.4.3 Volume and Revenue Projections
  • 5.4.4 Market Segmentation by Platform
  • 5.4.5 Technology Requirements and Differentiation
• 5.5 CPO Pricing and Cost Analysis
  • 5.5.1 Current Pricing Landscape
  • 5.5.2 Cost Trajectory and Reduction Drivers
  • 5.5.3 Cost Parity Timeline and Dynamics
  • 5.5.4 Pricing Strategy Implications
• 5.6 Regional Market Dynamics
  • 5.6.1 North America
  • 5.6.2 Asia-Pacific
  • 5.6.3 Europe
  • 5.6.4 Rest of World
• 5.7 Total Addressable Market Analysis
  • 5.7.1 Core TAM Segments
  • 5.7.2 Serviceable Addressable Market (SAM)
• 5.8 Market Forecast by Component
• 5.9 Market Forecast by Technology Generation
  • 5.9.1 Optical Engine Bandwidth Evolution
  • 5.9.2 Generation Lifecycle Analysis
• 5.10 Market Restraints and Barriers
  • 5.10.1 Manufacturing Yield and Cost
  • 5.10.2 Serviceability and Field Replacement Concerns
  • 5.10.3 Standards Maturity and Interoperability
  • 5.10.4 Supply Chain Capacity Constraints
  • 5.10.5 Competitive Alternatives
• 5.11 Adoption Curve Analysis
  • 5.11.1 Technology Adoption Framework
    • 5.11.1.1 Innovators (2024-2026)
    • 5.11.1.2 Early Adopters (2026-2028)
    • 5.11.1.3 Early Majority (2028-2031)
    • 5.11.1.4 Late Majority (2031-2034)
    • 5.11.1.5 Laggards (2034+)
  • 5.11.2 Segment-Specific Adoption Curves
• 5.12 Adoption Accelerators and Inhibitors
  • 5.12.1 Adoption Curve Implications
• 5.13 Competitive Landscape Evolution
  • 5.13.1 Current Competitive Positioning
  • 5.13.2 Integrated Device Manufacturers (IDMs)
  • 5.13.3 Silicon Photonics Specialists
  • 5.13.4 Foundry/OSAT Providers
  • 5.13.5 System Vendors
  • 5.13.6 Laser Suppliers
  • 5.13.7 Competitive Dynamics and Market Structure Evolution
    • 5.13.7.1 Near-Term Dynamics (2025-2028)
      • 5.13.7.1.1 Expected Evolution (2028)
    • 5.13.7.2 Mid-Term Dynamics (2028-2032)
      • 5.13.7.2.1 Expected Evolution (2032)
    • 5.13.7.3 Long-Term Dynamics (2032-2036)
      • 5.13.7.3.1 Expected Evolution (2036)
  • 5.13.8 Vertical Integration Trends
    • 5.13.8.1 Integration Strategy Framework
      • 5.13.8.1.1 Full Vertical Integration (Broadcom, Intel Model)
      • 5.13.8.1.2 Partial Integration (Cisco, NVIDIA Model)
      • 5.13.8.1.3 Fabless/Assembly-Light (Ayar Labs, Ranovus Model)
      • 5.13.8.1.4 Platform Provider (TSMC Model)
    • 5.13.8.2 Strategic Implications of Integration Trends
  • 5.13.9 Recent Developments - Q1
  • 5.13.10 Recent Developments - Q2
• 5.14 Scenario Analysis
  • 5.14.1 Scenario Framework
  • 5.14.2 Scenario Definitions
  • 5.14.3 Bull Case Scenario
  • 5.14.4 Base Case Scenario
  • 5.14.5 Bear Case Scenario
  • 5.14.6 Optical transceiver market
  • 5.14.7 Scenario Comparison and Key Variables

6 GLOBAL MARKET TRENDS IN DATACOM

• 6.1 Introduction to DATACOM Market Dynamics
  • 6.1.1 Overview of the Data Communications Market
    • 6.1.1.1 Market Definition and Scope
    • 6.1.1.2 Market Size and Growth
  • 6.1.2 Key Market Drivers
    • 6.1.2.1 Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning
    • 6.1.2.2 Cloud Computing Growth
    • 6.1.2.3 Data Growth
    • 6.1.2.4 Power and Sustainability Pressures
  • 6.1.3 The Optical Transceiver Market Context
• 6.2 Application Trends
  • 6.2.1 AI and Machine Learning Workload Growth
    • 6.2.1.1 The AI Training Revolution
    • 6.2.1.2 Training Cluster Architecture Evolution
    • 6.2.1.3 AI Inference Deployment
    • 6.2.1.4 Market Quantification
    • 6.2.1.5 Implications for CPO
  • 6.2.2 Hyperscale Data Centre Expansion
    • 6.2.2.1 Defining Hyperscale
  • 6.2.3 Global Hyperscale Capacity
  • 6.2.4 Regional Distribution
  • 6.2.5 Hyperscaler Investment Trends
    • 6.2.5.1 Capital expenditure acceleration
    • 6.2.5.2 AI-Specific Infrastructure
    • 6.2.5.3 Implications for CPO
  • 6.2.6 Edge Computing and Distributed AI
    • 6.2.6.1 Market Growth
  • 6.2.7 Edge AI Applications
  • 6.2.8 Edge Network Architecture
• 6.3 Technology Trends
  • 6.3.1 Technology Trends Overview
    • 6.3.1.1 Key Technology Vectors
    • 6.3.1.2 Technology Interdependencies
  • 6.3.2 Technology Trends: Packaging
  • 6.3.3 Universal Chiplet Interconnect Express (UCIe)
  • 6.3.4 Laser Sources for CPO
  • 6.3.5 External vs. Integrated Laser
  • 6.3.6 Silicon Photonics Share of Datacom

7 MARKET OUTLOOK

• 7.1 Hybrid Pluggable-to-CPO Transition, 2026–2030
• 7.2 Scale-Out Outlook
  • 7.2.1 Scale-Out CPO Market Evolution
    • 7.2.1.1 Scale-Out Market Drivers
    • 7.2.1.2 Market Evolution Phases
    • 7.2.1.3 Scale-Out CPO Market Forecast
  • 7.2.2 Scale-Out Technology Roadmap
    • 7.2.2.1 Technology Generation Evolution
    • 7.2.2.2 Technology Enablers by Generation
  • 7.2.3 Scale-Out Key Players and Competitive Landscape
• 7.3 Scale-Up Outlook
  • 7.3.1 Scale-Up CPO Market Evolution
  • 7.3.2 Copper to Optical Transition
  • 7.3.3 Optical I/O Solution
  • 7.3.4 Scale-Up CPO Market Forecast
  • 7.3.5 Market Evolution Phases
  • 7.3.6 Scale-Up Technology Roadmap
    • 7.3.6.1 NVIDIA Optical I/O Evolution
    • 7.3.6.2 AMD Optical I/O Evolution
    • 7.3.6.3 Custom Silicon Optical I/O
  • 7.3.7 Scale-Up Key Players and Competitive Landscape
    • 7.3.7.1 Competitive Landscape Overview
• 7.4 High-Density Connectors
  • 7.4.1 High-Density Connectors vs. CPO
    • 7.4.1.1 Scenario 1: Connectors Enable Extended Pluggable (Low CPO Impact)
    • 7.4.1.2 Scenario 2: Connectors Complement CPO (Moderate Impact)
    • 7.4.1.3 Scenario 3: Connectors Enable "Near-Packaged" Optics (Moderate CPO Impact)
    • 7.4.1.4 Scenario 4: Connector Development Delays (Positive CPO Impact)
  • 7.4.2 Detachable connectors
• 7.5 Emerging Supply Chain Dynamics
  • 7.5.1 Geographic Concentration in CPO Supply Chains
  • 7.5.2 Laser and component supply chain
• 7.6 Third-Party Suppliers and Systems Integrators
  • 7.6.1 Multi-Tier Supply Chain Architecture
    • 7.6.1.1 Tier 1: Silicon Photonics Platform
    • 7.6.1.2 Tier 2: CPO Assembly (OSAT)
    • 7.6.1.3 Tier 3: Fiber Array Unit (FAU) Suppliers
    • 7.6.1.4 Tier 4: External Laser Source (ELS) Suppliers
    • 7.6.1.5 Tier 5: Optical Fiber Supply
    • 7.6.1.6 Tier 6: Optical Sub-Assembly Integration
  • 7.6.2 Strategic Implications for Supply Chain Participants

8 COMPANY PROFILES (68 company profiles)

9 APPENDIX

• 9.1 Research Methodology and Data Sources

10 REFERENCES

List of Tables

• Table 1. CPO Market Drivers and Restraints Analysis
• Table 2. Key Data Centre Architecture Challenges Summary
• Table 3. Key Data Centre Architecture Challenges Summary.
• Table 4. Form Factor Evolution and Density Comparison
• Table 5. Optical Transceiver Power Consumption by Generation
• Table 6. Technology Migration Decision Framework
• Table 7. CPO vs. Pluggables Decision Matrix
• Table 8. Semiconductor Packaging Interconnection Techniques Overview
• Table 9. CPO Application Segmentation (Scale-Out vs. Scale-Up)
• Table 10. EIC/PIC Integration Methods Comparison
• Table 11. Integration Technology Selection Criteria
• Table 12. Detailed Technical Comparison: 2D vs 2.5D vs 3D
• Table 13. 3D Integration Sub-Categories Comparison
• Table 14. Packaging Technology Benchmark for EIC/PIC Integration
• Table 15. CPO Technology Challenges and Mitigation Strategies
• Table 16. NVIDIA vs. Broadcom Strategic Positioning Comparison
• Table 17. NVIDIA vs. Broadcom CPO Product Specifications Benchmark
• Table 18. Server Boards, CPUs, and GPU/Accelerator Forecast (2026-2036)
• Table 19. Optical I/O for AI Interconnect CPO - Unit Shipment Forecast (2026–2037)
• Table 20. Optical I/O for AI Interconnect CPO - Revenue Forecast ($M) (2026–2037)
• Table 21. CPO Network Switches - Unit Shipment Forecast (2026–2037)
• Table 22. CPO Network Switches - Optical Engine Revenue Forecast ($M) (2026–2037)
• Table 23. Total CPO Market Size and Revenue (2026–2037)
• Table 24. Total CPO by EIC/PIC Integration Technology - Unit Shipments (2026–2037)
• Table 25. Network Switch CPO Adoption by Packaging Technology (2026–2037)
• Table 26. Optical I/O Forecast by Packaging Technology
• Table 27. PIC Design Segment - Key Players and Capabilities
• Table 28. ASIC and xPU Design Segment - Key Players and CPO Integration Strategies
• Table 29. Laser Sources Segment - Key Suppliers and Technologies
• Table 30. SOI Wafer and Epi-Wafer Segment - Substrate Suppliers
• Table 31. EIC, Retimers, SerDes, and PHY Segment - High-Speed Electronics Suppliers
• Table 32. Connectors and Fibers Segment - Optical Infrastructure Suppliers
• Table 33. Foundries Segment - Silicon Photonics and Advanced Packaging Capabilities
• Table 34. Packaging, Assembling, and Testing Segment - OSAT and Test Equipment Providers
• Table 35. System and Equipment Segment - OEMs and ODMs
• Table 36. End Customers (Hyperscalers) Segment - Data Centre Operators and AI Leaders
• Table 37. CPO Industrial Ecosystem Summary - Complete Value Chain Overview
• Table 38. AI Model Parameter and Compute Growth (2018-2030)
• Table 39. Global AI Training Compute Demand Growth
• Table 40. AI Data Centre Requirements by Workload Type
• Table 41. Switch Hierarchy in AI Data Centres
• Table 42. Scale-Up vs. Scale-Out vs. Scale-Across Comparison Matrix
• Table 43. SerDes Bandwidth Limitations and Power Consumption
• Table 44. SerDes Bottleneck Solutions Comparison
• Table 45. Pluggable Optics Architecture and Limitations
• Table 46. Signal Loss Comparison: Pluggable vs. CPO (dB)
• Table 47. Comprehensive Pluggable vs. CPO Comparison
• Table 48. Design Decision Framework for CPO Adoption
• Table 49. L2 Network Architecture Comparison
• Table 50.Copper Wire Count in Current AI Systems
• Table 51. Copper Interconnect Specifications by System
• Table 52. Copper System Limitations Summary
• Table 53. Copper vs. Optical Performance Benchmark
• Table 54. Power Consumption by Interconnect Technology
• Table 55. Power Consumption Component Breakdown: Pluggable vs. CPO (400G)
• Table 56. Latency Benchmark Comparison
• Table 57. PIC Component Overview
• Table 58. PICs vs. Silicon Photonics Comparison
• Table 59. Silicon Photonics vs. Other PIC Platforms: Capability Comparison
• Table 60. PIC Advantages and Challenges Summary
• Table 61. Optical Engine vs. Pluggable Transceiver Comparison
• Table 62. External Laser Source Configurations
• Table 63. CPO Technology Building Blocks
• Table 64. CPO Technology Components and Suppliers
• Table 65. Latency Comparison: Pluggable vs. CPO
• Table 66. Data Rate Scaling: Pluggable vs. CPO
• Table 67. Emerging modulator technologies for CPO and high-speed optics
• Table 68. Data-Rate Scaling Levers, Physical Ceilings, and Industry Responses
• Table 69. WDM Variants for Co-Packaged Optics
• Table 70. Representative Multi-Wavelength Source and Platform Demonstrations (2025–2026)
• Table 71. Shoreline (Beachfront) Bandwidth Density
• Table 72. Challenges of Higher WDM Channel Count and Mitigations
• Table 73. CPO Value Proposition Summary
• Table 74. CPO Technical Challenges and Mitigation Approaches
• Table 75. CPO test scale-up: challenges and mitigations
• Table 76. OIF CPO Standards Development Timeline
• Table 77. OIF CPO Framework Functional Partitioning
• Table 78. OIF CPO Module Specifications by Generation
• Table 79. ELSFP Implementation Agreement Key Specifications
• Table 80. CPO Telemetry and Management Requirements
• Table 81. OIF CEI Specifications for CPO Applications
• Table 82. UCIe Specifications and CPO Relationship
• Table 83. China CPO Standards Landscape
• Table 84. Pluggable vs. co-packaged optics: cost and serviceability
• Table 85. CPO Component Packaging Requirements
• Table 86. Switch CPO Package Specifications (Representative)
• Table 87. 1.6 Tbps Optical Engine Performance
• Table 88. XPU Optical I/O Requirements
• Table 89. Advanced Optical I/O Integration Approaches
• Table 90.Overview of CPO Packaging Technologies
• Table 91. Semiconductor Packaging Technology Landscape
• Table 92. Packaging Technology Comparison for CPO
• Table 93. Advanced Packaging Performance Metrics
• Table 94. Overview of Interconnection Techniques in Semiconductor Packaging
• Table 95. Interconnection Technique Comparison for CPO
• Table 96. Silicon Interposer vs. Silicon Bridge Comparison
• Table 97. Silicon-Based 2.5D Packaging Options
• Table 98. TSV Specifications by Application
• Table 99. TSV Fabrication Process Steps
• Table 100.TSV Technology Evolution
• Table 101. TSV Challenges for CPO Applications
• Table 102. TSV Technology Evolution.
• Table 103. 2.5D Silicon Packaging Development Trends
• Table 104. Key Development Areas by Technology Node
• Table 105. Interposer Size Evolution for CPO
• Table 106. 2.5D Silicon Packaging Roadmap by Vendor
• Table 107. Roadmap Milestones for CPO Integration
• Table 108. Si Interposer vs. Si Bridge Comparison
• Table 109. RDL Technology Specifications
• Table 110. SiO2 vs. Organic Dielectric Comparison
• Table 111. WLFO vs. PLFO Comparison
• Table 112. Fan-Out Packaging Trends
• Table 113. Fan-Out Process Challenges
• Table 114. Glass Properties vs. Silicon and Organic.
• Table 115. Glass Applications in Semiconductor Packaging
• Table 116. Glass Core Interposer Characteristics
• Table 117. Glass vs. Silicon Interposer Comparison
• Table 118. Glass Interposer Benefits for CPO
• Table 119. Glass vs. Molding Compound Properties
• Table 120. Glass Packaging Challenges and Solutions
• Table 121. Bumping Technology Evolution
• Table 122. Bump Scaling Challenges
• Table 123. Micro-Bump Specifications and Applications
• Table 124. Cu-Cu Hybrid Bonding Methods Comparison
• Table 125. Hybrid Bonding Method Selection for CPO Applications
• Table 126. Hybrid Bonding Manufacturing Challenges
• Table 127. Hybrid Bonding Process Maturity by Pitch
• Table 128. Critical Process Parameters for Hybrid Bonding
• Table 129. Conventional EIC/PIC Integration Methods
• Table 130. Conventional Method Advantages and Limitations Summary
• Table 131. Emerging EIC/PIC Integration Methods
• Table 132. 2D to 3D EIC/PIC Integration Options
• Table 133. Technology Transition Drivers
• Table 134. 2D to 3D Integration Evolution
• Table 135. Integration Roadmap by CPO Segment
• Table 136. EIC/PIC Packaging Technology Benchmark
• Table 137. 2D EIC/PIC Integration Pros and Cons
• Table 138. 2.5D EIC/PIC Integration Pros and Cons
• Table 139. 3D Hybrid EIC/PIC Integration Pros and Cons
• Table 140. 3D Monolithic EIC/PIC Integration Pros and Cons
• Table 141. Benefits of TSV for PIC/EIC Integration
• Table 142. TSV Fabrication Challenges in CPO
• Table 143. Si Photonics Packaging Options Comparison
• Table 144. 2.5D Si Interposer Pros and Cons for EIC/PIC
• Table 145. FOPOP vs. WB Packaging Comparison
• Table 146. Optical Engine Packaging Process Challenges
• Table 147. Fan-Out EIC/PIC Integration Challenges
• Table 148. Bond Pitch Scaling Challenges
• Table 149. Co-Packaging vs. CPO Definition Comparison
• Table 150. Future 3D-CPO Architecture Vision
• Table 151. Architecture Evolution by Component
• Table 152. 3D-CPO Integration Approaches
• Table 153. Future 3D-CPO Packaging Structure Types
• Table 154. Key Technology Milestones for Future 3D-CPO
• Table 155. Performance Trajectory for Future 3D-CPO
• Table 156. Thermal Management Evolution for 3D-CPO
• Table 157.3D-CPO Vision: NVIDIA Architecture Example
• Table 158. CPO Assembly Process and Bottlenecks
• Table 159. Coupler-FAU Interface Critical Dimensions
• Table 160. Misalignment Loss Characterisation
• Table 161. FAU-PIC Interface Stability Requirements
• Table 162. Grating vs. Edge Coupler Comparison
• Table 163. Grating vs. Edge Coupler Comparison
• Table 164. Optical Alignment Challenges Overview
• Table 165. Active vs. Passive Alignment Comparison
• Table 166. Fiber Attach Methods Comparison
• Table 167. FAU Supplier Landscape
• Table 168. Alignment Structure Benchmark
• Table 169. SENKO Key CPO Solutions
• Table 170. Suppliers of Optical Components in CPO: Comprehensive Overview
• Table 171. Laser Source Supplier Details
• Table 172. On-Chip Laser Integration Approaches
• Table 173. External Laser Configurations for CPO
• Table 174. External Laser Suppliers
• Table 175. Laser Attach Technology Comparison
• Table 176. Comprehensive Laser Integration Benchmark
• Table 177. Global CPO Market Forecast ($ Millions)
• Table 178.Switch CPO Unit Volume Forecast (Thousands of Optical Engines)
• Table 179. Switch CPO Market Forecast by Switch Generation ($M)
• Table 180. CPO Cost Trajectory Projection
• Table 181. XPU Optical I/O Market Forecast
• Table 182. XPU Optical I/O Market Forecast by Platform ($M)
• Table 183. CPO Cost Trajectory Projection
• Table 184. CPO vs. Pluggable Cost Comparison (Per 800G Equivalent)
• Table 185. Total Cost of Ownership Comparison (Per 51.2T Switch, 5-Year Lifetime)
• Table 186. North America CPO Market Forecast 2026-2037
• Table 187. Asia-Pacific CPO Market Forecast 2026-2037
• Table 188. Europe CPO Market Forecast 2026-2037
• Table 189. Rest of World CPO Market Forecast 2026-2037
• Table 190. Global CPO Market Summary
• Table 191. CPO Total Addressable Market Quantification
• Table 192.CPO Serviceable Addressable Market
• Table 193. CPO Component Market Forecast ($M)
• Table 194. CPO Market by Optical Engine Generation ($M)
• Table 195. CPO Commercial Milestones and Representative Products by Period
• Table 196. Generation Share Evolution
• Table 197. Manufacturing Yield Improvement Trajectory
• Table 198. CPO Standards Development Timeline
• Table 199. Market Restraints Summary
• Table 200. CPO Adoption Curve by Segment (Penetration of Addressable Market)
• Table 201. CPO Market Share by Participant (2024-2026)
• Table 202. Near-Term Competitive Evolution
• Table 203. Competitive Landscape Evolution Timeline
• Table 204. Vertical Integration Trends by Participant Type
• Table 205. Vertical Integration by Company
• Table 206. Bull Case Market Forecast ($M)
• Table 207. Base Case Market Forecast ($M)
• Table 208. Bear Case Market Forecast ($M)
• Table 209.Global optical transceiver market context (USD billion)
• Table 210. Scenario Comparison Summary
• Table 211. Global DATACOM Market Size and Growth
• Table 212. DATACOM Market Growth Drivers
• Table 213. Global optical transceiver market context (USD billion)
• Table 214. Global Hyperscale Data Centre Capacity
• Table 215. Edge Computing Market Growth
• Table 216. DATACOM Technology Trends Summary
• Table 217. Packaging Technology Evolution for DATACOM
• Table 218. UCIe Specifications and Adoption Timeline
• Table 219. Laser Source Technology Trends
• Table 220. Laser Source Comparison for CPO
• Table 221. Scale-Out CPO Market Forecast by Switch Bandwidth ($M) 2026-2037
• Table 222. Scale-Out Technology Enablers by Generation
• Table 223. Scale-Out CPO Competitive Landscape
• Table 224. Scale-Up CPO Market Forecast by Platform ($M)
• Table 225. Scale-Up CPO Market Forecast
• Table 226. Scale-Up CPO Market Evolution Phases
• Table 227. Scale-Up CPO Platform Comparison
• Table 228. Scale-Up vs. Scale-Out CPO Comparison
• Table 229. Scale-Up CPO Competitive Landscape
• Table 230. CPO vs. High-Density Connector Adoption Scenarios
• Table 231. OIF High-Density Connector Specifications (Proposed)
• Table 232. Technology Comparison: CPO vs. High-Density Connector-Enabled Alternatives
• Table 233. Scenario Impact by Market Segment
• Table 234. High-Density Connector Development Roadmap vs. CPO Timeline
• Table 235. Why High-Density Connectors Are Unlikely to Derail CPO
• Table 236. Scenario Summary and Strategic Implications
• Table 237. NVIDIA CPO Supply Chain Geographic Distribution
• Table 238. Taiwan IC Industry Market Share Evolution (2021-2025)
• Table 239. TSMC COUPE Platform Technical Specifications
• Table 240. External Laser Source Suppliers for NVIDIA CPO

List of Figures

• Figure 1. Anatomy of a Modern AI Data Centre
• Figure 2. Network Switch Architecture in Data Centres
• Figure 3. Switch IC Bandwidth Evolution Timeline (2015-2036)
• Figure 4. Optical Transceiver Technology Migration Path (Pluggable → Near-Package → CPO)
• Figure 5. Optical Engine Component Architecture
• Figure 6. Co-Packaged Optics 1.0: Typical Integration Flow.
• Figure 7. Heterogeneous Integration Concept Diagram
• Figure 8. Evolution from 2D to 2.5D to 3D Integration
• Figure 9. Integration Technology Progression Roadmap
• Figure 10. Co-packaged optics market map
• Figure 11. Switch ASIC with pluggable optics versus co-packaged optics
• Figure 12. LLM Parameter Growth Timeline (GPT-1 to GPT-5 and Beyond)
• Figure 13. DGX H100/H200system topology
• Figure 14. NVIDIA Rubin Architecture Overview
• Figure 15. Scale-Up Network Topology (NVLink, NVSwitch)
• Figure 16. Scale-Out and Scale-Up Network Topology (Ethernet/InfiniBand)
• Figure 17. Three-Tier Network Architecture Diagram
• Figure 18. Interconnect Technology Roadmap (2020-2036)
• Figure 19. On-Board Optics Configuration
• Figure 20. Switch ASIC Bandwidth Scaling (51.2T → 102.4T → 204.8T)
• Figure 21. Copper-to-Optical Migration Roadmap
• Figure 22. Current AI System Interconnect Architecture
• Figure 23. AI Architecture Evolution (2026-2030)
• Figure 24. AI Architecture Vision (2031-2036)
• Figure 25. PIC Architecture for CPO Applications
• Figure 26. CPO Key Concepts Illustration
• Figure 27. Power Consumption Comparison (pJ/bit Roadmap)
• Figure 28. Optical I/O Packaging for XPUs
• Figure 29. Schematic view of three optically enabled data center platforms (LightningValley2, ThunderValley and Pegasus) and the Aurora test and measurement platform contained within the Nexus rack, which allows intra-rack and inter-rack connectivity betwee
• Figure 30. Semiconductor Packaging Evolution Timeline
• Figure 31. 2.5D Packaging Structure Diagram
• Figure 32. 2.5D Si-Based Packaging Roadmap
• Figure 33. EMIB implementation (silicon bridge).
• Figure 34. FPGA + HBM in 2.5D package with interposer.
• Figure 35. RDL Fabrication Process Flow
• Figure 36. Panel-Level Fan-Out Process
• Figure 37. Wafer-Level Fan-Out Process
• Figure 38. Glass Core Interposer Structure
• Figure 39. Glass Interposer Manufacturing Process Flow
• Figure 40. (a) Switch composed of 2.5D advanced packaging; (b) TMV-based, (c) TSV-based, and (d) TGV-based advanced packaging architectures.
• Figure 41. ASE Fan-Out CPO Solution
• Figure 42. ASE FOPOP Process Flow
• Figure 43. SPIL's Fan-Out Embedded Bridge (FOEB) Structure for PIC/EIC Integration in CPO
• Figure 44. FOEB Integration Process Flow
• Figure 45. TSMC Optical Engine Roadmap
• Figure 46. TSMC iOIS Architecture
• Figure 47. (a) TSMC-SoIC face-to-face (F”F) technology for EIC and PIC bonding. (b) COUPE critical components consist of TSMC-SoIC bond, TDC, embedded micro-lens and metal reflector.
• Figure 48. Bond Pitch Scaling Roadmap
• Figure 49.Scale-Up Optical I/O Technology Roadmap
• Figure 50. A demo compute rack with 100% CPO interconnect