Gaby Waisman: So we see both optical and chemical portfolios gaining strong traction with advanced packaging. And if we want to dive in more specifically, the dimensional is focused on the hybrid bonding and TSV, as well as HBM. I’d say that chemical is very strong in HBM, but definitely has applications for the other advanced packaging technologies. We see the demand coming from a suite of applications that include the measuring of depth, size, dimensions on the through silicon via, as well as the flatness. We see the criticality of the edge of the wafer becoming more and more important, again, as part of the requirements on flatness. And that all drives both the chemical and the dimensional optical tool adoption for that segment.
Vedvati Shrotre: And if I may ask, what is the competitive positioning? If we look at some of your bigger competitors like [KLA] (ph), they have been talking about their front end tools being converted into backend. Is that your competitive — I mean, are you seeing that happen for the applications you’re being used in?
Gaby Waisman: Definitely. I believe that the use case of front-end tools converting into backend is exactly what we’re seeing. And we did identify early the need and so we customized the tools in order to support the specific requirements of the backend — both back-end, far back-end and hybrid bonding. So it all boils down to the adoption from the customers in that respect.
Vedvati Shrotre: All right. Thank you. That’s helpful.
Operator: Thank you. We’ll take the next question from the line of Charles Shi from Needham & Company. Please go ahead.
Charles Shi: Hey, thanks. Hey, good afternoon Gaby, Dror and Guy. I want to come back to the question about the 2 nanometer ramp, the shape of the ramp a little bit. So you are expecting some initial orders, looks like, and more of the ramp into next year, but I kind of wonder whether you think 2025 will be a big ramp year across all 3 customers, the leading edge customers on two nanometer node, or maybe we should expect maybe 2026 to be a bigger year. The reason why I asked this was that, at least the TSMC, they announced that the revenue will — 2 nanometer will be more like a 2026 event rather than 2025. Of course, they’re going to pull the tools a little bit earlier, but just try to understand based on your current visibility, what’s the shape of the ramp for the overall 2 nanometer?
And of course, I want to add that the leading logic IDM customer, they adopted several of your new technologies, but that sounds like we still haven’t seen a good amount of revenue contribution yet, do you think that will happen in 2025 or maybe a little bit earlier in 2024, maybe a little bit later in 2026. Thanks.
Gaby Waisman: Thank you. So I did mention that we already received orders for Gate-All-Around, which are expected to be delivered in the coming 12 months. And we are talking in fact on four Gate-All-Around customers. In terms of the shape, it’s definitely going to grow and gain momentum as we finish this year, enter into 2025 and onwards towards 2026, as our customers ramp gain traction. I cannot address to a specific customer, but I’ll definitely say that we’re working very closely with all of them.
Charles Shi: Thanks, Gaby. I want to ask a little bit more on the memory side. It looks like the memory revenue is probably — in Q1, is probably a record if my numbers for your past quarters are accurate. It sounds like Korea is the main driver for the strong memory results, but I wonder how much of that memory numbers is from China in the last quarter? And do you expect that the memory revenue run rate to maintain or even grow from here for the rest of the year?
Gaby Waisman: So our long term model calls for 60:40. 60% for logic foundry and 40% for memory, simply because of the metrology intensity that is higher in logic and foundry. We already had in the past an even split of 50:50 between logic and memory so 40% is not the record, but it’s definitely an improvement if we compare it to the previous quarter. The memory is, obviously, split between different territories, other territories to the ones that you’ve mentioned, and quite a few customers. So we are definitely very much focused on making sure that we can capture any opportunity first and foremost on DRAM as this is the segment that grows this year, but most definitely [indiscernible] when it gets traction probably towards the second half and onward.
Charles Shi: Thanks. If I may, one last question. One of the examples you gave about XPS tools for memory application, six tools for one memory fab. I think that that’s probably the highest number I’ve heard. Because what I remember is probably more like two tools per fab, but correct me if I’m wrong there. Can you talk a little bit more in details, whether this is DRAM or NAND, or what’s driving the increase in the intensity of the XPS in the memory fabs? Thanks.
Gaby Waisman: I mentioned that we reached a record of eight VERAFLEX 4 tools or VERAFLEX tools per fab in memory. And this is attributed to both the span of applications as well as capacity. And we’re very encouraged by the fact that we see that growth. We also discussed it in the past in terms of our effort and focus on increasing the appeal, the number of applications, the value that the platform provides and with the VERAFLEX 4, with the additional throughput sampling rate and performance criteria, we’re definitely able to execute on that and increase the number of tools per fab.
Charles Shi: Thanks, Gaby.
Operator: Thank you. We’ll take our next question from the line of Mark Miller from The Benchmark Company. Please go ahead.
Mark Miller: Congratulations on your record results. As you discussed previously, memory was up to 40%. I’m just wondering in terms of that memory sales, what — can you attribute a percentage to high bandwidth memory?
