Die to die interface patents: mapping who controls the standard and where claim space is still open
Concentrated at the top. the five leading assignees hold 40.9% of all 2,222 records in scope, and the leading ten hold 54.8% — a small group already controls more than half the filed claim space. Filings ran from 137 in 2017 to a peak of 174 in 2025, with 2024 — the most recent complete year — at 66, down 25% from 88 in 2021. The 2026 figure (14) and the 2025 peak both understate true filing volume because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months; treat the last two years as still filling in rather than as a genuine falling-off or a genuine rebound.
- 1QUALCOMM INC18.9%
- 2INTEL CORP8.7%
- 3APPLE INC4.5%
- 4SILVEBROOK KIA4.5%
- 5TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON (PUBL)4.3%
See the full die to die interface standards analysis in Eureka
- The complete ranking, not just the top five
- Every IPC branch with its share of the corpus
- The most-cited records, and where claim space is still thin
Common questions about die to die interface patents
Who holds the most patents on die-to-die interface standards?
One assignee leads this landscape with 419 records, well ahead of the fifth-ranked filer at 96 and the tenth-ranked filer at 39. The top five assignees combined hold 40.9% of all 2,222 records in scope, and the top ten hold 54.8%, so the field is concentrated among a small group even though the full ranking covers 100 companies. Anyone evaluating freedom to operate should check the leader's portfolio specifically rather than relying on field-wide averages.
Is patent filing for die-to-die interconnects growing or slowing down?
Filings fell from 88 in 2021 to 66 in 2024, a 25% decline over that three-year span, using 2024 as the most recent year that can be treated as a complete filing-year figure. A later apparent peak of 174 in 2025 should be read cautiously: publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, so recent years are still filling in and are not yet directly comparable. The honest read is a cooling trend through 2024, not a definitive slowdown or a definitive rebound.
What technology areas do die-to-die interconnect patents fall under?
Most records in this dataset carry IPC classes tied to wireless communication networks (H04W, 49.8% of records) and digital information transmission (H04L, 42.8%), reflecting that die-to-die interfaces are usually claimed as networking or signalling inventions. Electric digital data processing (G06F) appears in 19.6% of records, while semiconductor devices (H01L) appear in only 4.1%. Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should each be read against the full 2,222-record base.
Disclaimer. This analysis is based on Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent records and is provided for general information and reference only. Patent data carries inherent limitations — recent filings are under-counted because of publication lag, counts may be on a record or family basis, classification and applicant-name data may contain errors or duplicates, and the underlying search query defines the scope shown — so the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing here is an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Verify independently and review with qualified patent and legal professionals before acting on it.
Method: Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Die to Die Interface Standards covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish. Every share divides by all records in scope. Data: Patsnap Eureka. See the full landscape report.