In this paper, using a recently developed solder fatigue model for wafer level-chip scale package (WL-CSP), we investigated the improvement on solder joint reliability for a 8-bump micro SMD package by enlarging the passivation layer opening at the solder–die interface. The motivation to enlarge the passivation opening is to reduce the severity of the stress concentration caused by the original design, and also to increase the contact area between the solder bump and aluminum bump pad. It was confirmed in the thermal shock test that with the new design, package fatigue life improved by more than 70%. To numerically predict this improvement represents a unique challenge to the modeling. This is because in order to capture the slightest geometrical difference on the order of a few microns between the two designs, the multiple-layer solder-die interface needs to be modeled using extremely fine mesh, while the overall dimensions of the package and the test board are on the order of millimeters. To bridge this tremendous gap in geometry, a single finite element model that incorporates all necessary geometrical details is deemed computationally prohibitive and impractical. In this paper, we applied a global–local modeling scheme that was also suggested by others [1–3]. The global model contains the complete package with much simplified solder–die interface whereas the local model includes only one solder joint, but with detailed solder–die interface. Unlike most global–local models proposed by others, we included time-independent plasticity and temperature-dependent materials in the global model. This greatly improved model correlation accuracy with only moderate increase in run time. Energy-based solder fatigue model was used to correlate the inelastic strain energy with the package fatigue life. In an earlier study [4], we have found that Darveaux’s equations tended to be conservative when applied to the micro SMD, and hence new correlations based on curve-fitting the test data were derived. In this paper, we used the newly derived equation and achieved less than 20% error in N 50 life for both designs, which is on par with Darveaux’s equations when used for BGAs. The analysis also revealed two factors that may account for the life improvement. First, a slight decrease in inelastic energy dissipation after enlarging the passivation opening. Second, the shift of the crack initiation location which leads to longer crack growth length for the new design. The second factor was also independently confirmed by the failure analysis.