5 ms·

Is there a risk in one manufacturer seemingly getting so far ahead in terms of being able to deliver high-performance processors?

by skohan 6y ago

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
mlindner 6y ago
Intel was there. If a company gets far ahead then they start to rest on their laurels and then competitors catch back up. It's cyclical.
- virtue3 6y ago
  I think what hurt intel in the long run was actually their fully integrated stack. They couldn't really sell fab time to other companies cuz they didn't have a good attempt at fabbing for 3rd parties. So they were only fabricating intel chips, that's not nearly as big of a business as TSMC. So basically, TSMC can keep their last 3+ gens of fabs open and making product, while intel couldn't really reap any benefit from keeping old process nodes open. AMD made a good call selling off global foundries when it was apparent they couldnt keep up with Intel even. I think the really rough issue here is what happens if China does try to take Taiwan (and this is not unrealistic as China has been more aggressive towards them recently). TSMC is now a strategic asset for the USA. We've been attempting to get them to build a fab in the states for exactly this reason.
  - ENOTTY 6y ago
    Intel fabs plenty of stuff at the 22 nm node, including chipsets for their CPUs[1], RF and other analog uses[2], novel RAM technologies, and their Lakefield/Foreveros thing. Given Intel's expanding product portfolio, there's likely additional internal customers for older nodes. [1]: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-14nm-shortage-h310c,37819.html https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-14nm-shortage-h310c,... [2]: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9075914 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9075914
    - petra 6y ago
      Is that enough volume to cover all of their older , and large, fab capacity ? i'm not so sure.
      - wmf 6y ago
        Intel has a large number of fabs and I think capacity is reallocated over time; for example, a 22nm fab might be converted to 10nm to adapt to changing demand. They can eventually get down to just one 22nm fab which won't require as much demand to fill.
        ENOTTY 6y ago
        To be fair, there are limits on how far and how fast one can upgrade a fab and upgrades are planned out many years in advance. Equipment for the smaller nodes tends to be larger and more complex and involving more steps; this requires more space. Additionally, ASML only makes around a dozen of the EUV machines each year and they are booked years in advance.
        petra 6y ago
        What percentage of the equipment changes between nodes ? Is it mostly the lithography and inspection tools ?
  - sroussey 6y ago
    Intel fanning for themselves is more than twice the business of TMSC fanning for many others. https://www.extremetech.com/computing/317769-intel-tops-semiconductor-revenue-as-tsmc-nvidia-and-amd-vault-upwards https://www.extremetech.com/computing/317769-intel-tops-semi...
  - AtlasBarfed 6y ago
    What hurt Intel was missing the mobile CPU boat. If Intel wasn't so braindead in management, they probably could have won a substantial segment of mobile. Because of mobile, TSMC had so much revenue to advance their process and catch/surpass Intel. Heck, Apple's M1 is probably due to the same reason in the Apple ecosystem, they couldn't win the iPhone either, and IIRC various "what's wrong with Intel" threads stated many of the best Intel engineers went to Apple.
    - baybal2 6y ago
      > Because of mobile, TSMC had so much revenue to advance their process and catch/surpass Intel. Intel never been chasing pure revenue. They were always conscious of their profitability, to please sock market analysts.
      - AtlasBarfed 6y ago
        Agreed, that's what happens when the MBAs infect your company. Same with Medtronic, a medical engineering company gets overridden with MBAs and now the only innovation they do is acquiring other companies.
- fibers 6y ago
  each iterative cycle requires exponentially more r&d, making it prohibitive for that one firm to catch up
aaronblohowiak 6y ago
I’ve been told it helps protect Taiwan from prc aggression through its allies dependency on the fabrication continuing.
- justicezyx 6y ago
  Like the myth that China's GFW is to protect local business, this is just retrospective fairytale. TSMC succeeded because of the chip and high-quality talents on the island. It was not setup to become a high-value precious. And the logic also easily break down, if anyone bother to think about the consequence. I.e., put a high-value target in a contended geographical location, just makes the conflict more desirable for the aggressor. Sure the protector would be more concerned if the target is lost, but the value of acquiring that target suddenly becomes way more attractive, in comparison to the potential loss to the protectors.
  - DSingularity 6y ago
    The value of the target is probably irrelevant. What matters is probability of success. Any Chinese will be decided by expected loses and gains. This is probably why IS continues to arm Taiwan as it is the biggest deterrent.
    - justicezyx 6y ago
      I am replying to the idea that TSMC is setup to be valuable to US, such that Taiwan get more protection.
  - jasonwatkinspdx 6y ago
    You are mistaken. This was a deliberate and overt tactic by the Taiwanese government. It's been heavily discussed in geopolitical circles for decades. TSMC is not something that can be "acquired" by military force. That's not how things work. If China does follow through on their threats to take the island by force, they won't be able to simply operate TSMC as if they were new management. The organization itself will cease to exist, along with all the institutional knowledge necessary to duplicate their success, even assuming China was able to secure the fab lines without damage. Likewise all customer relationships become essentially void, and the finely tuned money machine that sustains TSMC's intense R&D ceases to exist as well.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Razengan 6y ago
What would the alternative be? Slowing all progress down so everyone can keep up?

Is there a risk in one manufacturer seemingly getting so far ahead in terms of being able to deliver high-performance processors?

by skohan 6y ago

Is there a risk in one manufacturer seemingly getting so far ahead in terms of being able to deliver high-performance processors?

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

mlindner 6y ago

Intel was there. If a company gets far ahead then they start to rest on their laurels and then competitors catch back up. It's cyclical.

virtue3 6y ago
I think what hurt intel in the long run was actually their fully integrated stack. They couldn't really sell fab time to other companies cuz they didn't have a good attempt at fabbing for 3rd parties. So they were only fabricating intel chips, that's not nearly as big of a business as TSMC. So basically, TSMC can keep their last 3+ gens of fabs open and making product, while intel couldn't really reap any benefit from keeping old process nodes open. AMD made a good call selling off global foundries when it was apparent they couldnt keep up with Intel even. I think the really rough issue here is what happens if China does try to take Taiwan (and this is not unrealistic as China has been more aggressive towards them recently). TSMC is now a strategic asset for the USA. We've been attempting to get them to build a fab in the states for exactly this reason.
- ENOTTY 6y ago
  Intel fabs plenty of stuff at the 22 nm node, including chipsets for their CPUs[1], RF and other analog uses[2], novel RAM technologies, and their Lakefield/Foreveros thing. Given Intel's expanding product portfolio, there's likely additional internal customers for older nodes. [1]: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-14nm-shortage-h310c,37819.html https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-14nm-shortage-h310c,... [2]: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9075914 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9075914
  - petra 6y ago
    Is that enough volume to cover all of their older , and large, fab capacity ? i'm not so sure.
    - wmf 6y ago
      Intel has a large number of fabs and I think capacity is reallocated over time; for example, a 22nm fab might be converted to 10nm to adapt to changing demand. They can eventually get down to just one 22nm fab which won't require as much demand to fill.
      - ENOTTY 6y ago
        To be fair, there are limits on how far and how fast one can upgrade a fab and upgrades are planned out many years in advance. Equipment for the smaller nodes tends to be larger and more complex and involving more steps; this requires more space. Additionally, ASML only makes around a dozen of the EUV machines each year and they are booked years in advance.
        petra 6y ago
        What percentage of the equipment changes between nodes ? Is it mostly the lithography and inspection tools ?
- sroussey 6y ago
  Intel fanning for themselves is more than twice the business of TMSC fanning for many others. https://www.extremetech.com/computing/317769-intel-tops-semiconductor-revenue-as-tsmc-nvidia-and-amd-vault-upwards https://www.extremetech.com/computing/317769-intel-tops-semi...
- AtlasBarfed 6y ago
  What hurt Intel was missing the mobile CPU boat. If Intel wasn't so braindead in management, they probably could have won a substantial segment of mobile. Because of mobile, TSMC had so much revenue to advance their process and catch/surpass Intel. Heck, Apple's M1 is probably due to the same reason in the Apple ecosystem, they couldn't win the iPhone either, and IIRC various "what's wrong with Intel" threads stated many of the best Intel engineers went to Apple.
  - baybal2 6y ago
    > Because of mobile, TSMC had so much revenue to advance their process and catch/surpass Intel. Intel never been chasing pure revenue. They were always conscious of their profitability, to please sock market analysts.
    - AtlasBarfed 6y ago
      Agreed, that's what happens when the MBAs infect your company. Same with Medtronic, a medical engineering company gets overridden with MBAs and now the only innovation they do is acquiring other companies.
fibers 6y ago
each iterative cycle requires exponentially more r&d, making it prohibitive for that one firm to catch up

aaronblohowiak 6y ago

I’ve been told it helps protect Taiwan from prc aggression through its allies dependency on the fabrication continuing.

justicezyx 6y ago
Like the myth that China's GFW is to protect local business, this is just retrospective fairytale. TSMC succeeded because of the chip and high-quality talents on the island. It was not setup to become a high-value precious. And the logic also easily break down, if anyone bother to think about the consequence. I.e., put a high-value target in a contended geographical location, just makes the conflict more desirable for the aggressor. Sure the protector would be more concerned if the target is lost, but the value of acquiring that target suddenly becomes way more attractive, in comparison to the potential loss to the protectors.
- DSingularity 6y ago
  The value of the target is probably irrelevant. What matters is probability of success. Any Chinese will be decided by expected loses and gains. This is probably why IS continues to arm Taiwan as it is the biggest deterrent.
  - justicezyx 6y ago
    I am replying to the idea that TSMC is setup to be valuable to US, such that Taiwan get more protection.
- jasonwatkinspdx 6y ago
  You are mistaken. This was a deliberate and overt tactic by the Taiwanese government. It's been heavily discussed in geopolitical circles for decades. TSMC is not something that can be "acquired" by military force. That's not how things work. If China does follow through on their threats to take the island by force, they won't be able to simply operate TSMC as if they were new management. The organization itself will cease to exist, along with all the institutional knowledge necessary to duplicate their success, even assuming China was able to secure the fab lines without damage. Likewise all customer relationships become essentially void, and the finely tuned money machine that sustains TSMC's intense R&D ceases to exist as well.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

Razengan 6y ago

What would the alternative be? Slowing all progress down so everyone can keep up?