3 ms·

Is this not just the efficient-market at work? Simplistically: Intel's chips aren't as good as AMDs so it has to drop prices. And for future investment Intel s

• scandinavian 5y ago
  > Simplistically: Intel's chips aren't as good as AMDs so it has to drop prices. Shouldn't you replace AMD with TSMC in that sentence, unless you meant design instead of chips? AMD doesn't manufacture chips.
  • rcthompson 5y ago
    By "AMD's chips", they clearly meant chips marketed and sold under AMD's brand. If you're trying to make the point that TSMC deserves the real credit for competing with Intel, then just say that.
    • scandinavian 5y ago
      You don't think it's important to make the distinction between chip design and manufacturing? Intel has clearly failed with regards to manufacturing new nodes, but is the chip design really that bad when they could compete for a long time with a large node disadvantage?
      • pdimitar 5y ago
        They almost never competed in the dictionary sense of the word, historically. They have plenty of shady tactics to gain more market share. Assuming that the "free market" works -- or that it even exists -- is way too charitable and optimistic of you.
  • tomalpha 5y ago
    It's an interesting point, but I buy from Intel or AMD - I don't buy from TSMC. Intel and AMD supply me the product and set the pricing. As a simple consumer, I perhaps don't know about their upstream suppliers (granted the HN crowd will absolutely know...).
    • Retric 5y ago
      If you own a cellphone or console your likely buying from TSMC. If you’re buying AMD then you are buying TSMC. Intel is unusual in that they still manufacture their high end chips in house, cutting edge fabs are simply mind boggling expensive. So basically everyone else outsources and if your outsourcing high end chips you might as well buy from the bets if you can.
  • adrian_b 5y ago
    It is true that the main reason why the AMD chips are better than the Intel chips is that the TSMC 7 nm manufacturing process is significantly better than the Intel process used for the Ice Lake Server chips. Nevertheless, the AMD designers must be praised for making the right design choices year after year for the last half of decade, which were needed to fully exploit the characteristics of the modern CMOS processes. On the other hand the Intel designers appear to have lived in a fantasy land, where they had absolutely no idea about how their future manufacturing processes will behave, even if in their case the required information should have come from another division of the same company, not from different foundry companies, like in the case of AMD. Once again, Intel was not able to switch in time their style of design, to be in sync with the advance of CMOS technology. During 2003 - 2008, Intel needed 5 years to follow AMD and switch to CPUs with integrated memory controllers and now, during 2016 - 2021, Intel required again 5 years to follow AMD in the transition to the use of multiple interconnected chiplets instead of large monolithic chips.
• danpalmer 5y ago
  TSMC are spending about that every year for the next 3 years on production improvements. Chip fabrication is so expensive to develop, I'm concern that $24bn is nowhere near enough to build a 5nm process.
  • pbalau 5y ago
    Intel has 24bn available in cash. One could assume Intel also has $FOO x 24bn available in loaning power.
    • MangoCoffee 5y ago
      money can't buy node process. Intel struggle with 10nm for so long and 7nm is delayed while TSMC is now 5nm production ready and developing 3nm.
• the-dude 5y ago
  Isn't a new fab around $20bn?
  • aeyes 5y ago
    You usually don't buy the construction of a new fab with cash.