3 ms·

We've been hearing this "they've lost all their CPU talents" claim for literal years, during a period when Apple keeps having win after win. At what point will

We've been hearing this "they've lost all their CPU talents" claim for literal years, during a period when Apple keeps having win after win. At what point will it start to ring a little hollow? "somehow delay their competitors from launching new and better chips" Both AMD and nvidia have designed and built on older processes long after newer process capacity was available to them. They aren't being delayed at all. Apple committing to production capacity is neither "Apple first", nor is it Apple "delaying" competitors. There is finite production capacity, and customers spread across the available options. There is literally nothing notable or interesting in that. But once you add words like "Mutiny", you pander to a very gullible crowd.

sudosysgen 5y ago
It takes around 5-6 years for a CPU architecture to go from first conception to production. Even if Apple's talents all left you wouldn't see the receipts for that until 5-7 years. NVidia and AMD do not have access to the latest processes. There is not enough capacity left at TSMC because of the Apple orders getting priority, so they have to stay on older processes. NVidia Ampere was not designed for Samsung 8nm, it was designed for TSMC 7nm but they couldn't get by with the leftovers so they had to put the consumer line on Samsung 8nm. Apple is absolutely first. They are using their warchest to ensure their competitors do not have access to high quality processes.
- defaultname 5y ago
  "There is not enough capacity left at TSMC because of the Apple orders getting priority" Reality: Apple had designs ready and committed to production. Indeed, the first 5nm production was Apple chips, and HiSilicon. Yes, HiSilicon with stock ARM cores somehow managed what AMD and nvidia (who are barely even Apple "competitors") couldn't. "They are using their warchest to ensure their competitors do not have access to high quality processes." Again, nvidia and AMD both tend to hang two processes behind (making their chips cheaper, higher yield, and because they have a slow design iteration for new processes), but let's pretend that they were really trying for the newest process (you know, the one that HiSilicon managed to get). Apple's evil here is apparently simply making products. Because you know that Apple isn't just reserving unused capacity -- they are literally making A15s and M1s and soon 5G models in the hundreds of millions. It's pretty amazing that simply making your products is now nefariously blocking competitors (if you're ignorant enough of actual fact to think that was actually happening).
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
    AMD and Nvidia literally cannot make enough product to meet demand, even after jacking up prices and using two different processes at once. Yet we're pretending that they couldn't design for only one lithography and that's why they couldn't get their orders first? And let's not pretend they couldn't do it in time, AMD was in the first running for 7nm, and they have a 5nm version of their GPUs that Samsung uses. HiSilicon is obvious, they wanted to produce as early as possible before US sanctions hit and were ready to pay any price for that. And AMD/Nvidia are direct competitors to the entire M1 line. By the way, AMD die size production only for the next-gen consoles in less than a year is equivalent to ~100 million iPhones as they use 4x more silicon, and that's in supply constrained conditions. AMD and NVidia absolutely can move more wafers than Apple, they just got outbid by a company that can buy them both. The issue is that we're in a market where Apple can afford to pay suppliers so much that other companies literally cannot afford to compete. Their positions in the market is slowing down technological advancement.
    - beebeepka 5y ago
      Exactly. Does the guy you're arguing with really think they are all idiots. Sure sounds like that.
      - defaultname 5y ago
        How does anything I said imply they are "all idiots". Quite the opposite, the other guy's argument demonstrates that they had zero need to go to a new process because they were going to do well regardless. nvidia is currently selling very low power control boards for robotics, computer vision, drones, cars, etc, built on 12nm. There simply was no compelling reason for them to have a higher BoM to go smaller, and they had proven existing designs. There is a world of excess 10nm fab capacity, and you can sign up for 7nm all day long. Nope. Because what random blowhards say on HN has little correlation with fact.
        beebeepka 5y ago
        Do you, by any chance, work in the industry?

sudosysgen 5y ago

It takes around 5-6 years for a CPU architecture to go from first conception to production. Even if Apple's talents all left you wouldn't see the receipts for that until 5-7 years. NVidia and AMD do not have access to the latest processes. There is not enough capacity left at TSMC because of the Apple orders getting priority, so they have to stay on older processes. NVidia Ampere was not designed for Samsung 8nm, it was designed for TSMC 7nm but they couldn't get by with the leftovers so they had to put the consumer line on Samsung 8nm. Apple is absolutely first. They are using their warchest to ensure their competitors do not have access to high quality processes.

defaultname 5y ago
"There is not enough capacity left at TSMC because of the Apple orders getting priority" Reality: Apple had designs ready and committed to production. Indeed, the first 5nm production was Apple chips, and HiSilicon. Yes, HiSilicon with stock ARM cores somehow managed what AMD and nvidia (who are barely even Apple "competitors") couldn't. "They are using their warchest to ensure their competitors do not have access to high quality processes." Again, nvidia and AMD both tend to hang two processes behind (making their chips cheaper, higher yield, and because they have a slow design iteration for new processes), but let's pretend that they were really trying for the newest process (you know, the one that HiSilicon managed to get). Apple's evil here is apparently simply making products. Because you know that Apple isn't just reserving unused capacity -- they are literally making A15s and M1s and soon 5G models in the hundreds of millions. It's pretty amazing that simply making your products is now nefariously blocking competitors (if you're ignorant enough of actual fact to think that was actually happening).
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  AMD and Nvidia literally cannot make enough product to meet demand, even after jacking up prices and using two different processes at once. Yet we're pretending that they couldn't design for only one lithography and that's why they couldn't get their orders first? And let's not pretend they couldn't do it in time, AMD was in the first running for 7nm, and they have a 5nm version of their GPUs that Samsung uses. HiSilicon is obvious, they wanted to produce as early as possible before US sanctions hit and were ready to pay any price for that. And AMD/Nvidia are direct competitors to the entire M1 line. By the way, AMD die size production only for the next-gen consoles in less than a year is equivalent to ~100 million iPhones as they use 4x more silicon, and that's in supply constrained conditions. AMD and NVidia absolutely can move more wafers than Apple, they just got outbid by a company that can buy them both. The issue is that we're in a market where Apple can afford to pay suppliers so much that other companies literally cannot afford to compete. Their positions in the market is slowing down technological advancement.
  - beebeepka 5y ago
    Exactly. Does the guy you're arguing with really think they are all idiots. Sure sounds like that.
    - defaultname 5y ago
      How does anything I said imply they are "all idiots". Quite the opposite, the other guy's argument demonstrates that they had zero need to go to a new process because they were going to do well regardless. nvidia is currently selling very low power control boards for robotics, computer vision, drones, cars, etc, built on 12nm. There simply was no compelling reason for them to have a higher BoM to go smaller, and they had proven existing designs. There is a world of excess 10nm fab capacity, and you can sign up for 7nm all day long. Nope. Because what random blowhards say on HN has little correlation with fact.
      - beebeepka 5y ago
        Do you, by any chance, work in the industry?