4 ms·

> 2. The 120nm legacy nodes and similar are right at the center of the whole shortage. This has been underinvested for years because it has been low demand grow

> 2. The 120nm legacy nodes and similar are right at the center of the whole shortage. This has been underinvested for years because it has been low demand growth and low margin. Automakers are particularly vulnerable, because for years, every new feature has gotten its own cheap microcontroller to run it. There are now dozens in new cars. > 5. For the vast majority of what automakers want, 7nm is overkill. Once there are more high end SoCs running multiple systems including self/assisted-driving, that will come into play. But that is not where the shortage is concentrated. There was a discussion about this a few months ago. It's not just that newer nodes are overkill, it's that auto components apparently have very long and expensive validation requirements, which would be another explanation for why they are still depending on these older manufacturing processes. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28728965 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28728965

CyanLite2 5y ago
Tesla, for the most part, is skipping that validation and just shipping cars. The warranty issues from Tesla have been notorious, but their business model is to ship cars as fast as possible and deal with warranty issues later. They were able to side-step much of the chip supply issues by either shipping cars without certain features (no adjustable seats, no USB-C ports, etc.) and also switching to newer 7nm+ parts, like the AMD Ryzen x86 chips that they've started shipping in the past few weeks. Their direct sales model allows them to easily change the price on the website, and so far, they still have unbelievable demand.
- bobthepanda 5y ago
  I think some of that is the difference in customer base. Tesla purchasers, are, to some degree, buying into the idea of the brand. This works if your brand is nice and new and flashy, but I think that traditional automakers would probably suffer reputational damage if they tried this approach, and it is very hard for them to shake old reputations if they manage to get one of unreliability.
  - ethbr0 5y ago
    Also, traditional automakers have full lines (sometimes multiple) of different models. Each with its own refresh cadence. And each which then needs to be supported long into the future. (Yes, there are some common platforms) I'd say Tesla ignored that future debt, but I think it's more nuanced. I'd hazard they made a wilfull decision that the relative simplicity of electric cars will allow them to avoid a maintenance nightmare down the road by simply replacing whole components (a la Apple). We'll see how it turns out.
mlyle 5y ago
> It's not just that newer nodes are overkill, it's that auto components apparently have very long and expensive validation requirements, which would be another explanation for why they are still depending on these older manufacturing processes. Also, if you're on a 7nm process, odds are there's not a decent way to e.g. drive the transistors for your power window actuator. Samsung's 7nm process has an 3 sigma intrinsic breakdown voltage around 4.8V, which precludes any kind of 5V tolerance and driving 2.5Vt power FETs. Little 3V3, 5V tolerant microcontrollers are good for a lot of things, and they belong on bigger process. While 10nm might be able to do it, there's not really transistors for it in most libraries.

CyanLite2 5y ago

Tesla, for the most part, is skipping that validation and just shipping cars. The warranty issues from Tesla have been notorious, but their business model is to ship cars as fast as possible and deal with warranty issues later. They were able to side-step much of the chip supply issues by either shipping cars without certain features (no adjustable seats, no USB-C ports, etc.) and also switching to newer 7nm+ parts, like the AMD Ryzen x86 chips that they've started shipping in the past few weeks. Their direct sales model allows them to easily change the price on the website, and so far, they still have unbelievable demand.

bobthepanda 5y ago
I think some of that is the difference in customer base. Tesla purchasers, are, to some degree, buying into the idea of the brand. This works if your brand is nice and new and flashy, but I think that traditional automakers would probably suffer reputational damage if they tried this approach, and it is very hard for them to shake old reputations if they manage to get one of unreliability.
- ethbr0 5y ago
  Also, traditional automakers have full lines (sometimes multiple) of different models. Each with its own refresh cadence. And each which then needs to be supported long into the future. (Yes, there are some common platforms) I'd say Tesla ignored that future debt, but I think it's more nuanced. I'd hazard they made a wilfull decision that the relative simplicity of electric cars will allow them to avoid a maintenance nightmare down the road by simply replacing whole components (a la Apple). We'll see how it turns out.

mlyle 5y ago

> It's not just that newer nodes are overkill, it's that auto components apparently have very long and expensive validation requirements, which would be another explanation for why they are still depending on these older manufacturing processes. Also, if you're on a 7nm process, odds are there's not a decent way to e.g. drive the transistors for your power window actuator. Samsung's 7nm process has an 3 sigma intrinsic breakdown voltage around 4.8V, which precludes any kind of 5V tolerance and driving 2.5Vt power FETs. Little 3V3, 5V tolerant microcontrollers are good for a lot of things, and they belong on bigger process. While 10nm might be able to do it, there's not really transistors for it in most libraries.