5 ms·

> There's not really any magic. I've read that it would take China at least 10 years to get to ASML's current level. It might not be magic but there must be a

> There's not really any magic. I've read that it would take China at least 10 years to get to ASML's current level. It might not be magic but there must be a lot of unknowns when starting from scratch.

markus_zhang 4y ago
10 years is probably an underestimate given then current geopolitical condition.
- pphysch 4y ago
  Underestimate? Unless Washington aggressively nukes mainland China, recent overperformance by a post-Zero-COVID China suggests 10y is an overestimate. Existential stress is an excellent motivator for rapid innovation. Or did we learn nothing from the 20th century?
  - yywwbbn 4y ago
    > overperformance What do you mean?
    - pphysch 4y ago
      Growth, high tech innovation, etc. China has been on the verge of collapse since 1991, according to Western popular consciousness.
      - yywwbbn 4y ago
        There is no need for exaggeration. But.. Well clearly the last couple of years were not great for China compared to 10 or so prior to covid.
        pphysch 4y ago
        Based on which facts?
        yywwbbn 4y ago
        Slowing economic growth? Extreme lockdowns? Rapidly aging population in large part because of idiotic lunacy that was the one child policy?
- rjzzleep 4y ago
  Just last year people were commenting here on HN that China is years away from making anything under 14nm and that even that would be hard for them. Then we heard about China being years away from hypersonic missiles and how they couldn't even make fast memory chips. Then we were surprised not only have been making 7nm chips for a year already, they also make the fastest memory chips. Our response? Let's sanction them so they can't sell those memory chips. Instead of believing in the fairy tale that we can somehow block the country with the highest number of STEM graduates out of technology, maybe what we ought to be doing is to invest a little less in the bullshit professions and a bit more in the hard tech, not just here but also in places like Japan where they had the potential to compete with ASML but dropped out because it wasn't profitable enough more than a decade ago.
  - ksec 4y ago
    >Just last year people were commenting here on HN that China is years away from making anything under 14nm and that even that would be hard for them. Forget about the topic of China for a bit, 99.999% of HN comments on anything hardware are pretty much worthless. To the point I question how did software developers get so abstracted that they had little to zero basic understanding of hardware. When they should be considered in the same field. If it is wasn't for the 0.00000001% of rare comments for those who actually work inside Intel, AMD, Lattice and ASML ( or some other SemiConductor Companies ) I would have skipped hardware topics on HN.
  - kurthr 4y ago
    I think you're comparing prototype low volume/yield production to 1000s of wafers per month at >90% yield. Those aren't comparable. Intel could do 7nm (they called it 10) with DUV immersion equipment and double/quad patterning, but the yield was low 90s even for their highly tuned processes. That's why EUV is so important. Don't believe all the "news" hype, it's just agit-prop entertainment.
  - markus_zhang 4y ago
    If you properly sanction China it would be very difficult for them to make anything 28nm+. A lot of stuffs have to be imported from foreign countries so if US can convince JP/SK/EU to join the sanction it would be tough time for China. Making hypersonic missiles or any military equipment is a different story as: - You don't have to care about quality. You can make 100 chips, fail 90 and still have 10 to use, which is OK for military but would be a disaster for civilian; - Worst case you can use espionage or diplomatic channels to find a small number of chips. You can't do that with mass market products.
nwiswell 4y ago
Yes, the design of those proprietary parts is very technical, but the manufacturing not so much. That's part of what makes the IP situation so tenuous and is a big part of why the FBI has aggressively prosecuted individuals for corporate espionage against WFE firms in the past.
- cactusplant7374 4y ago
  The tolerances are very tight. Manufacturing must be difficult.
  - nwiswell 4y ago
    Not really any harder than making an airplane. For older generations of tools, there are a lot of bootleg replacement parts floating around on secondary markets. When tools reach their end of life at leading-edge fabs, or when those fabs are shuttered, the tools are often sold off to trailing edge fabs in permissive jurisdictions with shoestring budgets. These fabs are not averse to buying whatever works cheapest, and the OEM WFE companies don't really have any way to enforce IP.
    - seper8 4y ago
      >Not really any harder than making an airplane. Except the airplane still works if something is misaligned by 10NM...
      - nwiswell 4y ago
        That's adjusted dynamically during operation by interferometer controls, not in manufacturing. You'd get more than 10nm of misalignment just due to a couple degrees of temperature change.
        seper8 4y ago
        And that dynamical adjustment is very easy too ofcourse! Just move it x nm in the right direction!
tooltalk 4y ago
China doesn't really have any chip-making equipment supply-chain of their own; neither does Taiwan or South Korea. I think that 10 years to EUV timeline is a bit too ambitious considering that it required ASML about 20-30 years to develope and commercialize (with support of the industry, TSMC, Samsung, and Intel). Unless ASML is allowed to license their EUV to China and all 600+ suppliers who make high-precision lenses/machinaries, cutting-edge light-source, electrochemicals, etc, can export their supplies without any restriction, it's still a pipedream.
- dirtyid 4y ago
  10 years optimistic but PRC in position to create indigenous semi supply chain. After elevating semi to first-level dicipline in 2018, PRC is spitting out 30k IC graduates per year. They're still about 200k short, ~520k/720k out of what IC talent white paper estimates PRC needed for semi industry. I wadger that's comparable to total direct semi industry talent globally, which is really effort from a handful of countries (NL,US,JP,DE) in hardware industry that historically got 2nd pick on talent due to how well software pays. Would take less than 20-30 years to catchup especially if industrial policy mitigates commercialization concerns. It won't be easy but feasible especially if PRC indigenization starts taking domestic shares and take revenue/R&D stream western incubants who has to boost subsidy to plug loss.
  - tooltalk 4y ago
    There is a lot of wishful thinking there.

markus_zhang 4y ago

10 years is probably an underestimate given then current geopolitical condition.

pphysch 4y ago
Underestimate? Unless Washington aggressively nukes mainland China, recent overperformance by a post-Zero-COVID China suggests 10y is an overestimate. Existential stress is an excellent motivator for rapid innovation. Or did we learn nothing from the 20th century?
- yywwbbn 4y ago
  > overperformance What do you mean?
  - pphysch 4y ago
    Growth, high tech innovation, etc. China has been on the verge of collapse since 1991, according to Western popular consciousness.
    - yywwbbn 4y ago
      There is no need for exaggeration. But.. Well clearly the last couple of years were not great for China compared to 10 or so prior to covid.
      - pphysch 4y ago
        Based on which facts?
        yywwbbn 4y ago
        Slowing economic growth? Extreme lockdowns? Rapidly aging population in large part because of idiotic lunacy that was the one child policy?
rjzzleep 4y ago
Just last year people were commenting here on HN that China is years away from making anything under 14nm and that even that would be hard for them. Then we heard about China being years away from hypersonic missiles and how they couldn't even make fast memory chips. Then we were surprised not only have been making 7nm chips for a year already, they also make the fastest memory chips. Our response? Let's sanction them so they can't sell those memory chips. Instead of believing in the fairy tale that we can somehow block the country with the highest number of STEM graduates out of technology, maybe what we ought to be doing is to invest a little less in the bullshit professions and a bit more in the hard tech, not just here but also in places like Japan where they had the potential to compete with ASML but dropped out because it wasn't profitable enough more than a decade ago.
- ksec 4y ago
  >Just last year people were commenting here on HN that China is years away from making anything under 14nm and that even that would be hard for them. Forget about the topic of China for a bit, 99.999% of HN comments on anything hardware are pretty much worthless. To the point I question how did software developers get so abstracted that they had little to zero basic understanding of hardware. When they should be considered in the same field. If it is wasn't for the 0.00000001% of rare comments for those who actually work inside Intel, AMD, Lattice and ASML ( or some other SemiConductor Companies ) I would have skipped hardware topics on HN.
- kurthr 4y ago
  I think you're comparing prototype low volume/yield production to 1000s of wafers per month at >90% yield. Those aren't comparable. Intel could do 7nm (they called it 10) with DUV immersion equipment and double/quad patterning, but the yield was low 90s even for their highly tuned processes. That's why EUV is so important. Don't believe all the "news" hype, it's just agit-prop entertainment.
- markus_zhang 4y ago
  If you properly sanction China it would be very difficult for them to make anything 28nm+. A lot of stuffs have to be imported from foreign countries so if US can convince JP/SK/EU to join the sanction it would be tough time for China. Making hypersonic missiles or any military equipment is a different story as: - You don't have to care about quality. You can make 100 chips, fail 90 and still have 10 to use, which is OK for military but would be a disaster for civilian; - Worst case you can use espionage or diplomatic channels to find a small number of chips. You can't do that with mass market products.

nwiswell 4y ago

Yes, the design of those proprietary parts is very technical, but the manufacturing not so much. That's part of what makes the IP situation so tenuous and is a big part of why the FBI has aggressively prosecuted individuals for corporate espionage against WFE firms in the past.

cactusplant7374 4y ago
The tolerances are very tight. Manufacturing must be difficult.
- nwiswell 4y ago
  Not really any harder than making an airplane. For older generations of tools, there are a lot of bootleg replacement parts floating around on secondary markets. When tools reach their end of life at leading-edge fabs, or when those fabs are shuttered, the tools are often sold off to trailing edge fabs in permissive jurisdictions with shoestring budgets. These fabs are not averse to buying whatever works cheapest, and the OEM WFE companies don't really have any way to enforce IP.
  - seper8 4y ago
    >Not really any harder than making an airplane. Except the airplane still works if something is misaligned by 10NM...
    - nwiswell 4y ago
      That's adjusted dynamically during operation by interferometer controls, not in manufacturing. You'd get more than 10nm of misalignment just due to a couple degrees of temperature change.
      - seper8 4y ago
        And that dynamical adjustment is very easy too ofcourse! Just move it x nm in the right direction!

tooltalk 4y ago

China doesn't really have any chip-making equipment supply-chain of their own; neither does Taiwan or South Korea. I think that 10 years to EUV timeline is a bit too ambitious considering that it required ASML about 20-30 years to develope and commercialize (with support of the industry, TSMC, Samsung, and Intel). Unless ASML is allowed to license their EUV to China and all 600+ suppliers who make high-precision lenses/machinaries, cutting-edge light-source, electrochemicals, etc, can export their supplies without any restriction, it's still a pipedream.

dirtyid 4y ago
10 years optimistic but PRC in position to create indigenous semi supply chain. After elevating semi to first-level dicipline in 2018, PRC is spitting out 30k IC graduates per year. They're still about 200k short, ~520k/720k out of what IC talent white paper estimates PRC needed for semi industry. I wadger that's comparable to total direct semi industry talent globally, which is really effort from a handful of countries (NL,US,JP,DE) in hardware industry that historically got 2nd pick on talent due to how well software pays. Would take less than 20-30 years to catchup especially if industrial policy mitigates commercialization concerns. It won't be easy but feasible especially if PRC indigenization starts taking domestic shares and take revenue/R&D stream western incubants who has to boost subsidy to plug loss.
- tooltalk 4y ago
  There is a lot of wishful thinking there.