TSMC cancels chip price cuts and promises $100B investment surge • Hacker News Board

Re: TSMC cancels chip price cuts and promises $100B investment surge

#91

Post by hyko » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 1:33 PM UTC

User23 wrote: post #75

hyko wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My first reaction to this plan is that it’s for the birds. The government would be better off just building a fab themselves. The raw materials aren’t that hard to get hold of; integrating consumer electronics into military systems would likely take just as long, if not longer (with all sorts of other negative effects on quality and security). I guess the analogy is with scrap metal drives in WWII, but this situation…

The only chance the USA has in a hot war for Taiwan is using nukes to which the PRC would respond in kind. That would be even worse for semiconductor availability than reunification. So let’s cool it with the macho idiocy and instead focus on diversifying the semiconductor supply chain to areas that aren’t inevitably going to fall back under Chinese control.

There’s nothing macho about a conflict of this magnitude, it would be absolutely horrible. But we have to set clear expectations and unambiguous boundaries to avoid a dangerous miscalculation, not pretend we have contingency plans that don’t actually exist.

There is nothing inevitable about a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. My sense is that the Chinese leadership are far too insightful to actually start that war, but you never know.

Re: TSMC cancels chip price cuts and promises $100B investment surge

#92

Post by lotsofpulp » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 1:33 PM UTC

Kliment wrote: post #89

lotsofpulp wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>However, the car industry got it badly wrong You write at the beginning and end of your post that the car industry lied to their vendors, but then you also write they got it badly wrong, which means they were incorrect about their projections of demand. Surely it can't be both, and it sounds like the car industry did not lie, but simply were wrong about their predictions for the future. Or am I misunderstanding? Nev…

The car industry got their demand planning wrong, so they lied to their vendors that they wouldn't need that inventory. They then turned around and went "hey actually screw that we want the inventory after all", making their previous promise that they wouldn't buy it a lie.

I would not characterize that as a lie, which typically involves an intent to deceive.

Rather, the only people with intent to deceive might be the chip vendors. They either sold chip capacity that the automakers still had the legal rights to, or they reneged on sales to non automakers to resume supplying to automakers.

Re: TSMC cancels chip price cuts and promises $100B investment surge

#93

Post by alberth » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 1:34 PM UTC

ksec wrote: post #47

1. TSMC were spending ~$30B per year on capital expenditure already. 2. Since leading edge node is forever increasing in cost, the next 3 years, i.e 3nm in 2022 and 2nm in 2024 are expected to be higher. ~$100B investment aligned with their initial plan / trend / target anyway. 3. So really the major news is stopping ( or to be precise, delaying ) price reduction. Which is unusual but understandable given the current…

> "the next 3 years, i.e 3nm in 2022 and 2nm in 2024"

I wish the industry would standardize on using "transistors per square millimetre" as the metric for their node size instead of "nm".

Re: TSMC cancels chip price cuts and promises $100B investment surge

#94

Post by ArtWomb » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 1:36 PM UTC

Kliment wrote: post #73

ksec wrote: post #47

1. TSMC were spending ~$30B per year on capital expenditure already. 2. Since leading edge node is forever increasing in cost, the next 3 years, i.e 3nm in 2022 and 2nm in 2024 are expected to be higher. ~$100B investment aligned with their initial plan / trend / target anyway. 3. So really the major news is stopping ( or to be precise, delaying ) price reduction. Which is unusual but understandable given the current…

Every single fabless semiconductor designer failed to predict demand because their customers lied to them. The car industry pulled a really dick move last year, and then pulled an even more dick move in the opposite direction, and now everyone is screwed. Back in early 2020 the car manufacturers decided that demand for cars would go down, and because they have a religious aversion to keeping any stock, cancelled lots…

Top comment. Really appreciate this analysis. I think there is a tangential question to be asked: are consumers really demanding "software defined cars" in the first place?

4 Forces Changing Automotive Electronics Systems

https://www.eetimes.com/4-forces-changing-automotive-electro...

Re: TSMC cancels chip price cuts and promises $100B investment surge

#95

Post by baybal2 » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 1:39 PM UTC

alberth wrote: post #93

ksec wrote: post #47

1. TSMC were spending ~$30B per year on capital expenditure already. 2. Since leading edge node is forever increasing in cost, the next 3 years, i.e 3nm in 2022 and 2nm in 2024 are expected to be higher. ~$100B investment aligned with their initial plan / trend / target anyway. 3. So really the major news is stopping ( or to be precise, delaying ) price reduction. Which is unusual but understandable given the current…

> "the next 3 years, i.e 3nm in 2022 and 2nm in 2024" I wish the industry would standardize on using "transistors per square millimetre" as the metric for their node size instead of "nm".

Even that is not exactly the same. Cells, or logic gates per mm° is too rather ambiguous, as different implementations of same logic families do things differently, and the metric gets even wronger for different logic families.

The best I believe will be a whole cell library metric using some lowest common denominator blocks like registers, adders, bus pieces etc

Re: TSMC cancels chip price cuts and promises $100B investment surge

#96

Post by ballenf » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 1:44 PM UTC

Kliment wrote: post #73

ksec wrote: post #47

1. TSMC were spending ~$30B per year on capital expenditure already. 2. Since leading edge node is forever increasing in cost, the next 3 years, i.e 3nm in 2022 and 2nm in 2024 are expected to be higher. ~$100B investment aligned with their initial plan / trend / target anyway. 3. So really the major news is stopping ( or to be precise, delaying ) price reduction. Which is unusual but understandable given the current…

Every single fabless semiconductor designer failed to predict demand because their customers lied to them. The car industry pulled a really dick move last year, and then pulled an even more dick move in the opposite direction, and now everyone is screwed. Back in early 2020 the car manufacturers decided that demand for cars would go down, and because they have a religious aversion to keeping any stock, cancelled lots…

Maybe we need a futures market for fab slots. Then we could just blame speculators for price swings instead of a particular industry.

Re: TSMC cancels chip price cuts and promises $100B investment surge

#97

Post by ethbr0 » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 1:47 PM UTC

foobarian wrote: post #83

User23 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only chance the USA has in a hot war for Taiwan is using nukes to which the PRC would respond in kind. That would be even worse for semiconductor availability than reunification. So let’s cool it with the macho idiocy and instead focus on diversifying the semiconductor supply chain to areas that aren’t inevitably going to fall back under Chinese control.

You should look at the stockpile sizes. Unless Russia gets involved it would not be a balanced situation at all.

Seriously. We're talking about horrible things, here.

But if it came to a nuclear exchange, China has ~300, and the US and Russia ~6,000 each. Total yield numbers are harder to come by(?), so those are +/- considering tactical-scale inventory.

Historically, this was because China's nuclear doctrine was to limit their stockpile to a minimal deterrent.

Personally? Sitting about 40km from a priority US target, I'd support the US risking a strike to guarantee Taiwan's freedom.

Either you stand for something, or you don't. And China doesn't get to claim modern territory by dusting off historical documents. Hong Kong was untenable, but Taiwan should be a line. If its citizens don't want to be Chinese, they get to make that choice.

PS: Russia would probably care less about a strike on China, unless China negotiated their support via treaty. That ship sailed in the early 60s.

Re: TSMC cancels chip price cuts and promises $100B investment surge

#98

Post by baybal2 » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 1:49 PM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #20

bigdogc wrote: post #5

How much would it cost to start a design semiconductor business? On the low end of the budget.

Manufacturing you'd need billions and the support of your government. But a design business? There's quite a lot of those around. Bare minimum estimates, working backwards: - $? for marketing and distribution, physical inventory costs - $100k/y for one field engineer (FAE) - $250k for first successful manufacturing run - $250k for first full mask run with bugs - $100k bringup boards, test equipment, engineering time…

Excellent description, I wished I could've pushed your comment higher.

People are always shocked when I tell how tiny is the semi industry, but it really is.

Besides the super-concentration of semi manufacturing which starts to get more coverage, designs needs some exposure too.

When Apple bought PA Semi, it went rather unnoticed, but people didn't know that the amount of logic designers of a such calibre who can design cores like ZEN, or Firestorm is probably less than 100 in the whole of North America.

Sounds very dramatic, but America is less than 100 senior logic designers away from getting out of design business too.

Re: TSMC cancels chip price cuts and promises $100B investment surge

#99

Post by lumost » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 1:49 PM UTC

ksec wrote: post #47

1. TSMC were spending ~$30B per year on capital expenditure already. 2. Since leading edge node is forever increasing in cost, the next 3 years, i.e 3nm in 2022 and 2nm in 2024 are expected to be higher. ~$100B investment aligned with their initial plan / trend / target anyway. 3. So really the major news is stopping ( or to be precise, delaying ) price reduction. Which is unusual but understandable given the current…

There aren't many companies that can compete with 100 billion dollar capex demands. While the loans are freely available, the development risk remains. TSMC has a proven track record pushing into the latest node - intel does not. Samsung has been a little bit behind for a while while keeping pace.

Following this trend - 2nm will have something on the order of 200 billion in capex outlays. Given that being first to market has a premium, the loan will be high risk. If you borrow thinking you'll be first and are late by 4 years then you and your bank are going to have a problem.

Re: TSMC cancels chip price cuts and promises $100B investment surge

#100

Post by shock-value » Thu, Apr 01, 2021, 1:49 PM UTC

Kliment wrote: post #89

lotsofpulp wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>However, the car industry got it badly wrong You write at the beginning and end of your post that the car industry lied to their vendors, but then you also write they got it badly wrong, which means they were incorrect about their projections of demand. Surely it can't be both, and it sounds like the car industry did not lie, but simply were wrong about their predictions for the future. Or am I misunderstanding? Nev…

The car industry got their demand planning wrong, so they lied to their vendors that they wouldn't need that inventory. They then turned around and went "hey actually screw that we want the inventory after all", making their previous promise that they wouldn't buy it a lie.

That's not what "lie" means.