41–50 of 107 posts
That's when the bubble will burst.
Ah yes, just like when the internet died in 2001… —— Being a bit more fair, yes a bubble did burst then, but it was a “too much, too quick” type of bursting, not a “this whole thing is a scam” type.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From 10 to 30 years. They need to clone ASML.
Very doubtful. They are already at 7nm. I'll bet 3 years. Using mostly stolen IP, because they aren't allowed to buy it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah yes, just like when the internet died in 2001… —— Being a bit more fair, yes a bubble did burst then, but it was a “too much, too quick” type of bursting, not a “this whole thing is a scam” type.
I'm not saying it's not useful, but much like the internet, claims have been overstated.
(And as far as I can tell this current craze is entirely predicated on LLMs/transformers.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read Chip Wars [1]. The cost to stand up an advanced chip fab has reached tens of billions of dollars. It’s so capital intensive that even the US Department of Defense has exited the game. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chip_War:_The_Fight_for_the_...
I’ve read it, and I agree with you 100%. Open sourcing won’t don’t anything with an ASML machine costs $300,000,000. Open sourcing software works because some many people already have the hardware (a computer)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually if the IC design tools would be FOSS, the cost of new designs would decrease considerably, even up to two times. The cost of the subscriptions to the design tools provided by Cadence, Synopsis, Siemens (Mentor) and a few others is ridiculously high and it can contribute with many millions of $ to the design cost of a state-of-the-art chip. The design tools themselves have been improved extremely slowly and t…
>Actually if the IC design tools would be FOSS, the cost of new designs would decrease considerably, even up to two times. There are FOSS IC design tools but nothing that can match Synopsis, Mentor and Cadence and the semi industry isn't gonna start dealing with FOSS jank and destroy their productivity and competitiveness just to save a few milion in licensing costs to those 3 companies, which are peanuts in the end.…
I wonder how this will impact consumer gpus? If nvidia can print money making h100's you have to wonder if they will continue to invest on the retail side or if they'll funnel most of their efforts to server and let desktop parts languish.
That would be foolish. A large part of their moat is that lots of people already have Nvidia cards in their computers, making development really smooth and allowing hobbyists to easily get started and contribute to the ecosystem. If they were to give up their consumer gpu lead and let AMD overtake them that will lead to more AMD support in ML, enabling AMD to eventually compete in the server gpu space too.
I think many, maybe even most, would claim this is now best done on cloud services, like huggingface.co.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Actually if the IC design tools would be FOSS, the cost of new designs would decrease considerably, even up to two times. There are FOSS IC design tools but nothing that can match Synopsis, Mentor and Cadence and the semi industry isn't gonna start dealing with FOSS jank and destroy their productivity and competitiveness just to save a few milion in licensing costs to those 3 companies, which are peanuts in the end.…
At least Microsoft, Google, Apple etc. do not demand (yet) hundreds of thousands of $ per year for a single license.
Because they sell ads and monetize their users instead, which is a pipe of infinite money.
Why does it matter to you how much they're charging? It's not communism. It's their honest labor and they're allowed to charge as much as they want for it, same how you're allowed to ask for as much money as you want for your salary negotiations.
So please excuse traditional engineering companies for trying to make a living by monetizing their hard earned IP like every single company out there, and not selling ads like big-tech.
The world still needs traditional engineering companies to exist to progress, we can't have a society where everyone only works by selling ads to one another.
If you feel like they're price gouging, then feel free to write your own EDA tools and sell them for cheap, I'm sure the market is open to paying much less and saving some money.
I wonder how this will impact consumer gpus? If nvidia can print money making h100's you have to wonder if they will continue to invest on the retail side or if they'll funnel most of their efforts to server and let desktop parts languish.
That would be foolish. A large part of their moat is that lots of people already have Nvidia cards in their computers, making development really smooth and allowing hobbyists to easily get started and contribute to the ecosystem. If they were to give up their consumer gpu lead and let AMD overtake them that will lead to more AMD support in ML, enabling AMD to eventually compete in the server gpu space too.
The moat is their high quality libraries for speeding up common operations on Nvidia gpus.
AMD refuses to invest in ML and build the same libraries. Their stack is horribly buggy to the point of being unusable. It takes forever for their ML stack to get support for their new GPUs, even the crappy version they always produce.
I'd bet $50 in 18 months "the crunch" will still be in full swing (and Raspberry Pi will still be "bringing huge volumes to the market any week now"). There is no way in hell all these expensive fabs will pay for themselves if chips are too cheap. So no one (especially not TSMC) will risk oversupply by building too many fabs.
I'd bet $50 in 18 months "the crunch" will still be in full swing (and Raspberry Pi will still be "bringing huge volumes to the market any week now"). There is no way in hell all these expensive fabs will pay for themselves if chips are too cheap. So no one (especially not TSMC) will risk oversupply by building too many fabs.
The Raspberry Pi wouldn't have issues if not for the fact that they are explicitly an outlet for Broadcom's excess chips, and they have never paid full price for their CPUs. If they doubled the price of the boards, they would be able to get the parts.