Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 734 posts

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#121

Post by forinti »

mordae wrote: post #88
moffkalast wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.raspberrypi.com/news/production-and-supply-chain... That's from April, but in short there's a huge order backlog that they're still working through apparently, despite producing half a million units per month. With the lockdown gap in production and the Pi 4s getting increasingly integrated into various 3rd party products I suppose that's no surprise. It's quite apparent that there's little demand for the…

People are just not yet used to it. Eventually it will gain more popularity. PIOs are awesome.

The target audience for picos is a lot smaller, no?

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#122

Post by xadhominemx »

adeptima wrote: post #59
bouncycastle wrote: post #50

Related: There is a massive TSMC factory being built in Japan right now. Take a look at the pictures, I've never seen this many cranes at one location: https://www.nhk.jp/static/assets/images/newblogposting/ts/7P... https://cdn-cw-english.cwg.tw/ckeditor/202205/ckeditor-628ae... It looks like a forest of cranes...

"The plant will produce 22-nanometer and 28-nanometer chips to address strong global demand for speciality chip technologies, they said" I'm curious why not the latest - 3nm, 5nm

Japanese customers like Sony and Renesas have growing demand on 22/28nm

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#123

Post by bryanlarsen »

breckenedge wrote: post #86
bryanlarsen wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China will invade Taiwan when the cost to do so is low enough and/or they are desperate. In other words, the probability of success is considerably higher today than it will be in the future (even if the probability of success today isn't great). Russia is a declining state relative to Ukraine & Europe, so Putin's odds of success in 2022 were considerably higher than they would be 10 years later. So if invading Ukrai…

Treating political and military leaders as rational entities is dangerous.

Xi is one of the most rational actors on the world stage. Machiavellian rational, but rational. I recommend the Economist's podcast series on him.

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#124

Post by throwawaylinux »

kuschku wrote: post #85
sylware wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"spare capacity" ? what do you mean ? Taiwan and South Korea are enough to supply the world demand? Well, it is still hard to get your hands on top-notch chips at a reasonable price whatever the news is saying...

You need certain machines for EUV. There's only one manufacturer (ASML) for those, and they're at capacity. And even if they wanted to scale up, there's only one manufacturer (Zeiss) for the EUV mirrors required for those machines, and all their capacity for the next years is already bought as well.

DUV seems to be economical down to about 7nm though.

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#125

Post by Comevius »

mrjin wrote: post #34

Not sure how well/bad is AMD doing right now. Have been using Intel machines for over two decades now but not long ago I finally switched to AMD with my new PC and I regret haven't done so earlier. In the meantime, I'm also about to ditch Windows. I guess I'm not alone. Time to say goodbye to Wintel league.

That's more or less irrelevant, AMD is one of the many fabless companies like Qualcomm or MediaTek. Intel makes it's own chips, and now wants to make chips for other companies as well. They may end up making AMD processors one day.

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#126

Post by jcranmer »

roenxi wrote: post #46
mensetmanusman wrote: post #26

Highly recommend the economist’s podcast on Xi called ‘The Prince’ Xi became a Leninist and is trying to be the next Mao. He is a true believer that his glory and the glory of China can only happen by taking back Taiwan. TSMC is a huge reason for this conflict. The current US policy is trying to slow China’s technological might for that next war.

There is a more simple explanation - if China wants a boat to travel from anywhere to Guangzhou, Tianjin or Shanghai then at the moment the boat has to pass close by an island that is a US ally. If China controlled Taiwan, that would no longer be true and they'd have easy access to the Pacific. For the last 300? 400? years the dominant global superpower has been a naval power. You don't need to be a Leninist or a "tr…

> There is a more simple explanation - if China wants a boat to travel from anywhere to Guangzhou, Tianjin or Shanghai then at the moment the boat has to pass close by an island that is a US ally. If China controlled Taiwan, that would no longer be true and they'd have easy access to the Pacific.

No, it would still be true. Just beyond Taiwan on the north side are the furthest islands in the Japanese island chain, and if you instead head south, you see Philippine islands instead. Head through the South China Sea and you end up either having to run past Singapore through the Straits of Malacca (already a critical, congested chokepoint), or travel through the internal waters of Indonesia or the Philippines (admittedly, I'm not sure you could call Singapore, Malaysia, or Indonesia US allies, given the general ASEAN propensity for neutrality).

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#127

Post by gonzo41 »

gtirloni wrote: post #41
gonzo41 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also setting up the conditions for the US and the West to leave Taiwan to fight it's own fight like Ukraine.

Ukraine is fighting its own fight but it's far from alone.

Yes, but I think America will walk back it's current hawkish defense posture around going head to head with china over Taiwan over the next 10 years. If they get into a fight, I expect the US to supply arms and money but not soldiers or marines.

This posture change will keep pace broadly with the American domestic chip fab industry.

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#128

Post by jychang »

randomopining wrote: post #118
tarsinge wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it is in the US strategic interests, the problem is having strategic interests doesn't automatically give the US rights to intervene. Contrary to Ukraine (plain violation of the territorial integrity of a sovereign nation) the situation in Taiwan is complicated (for those who doubt it please at least make the effort to read the Wikipedia entry). Now given recent history I don't doubt the US will not let it…

Taiwan as a piece of land has much more strategic importance than Ukraine. Ukraine's grain and terrain are the two things that are important about it from a utilitarian sense.

Ukraine as a piece of land was Russia's only warmwater port.

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#129

Post by flerchin »

warinukraine wrote: post #102
nly wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The best way for the EU to 'fight' russia would be to not be dependent on it for energy. Russia can also do what it likes because of the constant nuclear threat. Russia has nukes that work, whereas the likes of the UK has a single nuclear sub that occasionally gets stuck on a sand banks. The Russians probably know where it is at all times.

> Russia has nukes that work Does it? Nominally, Russia has roughly the same number of nukes as the US. The US military budget is 700bn/yr and it spends 60bn/yr in maintaining its nuclear weapons. So 60bn/yr is a good estimate for what it costs to maintain a US/Russia-sized nuclear weapons arsenal. Russia spends 60bn/yr on its military in _total_. However much of that goes into maintaining its nuclear arsenal is clea…

You make a good point, the Russkies should schedule a test. If that violates a treaty, well that never seemed to bother them before.

Re: Intel and the $1.5T chip industry meltdown

#130

Post by Gunnerhead »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #123
breckenedge wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Treating political and military leaders as rational entities is dangerous.

Xi is one of the most rational actors on the world stage. Machiavellian rational, but rational. I recommend the Economist's podcast series on him.

For anyone interested, the podcast is “The Prince” by The Economist.
Post reply on HN