AMD CEO sees chips from TSMC's US plant costing 5%-20% more

Post by kortilla » Thu, Jul 24, 2025, 10:21 PM UTC

Gee101 wrote: post #364

kulahan wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, Taiwán - that famously stable nation with no existential threats to its very existence. I don’t think this is an “if” situation, but rather a “when”. There is no question in my mind - it’s simply too attractive to China. It may not come through all out war, but they will eventually claim what they feel is theirs. They operate on much more manageable time scales.

What is interesting is if the world is not that reliant on Taiwan chips anymore would China really care that much about Taiwan?

Post by kortilla » Thu, Jul 24, 2025, 10:23 PM UTC

lenerdenator wrote: post #330

benreesman wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel is a great example of the fact that between stupidity and low-integrity behavior as a default, the people in charge fuck up in ways that the man on the street would get right. Defense is starting to get a blank check with fairly bipartisan support for the first time in at least 30-40 years and it's centered on semiconductor supply chains . There has never been a better time to secure the fucking funding, have A…

> It's a failure of the will to do the right thing for both the shareholders and the country. They've been doing the exact right thing for the shareholders: squeezing the living shit out of an asset (x86/64) for decades while cutting anything interesting or competitive to the bone to give shareholders more money. Money spent on something that could really have been competitive is money not sent to the retirement fund…

Post by danparsonson » Thu, Jul 24, 2025, 10:27 PM UTC

swores wrote: post #266

SkyMarshal wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Intel technically leapfrog TSMC and their 18nm is better than TSMC 20nm this year but; Think you mean 1.8nm, aka 18A. We're way past 18nm and 20nm.

How long ago did nm numbers stop being descriptions of size of chip and start being purely marketing names? About a decade?

Post by wat10000 » Thu, Jul 24, 2025, 10:30 PM UTC

benreesman wrote: post #297

CamperBob2 wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The climate of uncertainty under Trump inhibits long-term investment, whether in chip fabs, car factories, or anything else. He has reminded us all of something that's really always been a problem: whatever one Congress or one POTUS supports can be undone by the next. Usually opposing parties have had the common sense not to immediately hit the undo button once they take office. E.g., Biden leaving most of Trump's pr…

The decline in what we expect of our leaders has been going on my entire life and the contrast between 20 years ago and the present is stark. In 1998 Meriwether and the rest of LTCM nearly crashed the economy, needed the Fed to get involved, and they were personally ruined , guy never opened a ten thousand dollar bottle of wine again and probably never had anything again. Shortly thereafter, Jeff Skilling took out of…

Post by cptskippy » Thu, Jul 24, 2025, 10:33 PM UTC

SlowTao wrote: post #329

cptskippy wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The K6 line was a functional CPU but I wouldn't call them "excellent". The K6-III was basically a K6-2 with integrated cache, much the same way the Pentium III was a Pentium II with integrated cache. Despite the fact that AMD tried to replicate Pentium branding on the K6 line, they very much competed with Celerons in terms of market place and performance. Indeed that's how they were marketed where I worked (Office Ma…

Minor correction. Athlon arrived at 500MHz, 550MHz and 600MHz. But they were still a big shock when they arrived. They were the first chip in a long while to really take on Intel and succeed. The 650MHz came two months after than, and 700MHz another two months later. 6 months later 1GHz! It is easy to forget just how rapid performance increased in the late 90s.