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

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

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

591–600 of 761 posts

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

#591

Post by FirmwareBurner »

adastra22 wrote: post #587
FirmwareBurner wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did that work out?

There used to be open war between European countries every 30 years or so. That hasn’t happened. So mission accomplished? And before anyone says it’s because of nukes or superpower protection or whatever, there has been plenty of wars on the periphery of the EU during this time. The balkans, Cyprus, Egypt, etc.

>There used to be open war between European countries every 30 years or so. That hasn’t happened.

I meant how did that ensure peace between Ukraine, Russia and EU? It clearly didn't even though EU was buying shit tonnes of gas from Russia, and Russia was buying shit tonne of aerospace parts and stuff from Ukraine. War still happened.

[..edited out the Yugoslavia argument..]

All the proof shows "peace through trade" does not work. The only thing that works is "peace through strength", which then you can use to enforce and defend your own favorable trade policies for you and your close allies, which has been the US's MO since 1945.

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

#592

Post by FirmwareBurner »

potatototoo99 wrote: post #581
FirmwareBurner wrote: post #578

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did that work out?

Very well? There hasn't been open war between EU countries since WW2.

>Very well?

I meant with EU Russia and Ukraine.

Plus, France and German economies were also connected before WW2 and that didn't stop the war. And the economies of former Yugoslav nations were very well connected, that didn't stop them going to war with each other.

What stopped the wars after WW2 was western Europe being under the rule of a nuclear superpower needing to unite against a bigger nuclear superpower next door, and the countries having democracies with separation of powers making war declarations on their neighbors impossible politically, nothing to do with economies.

So the famous "muh economies connected = no war" is a very reductionist and short sighted take that ignores evrything else.

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

#593

Post by nottorp »

kelnos wrote: post #590
nottorp wrote: post #37

So are they going to try and spread this extra cost to customers worldwide? I'm fine with chips made in Taiwan.

When (not if) China invades Taiwan, those Taiwanese-made chips will disappear overnight. Even if China takes over the TSMC fabs intact, they'll be disrupted for years. So sure, right now we might not want to pay that 20% markup for US-made chips, but 20% will be cheap if the only operational TSMC fabs are in the US.

The monopoly moving to the US from Taiwan doesn't really turn me on :)

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

#594

Post by kelnos »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #69
CivBase wrote: post #24

5-20% more expensive? That's way cheaper than I expected. That's pretty good, especially for 4nm.

Even 5% more expensive means 80% of people buy the taiwan version for $475 instead of $500. 20% more expensive and 99.9% of people buy the $500 one instead of the $600 one. Never make the mistake of falling for people's virtue signalling and pay attention instead to how they actually apply those virtues (spoiler: saving money is the #1 acted upon virtue, being far stronger than any other).

The manufacturing cost is 5%-20% more expensive. That doesn't say much about what AMD is going to do with the prices they charge customers. They may be able to absorb that cost, albeit with lower margins, and may choose to do so for exactly the reason you state: people won't buy it if they can get a more or less identical product elsewhere for cheaper.

Whether or not AMD is motivated to eat that cost is another question, of course.

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

#595

Post by Theodores »

avhception wrote: post #342

If that is the cost of keeping the value within the western economies, we should pay. Plain and simple. I'd even argue it's cheap.

Except that it will just be for the US, not Europe or even Canada necessarily.

In Europe nobody is going to pay extra for a gadget that comes with an American chip inside it, they will just buy Chinese.

The result will be like automotive with the Chicken Tax, with Americans having pickup trucks and the rest of the world having crossover SUVs.

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

#596

Post by fellowmartian »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #505
kulahan wrote: post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Americans are not in need of high calorie density, and 90% of this corn isn't being eaten anyways. Rice is easier to grow, eaten readily by more of the world, easier to store, easier to transport, etc. - there really isn't a great argument for corn.

> 90% of this corn isn't being eaten anyways But it could be. I don't have to consume the canned food in my basement for it to provide food security in the event of a natural disaster. I'm finding exact numbers difficult to come by but rice requires noticeably more water to grow. Dried corn kernels are approximately equivalent to dried rice when it comes to storage and transport. There really isn't any sensible argum…

It’s not being stored. There’s no “strategic corn reserve”. What is not being consumed by people or animals gets turned into biofuel - the worst kind of fuel from thermodynamic perspective and one that would never exist without market distortion.

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

#598

Post by seszett »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #591
adastra22 wrote: post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There used to be open war between European countries every 30 years or so. That hasn’t happened. So mission accomplished? And before anyone says it’s because of nukes or superpower protection or whatever, there has been plenty of wars on the periphery of the EU during this time. The balkans, Cyprus, Egypt, etc.

>There used to be open war between European countries every 30 years or so. That hasn’t happened. I meant how did that ensure peace between Ukraine, Russia and EU? It clearly didn't even though EU was buying shit tonnes of gas from Russia, and Russia was buying shit tonne of aerospace parts and stuff from Ukraine. War still happened. [..edited out the Yugoslavia argument..] All the proof shows "peace through trade" d…

> I meant between Ukraine, RUssia and EU.

> Yugoslav wars started in 1991 and ended in 2001. Russia invaded Crimea in 2014. Are these wars not "European" enough?

Well, Ukraine, Russia and the former Yugoslavian republics that had wars are not part of the EU, or were not at the moment they had their wars. And even though all neighbouring countries trade with the EU, their economies are much less interdependent than those of the EU countries because of the lack of free trade and freedom of movement.

So this supports the idea that the EU does prevent wars rather than invalidating it.

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

#599

Post by FirmwareBurner »

seszett wrote: post #598
FirmwareBurner wrote: post #591

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>There used to be open war between European countries every 30 years or so. That hasn’t happened. I meant how did that ensure peace between Ukraine, Russia and EU? It clearly didn't even though EU was buying shit tonnes of gas from Russia, and Russia was buying shit tonne of aerospace parts and stuff from Ukraine. War still happened. [..edited out the Yugoslavia argument..] All the proof shows "peace through trade" d…

> I meant between Ukraine, RUssia and EU. > Yugoslav wars started in 1991 and ended in 2001. Russia invaded Crimea in 2014. Are these wars not "European" enough? Well, Ukraine, Russia and the former Yugoslavian republics that had wars are not part of the EU, or were not at the moment they had their wars. And even though all neighbouring countries trade with the EU, their economies are much less interdependent than th…

>So this supports the idea that the EU does prevent wars rather than invalidating it.

Yes, it was all the EU economy. The 40 or so US military bases occupying the EU had nothing to do with ensuring peace on the continent.

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

#600

Post by jeroenhd »

kelnos wrote: post #590
nottorp wrote: post #37

So are they going to try and spread this extra cost to customers worldwide? I'm fine with chips made in Taiwan.

When (not if) China invades Taiwan, those Taiwanese-made chips will disappear overnight. Even if China takes over the TSMC fabs intact, they'll be disrupted for years. So sure, right now we might not want to pay that 20% markup for US-made chips, but 20% will be cheap if the only operational TSMC fabs are in the US.

I wouldn't want to pay 20% extra for US-made chips. The US threatened to invade a close ally and started trade wars for absolutely no reason. Paying extra to give the US even more economic power seems like a lose/lose situation to me.

I'd rather see America hooked on the same supply as everyone else to make sure they stop China from invading Taiwan. Our shared weaknesses force governments to cooperate, which is a win in my book.

Post reply on HN