Chinese semiconductor industry

Franklin said:

I can speak Dutch and I'm reading the Dutch media and they are saying that the ban is coming. Not all machines will be banned just the ones that can make the 14 nm chips.

The Netherlands is one of the most loyal allies of America. When the Americans say jump their question is how high.

Click to expand...

every single one of ASML immersion systems can be used to make 14nm chips. If they are going to do a ban, they will ban export of immersion lithography systems to china. That is the problem with this blanket bans.


The biggest different between this systems is the productivity 250WPH for the 1970 to 300WPH for the 2050, that it. resolution wise is almost the same. maybe the 2000+ have some better software and what not, but resolution wise they are almost the same.

tokenanalyst said:

every single one of ASML immersion systems can be used to make 14nm chips. If they are going to do a ban, they will ban export of immersion lithography systems to china. That is the problem with this blanket bans.

View attachment 103151
The biggest different between this systems is the productivity 250WPH for the 1970 to 300WPH for the 2050, that it. resolution wise is almost the same. maybe the 2000+ have some better software and what not, but resolution wise they are almost the same.

Click to expand...

There’s way more to it than just difference in throughout and software between NXT1970 1980 2000 and 2050.

hvpc said:

There’s way more to it than just difference in throughout and software between NXT1970 1980 2000 and 2050.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but all of them can be used to pattern 14nm chips.

20% more production rate might be the difference between being competitive on cost or not.

gelgoog said:

20% more production rate might be the difference between being competitive on cost or not.

Click to expand...

And that would matter immensely if Chinese fabs had to compete with foreign fabs.

BlackWindMnt said:

If i'm not mistaken graphical shells, drivers and other parts of an operating system aren't counted as part of the linux kernel and such don't have to be up streamed or open sourced to commercialise a linux based distribution.

As i can find the docs for HarmonyOS the architectural overview does show the OS abstracts away the kernel.

Click to expand...

There is no short-answer.

Simplistically, you may compare the evolution of pSOS/VxWorks vs Linux and you would likely get some relevant answers. It is not just about kernel technologies. It is an eco-system for developers, products and consumers.

Linux kernel started as a piece of crap that imitated UNIX V5R4. But over last 30 years, Linux kernel has evolved so much that even the best UNIX release cannot match its current release. Just compare the kernel networking stack and you can get a solid answer.

Creating a Linux distribution off kernel.org is not that complicated. But creating a Linux distribution that is adopted by wide variety of business segments is a long-term evolution. I started using Linux from the Slackware distribution. Now only Ubuntu LTS and RHEL can keep up in the cloud age.

For Harmony OS, the best chance is starting from bottom up in the food chain. The embedded world is a vast addressable market. But in this cloud age, I don't yet see a feasible approach to having an OS for both mainstream embedded operating environments and host operating environments.

If the LoongArch community can learn from the history of the MacOS, they would probably have a better chance of creating its own host operating eco-system, while leaving embedded operating environments to Harmony OS.

Franklin said:

I can speak Dutch and I'm reading the Dutch media and they are saying that the ban is coming. Not all machines will be banned just the ones that can make the 14 nm chips.

The Netherlands is one of the most loyal allies of America. When the Americans say jump their question is how high.

Click to expand...

This same Dutch media back in October said ASML would not be able to service Chinese clients after the American sanctions. And then ASML came out and said the sanctions didn't affect them.

At this point, most of us think Dutch gov't will put some kind of formal restrictions. Whoever, the impact of China's semiconductor industry could be minimal to a year or two of set back depending on the details and implementation. As we discussed earlier, Arfi scanners that are ideal for 28 nm process can also be used for 14 nm process. What is going to be blocked and what won't be blocked? American parts in Arfi scanners could be replaced by non-American parts. Is restriction just toward any machine that has American parts? We don't know. How is the implementation going to be done? Is it going to be immediate or will there be a grace period where orders that have already received advanced payments will be carried out? Are they going to be smart and make it based on the progress of Chinese competition or will they do blanket ban like the Americans and just leave the entire market to competition? There are all these details that can be slight inconvenience to delaying certain SMIC or YMTC fab by a year or two while they wait to tune domestic scanners to work with their processes.

Without details, this just ends up being a pointless circular argument of Chinese grievance, positive thinking and attacking Dutch as American vassals. You can see why this is not productive for this thread.

WarAndPeace said:

Theoretical question. So what happens if the US bans computer manufacturing in China if China decides to use SMEE and SMIC to make the chips of the computers made in China instead of importing chips from TSMC to make the chips of the computers made in China? Any ideas?

Click to expand...

This question makes no sense. How can America bank computer manufacturing in China?

Theoretical question. So what happens if the US bans computer manufacturing in China if China decides to use SMEE and SMIC to make the chips of the computers made in China instead of importing chips from TSMC to make the chips of the computers made in China? Any ideas?​

Click to expand...

Your question doesn't make any sense. If the US bans "Chinese computer making" then all chip sales from TSMC are banned from China. If they are using chips from SMIC etc then there's nothing to ban.

4Runner said:

For Harmony OS, the best chance is starting from bottom up in the food chain. The embedded world is a vast addressable market. But in this cloud age, I don't yet see a feasible approach to having an OS for both mainstream embedded operating environments and host operating environments.

If the LoongArch community can learn from the history of the MacOS, they would probably have a better chance of creating its own host operating eco-system, while leaving embedded operating environments to Harmony OS.

Click to expand...

I think Huawei should be the one to push a domestic software ecosystem they have an excellent consumer product line rivaling that of Apple Pre sanctions. In the non MacBook section of the prosumer market the matebook pro was like the best looking windows/Linux laptop out there.

In the cloud world you might want liteOs take the lead and maybe become a runtime for WASM container images. Seeing the result from the docker preview, those WASM container images are like 2 order of magnitude smaller. We are talking about 300kb WASM VS 40mb for a Linux container image. This saves on disk storage but probably more importantly you can send more images with the limited bandwidth in a data centre and contain more images in memory. The more WASM image you can load, the more customer you can serve and generating more revenue with edge computing.