Chinese semiconductor industry

Status
Not open for further replies.

FairAndUnbiased

Brigadier
Registered Member
That goes into the CPU architecture design in the way how it can also ultimately affect the clock speed.

I was referring to the switching speed of the semiconductor transistors themselves; how their node size affects their switching speed, power consumption etc.
I'm not an expert but it seems individual transistors switch at similar rates. Voltage transients are measured in the picoseconds between current FinFETs and next generation nanosheets.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I believe clock rate limitations are not on the transient decay rate but on the thermal capacity.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
006DKHfbgy1hgesh9zr8lj30q40hsdhi.jpg

Mediatek, still not allowed to export anything to Huawei. Remember, the restrictions are meant to help American companies like Qualcomm while restricting Huawei to just 4G RF stuff.

The big jump here for Huawei isn't the 7nm Kirin SoC but rather the RF chips. That's only became available in the past couple of months as I've documented here.

When Huawei unveils its 5G phones, it will be the first time anyone has broken through the US controlled 5G mobile RF market
 

Schmoe

New Member
Registered Member
View attachment 116573

Mediatek, still not allowed to export anything to Huawei. Remember, the restrictions are meant to help American companies like Qualcomm while restricting Huawei to just 4G RF stuff.

The big jump here for Huawei isn't the 7nm Kirin SoC but rather the RF chips. That's only became available in the past couple of months as I've documented here.

When Huawei unveils its 5G phones, it will be the first time anyone has broken through the US controlled 5G mobile RF market
But won't the 7nm Kirin SoC require ASML equipment? And won't that equipment (regardless if owned by SMIC or any entity SMIC spun-out) experience a servicing cut-off if used to manufacture Kirin chips? If so, my original point was, does that imply that a cut-off of servicing and maintenance is not fatal?
 

Quickie

Colonel
I'm not an expert but it seems individual transistors switch at similar rates. Voltage transients are measured in the picoseconds between current FinFETs and next generation nanosheets.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I believe clock rate limitations are not on the transient decay rate but on the thermal capacity.

Never intended to go that deep, lol.

I was thinking along the lines of as the transistor gets smaller; there is lower capacitance (capacitance is always a problem with digital circuits); also it needs fewer electrons to get saturated/turn on and it seems, from the above paper, "thermal capacity" also plays a part? I suppose the node size has an effect on its thermal capacity as well.
 
Last edited:

tonyget

Senior Member
Registered Member
How do we know SMIC did not simply just spin out its FinFET capable factory in Shanghai?
Why do you think they took out 14nm from their website?
I have been thinking this might have happened for a while. I suspect it is highly likely.

14nm line is SMIC's most profitable department now,since no other Chinese fabs can do it. It has a very strong demand in China at the moment,those companies on US blacklist can only go to SMIC for FinFET. So I see no reason what so ever SMIC would want to spin out this core business line
 

tonyget

Senior Member
Registered Member
But won't the 7nm Kirin SoC require ASML equipment? And won't that equipment (regardless if owned by SMIC or any entity SMIC spun-out) experience a servicing cut-off if used to manufacture Kirin chips? If so, my original point was, does that imply that a cut-off of servicing and maintenance is not fatal?

Firstly,the rumored "7nm Kirin SoC" has not been confirmed. As of now just speculation.

Regarding the servicing cut-off,it's not a big a deal. We have discussed this numerous times already in this thread
 

Eventine

Junior Member
Registered Member
The problem Chinese domestic AI chip facing,is ecosystem/software compatibility/ease to use,thus the overall cost is high compare to Nvidia chip. That's why even though NVIDIA Chip is being pushed to sky high price,Chinese companies are still rush to buy these chips like crazy

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

实际上,除了硬件性能差距外,软件生态也是国产AI芯片厂商的短板。

芯片需要适配硬件系统、工具链、编译器等多个层级,需要很强的适配性,否则会出现这款芯片在某个场景能跑出90%的算力,在另一场景只能跑出80%效能的情景。

上文提到,英伟达在这方面优势明显。早在2006年,英伟达就推出了计算平台CUDA,这是一个并行计算软件引擎,CUDA框架里集成了很多调用GPU算力所需的代码,工程师可以直接使用这些代码,无须一一编写。开发者可使用CUDA更高效地进行AI训练和推理,更好的发挥GPU算力。时至今日,CUDA已成为AI基础设施,主流的AI框架、库、工具都以CUDA为基础进行开发。

如果没有这套编码语言,软件工程师发挥硬件价值的难度会变得极大。

英伟达之外的GPU和AI芯片如要接入CUDA,需要自己提供适配软件。据业内人士透露,曾接触过一家非英伟达GPU厂商,尽管其芯片和服务报价比英伟达更低,也承诺提供更及时的服务,但使用其GPU的整体训练和开发成本会高于英伟达,还得承担结果和开发时间的不确定性。

虽然英伟达GPU价格贵,但实际用起来反而是最便宜的。这对有意抓住大模型机会的企业来说,钱往往不是问题,时间才是更宝贵的资源,大家都必须尽快获得足够多的先进算力来确保先发优势。

因此,对于国产芯片供应商来讲,哪怕能通过堆芯片的方式能堆出一个算力相当的产品,但软件适配与兼容让客户接受更难。此外,从服务器运营的角度,它的主板开销、电费、运营费,以及需要考虑的功耗、散热等问题,都会大大增加数据中心的运营成本。

因为算力资源常需要以池化的形式呈现,数据中心通常更愿意采用同一种芯片,或者同一家公司的芯片来降低算力池化难度。

算力的释放需要复杂的软硬件配合,才能将芯片的理论算力变为有效算力。对客户而言,把国产AI芯片用起来并不容易,更换云端AI芯片要承担一定的迁移成本和风险,除非新产品存在性能优势,或者能在某个维度上提供其他人解决不了的问题,否则客户更换的意愿很低。

In fact, in addition to the gap in hardware performance, the software ecosystem is also a shortcoming of domestic AI chip manufacturers.

The chip needs to adapt to multiple levels such as hardware system, tool chain, compiler, etc., and needs strong adaptability. Otherwise, it will appear that this chip can run 90% of the computing power in one scene, but only in another scene. Run out of 80% performance scenario.

As mentioned above, Nvidia has obvious advantages in this regard. As early as 2006, Nvidia launched the computing platform CUDA, which is a parallel computing software engine. The CUDA framework integrates a lot of codes required to invoke GPU computing power. Engineers can directly use these codes without writing them one by one. Developers can use CUDA to perform AI training and reasoning more efficiently, and make better use of GPU computing power. Today, CUDA has become an AI infrastructure, and mainstream AI frameworks, libraries, and tools are all developed based on CUDA.

Without this set of coding languages, it will be extremely difficult for software engineers to realize the value of hardware.

If GPUs and AI chips other than Nvidia want to access CUDA, they need to provide their own adaptation software. According to industry insiders, I have contacted a non-NVIDIA GPU manufacturer. Although its chip and service quotations are lower than NVIDIA’s and promise to provide more timely services, the overall training and development costs of using its GPU will be higher than NVIDIA’s. Undertake the uncertainty of results and development time.

Although Nvidia GPUs are expensive, they are actually the cheapest to use. For companies that intend to seize the opportunity of large-scale models, money is often not a problem, and time is a more precious resource. Everyone must obtain enough advanced computing power as soon as possible to ensure the first-mover advantage.

Therefore, for domestic chip suppliers, even if a product with comparable computing power can be stacked by stacking chips, it is more difficult for customers to accept software adaptation and compatibility. In addition, from the perspective of server operation, its motherboard expenses, electricity charges, operating expenses, and issues such as power consumption and heat dissipation that need to be considered will greatly increase the operating costs of the data center.

Because computing power resources often need to be presented in the form of pooling, data centers are usually more willing to use the same chip or chips from the same company to reduce the difficulty of computing power pooling.

The release of computing power requires complex software and hardware cooperation to turn the theoretical computing power of the chip into effective computing power. For customers, it is not easy to use domestic AI chips. Replacement of cloud AI chips requires certain migration costs and risks, unless the new product has performance advantages, or can provide problems that others cannot solve in a certain dimension. Otherwise, the willingness of customers to replace is very low.
It's great to call out problems, but pretty soon these companies won't even have the ability to run any high-end Nvidia GPUs based on the direction US sanctions are going, so the choice is obvious - adapt or die.

CUDA hegemony needs to end, and it isn't even that difficult to do so. Popular ML libraries like Tensorflow and Pytorch that pretty much everyone use can easily be forked to support a different hardware API, so you don't have to build the entire ecosystem from scratch. You just need to commit to switching out the driver layer.

The US can't ban open source ML libraries easily, but CUDA is proprietary to Nvidia's architecture so it's the main bottle neck. Normally this kind of software is developed by the GPU manufacturer itself, but in this case I think Huawei is probably best suited to doing it, since they have the most experience with chip design. Or, if they can't do it themselves due to resource limitations, they should help organize a group of Chinese chip design & AI companies to do the actual implementation.
 

latenlazy

Brigadier
But won't the 7nm Kirin SoC require ASML equipment? And won't that equipment (regardless if owned by SMIC or any entity SMIC spun-out) experience a servicing cut-off if used to manufacture Kirin chips? If so, my original point was, does that imply that a cut-off of servicing and maintenance is not fatal?
Equipment that has already been delivered is not equipment that the US can go into China and rip out. What servicing that could have been cut off by US sanctions has already been cut off by the October ban. Servicing itself is not something that only the OEM you bought the equipment from can do. Just like you can service your car or phone at a 3rd party store, so too can SME equipment be serviced by 3rd party businesses.
 

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
But won't the 7nm Kirin SoC require ASML equipment? And won't that equipment (regardless if owned by SMIC or any entity SMIC spun-out) experience a servicing cut-off if used to manufacture Kirin chips? If so, my original point was, does that imply that a cut-off of servicing and maintenance is not fatal?
They have been going months without servicing on their equipments. Ymtc has been operating for months without any help. It's been cutoff and you have to work around it. Nothing to do with Huawei
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top