Chinese semiconductor industry

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rank Amateur

Rank Amateur

Junior Member
Registered Member
BoraTas said:
On phones, what you see is mostly software trickery. For example, they take numerous photos, choose a few of them, edit those in some ways, compound them, and edit the result again. They constantly optimize parameters. Nowadays these are all aided by AI. These are computationally intense which is why smartphone SoCs have specialized NPUs and DSPs nowadays. It is also why most people take worse photos with real cameras. The phone does choosing and editing for you.

View attachment 119156
Click to expand...

"On phones, what you see is mostly software trickery. . . . The phone does choosing and editing for you."

I'm going a bit off-topic here, but one might be surprised to learn -- I certainly was -- how much "choosing and editing" is done by the brain in just simple vision, i.e., just seeing with one's eyes. For those interested, look up "saccades" and associated phenomena, such as saccadic masking, the stopped-clock illusion, etc.
 
H

henrik

Senior Member
Registered Member
paiemon said:
I suspect that it is also IP based given that Huawei has its own modem, and Huawei has numerous patents on signal processing, encoding, etc that form the fundamental basis of telecommunications transmissions and receiving, of which the modem is a key piece. However, the modem is not standalone and needs to operate in conjunction with other signal processing elements at the respective frequencies and this is where I suspect Apple has run into a wall because Qualcomm and Huawei as telecom leaders hold key patents underlying those telecom principles in say 5G that govern how the modem would interact and interface with the signals. They have no interest in licensing or allowing Apple to encroach on their space, and its possible in say 5G telecommunications there are only so many ways to efficiently transmit and receive signals which Qualcomm and Huawei have locked down, hence why they are the modem leaders as well. It seems to me that its not so much a lack of technical expertise holding Apple back, its more that Huawei and Qualcomm took all the good options and its not worthwhile for them to take alternatives that result in poorer performance.
Click to expand...

People in general think Apple is a technology power house, but it is just a marketing company.
 
S

SanWenYu

Captain
Registered Member
tphuang said:
As usual, China's commerce department is run by Patsy's constantly worried about international opinions.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Just granted export license to American company axt Chinese subsidiaries for export on gaa substrate and ge substrate. What a bunch of jokers.
Click to expand...
Well, it's an export control, not a total ban. And we don't know what AXT gave in return for the permit.
 
E

european_guy

Junior Member
Registered Member
paiemon said:
I suspect that it is also IP based given that Huawei has its own modem, and Huawei has numerous patents on signal processing, encoding, etc that form the fundamental basis of telecommunications transmissions and receiving, of which the modem is a key piece. However, the modem is not standalone and needs to operate in conjunction with other signal processing elements at the respective frequencies and this is where I suspect Apple has run into a wall because Qualcomm and Huawei as telecom leaders hold key patents underlying those telecom principles in say 5G that govern how the modem would interact and interface with the signals. They have no interest in licensing or allowing Apple to encroach on their space, and its possible in say 5G telecommunications there are only so many ways to efficiently transmit and receive signals which Qualcomm and Huawei have locked down, hence why they are the modem leaders as well. It seems to me that its not so much a lack of technical expertise holding Apple back, its more that Huawei and Qualcomm took all the good options and its not worthwhile for them to take alternatives that result in poorer performance.
Click to expand...

Mediatek and UNISOC have developed in-house 5G modem too....and nobody sued them.

Mediatek and UNISOC would never sue Apple, and I think neither Huawei would (for many reasons).....Qualcomm instead would definitely do, but actually nobody really knows why Apple gave up and granted Qualcomm another 3 years contract for 5G modem.

BTW 5G is an international ITU standard, so related essential patents should be available under FRAND terms.
 
P

paiemon

Junior Member
Registered Member
european_guy said:
Mediatek and UNISOC have developed in-house 5G modem too....and nobody sued them.

Mediatek and UNISOC would never sue Apple, and I think neither Huawei would (for many reasons).....Qualcomm instead would definitely do, but actually nobody really knows why Apple gave up and granted Qualcomm another 3 years contract for 5G modem.

BTW 5G is an international ITU standard, so related essential patents should be available under FRAND terms.
Click to expand...
I agree, but I suspect Apple's options are more limited in respect to how to work around patent issues for any 5G modem since they came later to the game then Mediatek and UNISOC. They probably have enough IP plus the essential patents licensed that they can withstand any challenge. That would narrow the workaround options for Apple in their design and implementations. Its the same obstacle that China has in coming up with something in the x86 processor market, a standalone third party ISA such as the one from Zhaoxin/VIA struggles against AMD/Intel because of trying to work around the IP that's been built up over the years.
 
T

tinrobert

Junior Member
Registered Member
Phead128 said:
This article is very reasonable and objective, the author has a PhD in material chemistry and 10 years of wafer fabrication experience. He says that SMIC is capable of going down to 5nm with DUV multi patterning. Contrast this to the legions of humanities, political-science, MBAs who pretend to be "semiconductor experts".... this guy has real experience and is a true expert.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Alternative link:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Key Points of Article:
  • Chinese Self-Sufficiency: Sanctions imposed by the U.S. aimed to inhibit China's technological progress but have instead catalyzed China's drive to be self-sufficient in semiconductor production, aligning with "Made in China 2025" initiative.
  • SMIC’s Progress: Despite sanctions and not having access to ASML’s EUV lithography equipment, SMIC (Semiconductor Manufacturing International) has reached the 7nm node and is on track to reach 5nm by 2025, showing significant advancements in technology.
  • Chinese Companies Benefiting: The sanctions have benefitted domestic Chinese equipment companies; HoH growth for these companies is 4x greater than non-Chinese companies, allowing them to grow and potentially serve not only Chinese semiconductor companies but also international ones.
  • Increase in Chip-Related Businesses: China has added a significant number of new chip-related businesses, 47,400 in 2021, depicting a rapid growth in the domestic semiconductor industry.
  • Equipment Sales Drop for Non-Chinese Companies: Companies like ASML and KLA have experienced a drop in equipment sales to China due to sanctions, affecting their revenue from the Chinese market.
  • Chinese Companies' Global Share: Chinese-owned organizations are expected to accelerate capacity investments and represent about 60% of China's fab capacity by 2024, increasing China’s global share in the semiconductor industry.
  • Effect on Global Competition: The advancement of Chinese domestic equipment companies could affect global competition, as these companies are not only selling to Chinese semiconductor companies but also to non-Chinese companies.
  • Sanctions Proven Ineffective: The U.S. sanctions have proven to be ineffective in curbing China’s technological advancements in the semiconductor sector, rather they have been a catalyst for growth and advancements in Chinese semiconductor and equipment companies
I highly recommend reading the full article.
Click to expand...
Thank you very much for your compliments.
 
tphuang

tphuang

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
VIP Professional
Registered Member
european_guy said:
Mediatek and UNISOC have developed in-house 5G modem too....and nobody sued them.

Mediatek and UNISOC would never sue Apple, and I think neither Huawei would (for many reasons).....Qualcomm instead would definitely do, but actually nobody really knows why Apple gave up and granted Qualcomm another 3 years contract for 5G modem.

BTW 5G is an international ITU standard, so related essential patents should be available under FRAND terms.
Click to expand...
keep in mind that Apple may consider Qualcomm to have top of the line modem. Even though Mediatek & Unisoc have their own 5G modem, it may not yield the same performance. For someone like Apple, they really can't afford the image of settling for 2nd or 3rd best
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top