Chinese semiconductor industry

Status
Not open for further replies.
TK3600

TK3600

Major
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Not sure if posted already, but here is a performance review of latest LoongSon desktop processor: 3A6000. The article is fairly indepth but in Chinese. Basically it is equivalent of gen 10 Intel i3 performance. This is overall performance, same amount of cores. i3 was pushed to 4ghz while LoongSon was 2.5ghz, both at their advertised clock. In other words the result is realistic, no silly caveats like using 8 cores to match 4 cores.

This is good enough for office use. I don't think it is ready for mass adoption yet despite adequate performance. There are still too much missing in the ecosystem, but it won't be long until those are stable. What is really important here is the technological basis of the processor. It is not relying on core spamming, or pushing high ghz. Achieving this result under low ghz means architecture has good design and high potential for improvement.

Up next is LoongSon 3B6000 scheduled for 2024. It will feature improvements like DDR4 > DDR5, PCIE3 > PCIE4, 4 core > 8 core. I expect the performance to be pretty good, allowing for use beyond office machines.

3B7000 processor is for post 2025. 3ghz, up to 16 cores. Supports PCIE5. I expect Zen 3 level of performance. Mass adoption by public could start here. Note, dedicated GPU will also release by this year.
 
Wrought

Wrought

Junior Member
Registered Member
tokenanalyst said:
Also I am not attacking @hvpc or anyone. I am just saying there is a lot of secrecy in some parts of the semiconductor industry in China, especially when comes to sanction busting research and development for obvious reason.
Click to expand...

But this is not the PLA, or some super top secret government project. This is a public commercial industry full of public commercial players who are trying to turn a profit. Yes there is for sure secret research with tight security being done here, but the product of that research will eventually be revealed to companies who actually use it to fabricate things that people buy and sell on the open market. Like with SMIC/Huawei, we heard the rumors for months beforehand that something big was coming before the phones were in people's hands. There is a chain of information which goes from complete secret->industry secret->public knowledge and you can't skip steps.

And just because you can technically do something on one sample in a lab does not mean you can do it on a production line in a factory. Scaling up is what makes this a global industry instead of one super secret project hidden away underground. @hvpc is right when he talks about all the problems that companies have actually going from theory to practice. Industry folks may not know everything about the latest breakthrough on paper, but they know about what is being produced and sold by their companies in the real world. And that's what matters here, because this is not some war which might happen in the future, it's a competition in technology happening right now.
 
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
Wrought said:
But this is not the PLA, or some super top secret government project. This is a public commercial industry full of public commercial players who are trying to turn a profit. Yes there is for sure secret research with tight security being done here, but the product of that research will eventually be revealed to companies who actually use it to fabricate things that people buy on the open market. Like with SMIC/Huawei, we heard the rumors for months beforehand that something big was coming.

And just because you can technically do something on one sample in a lab does not mean you can do it on a production line in a factory. Scaling up is what makes this a global industry instead of one super secret project hidden away underground. @hvpc is right when he talks about all the problems that companies have actually going from theory to practice. Industry folks may not know everything about the latest breakthrough on paper, but they know about what is being produced and sold by their companies in the real world. And that's what matters here.
Click to expand...
If this were a full "free market" competition condition then the questions about implementation and scale would be a lot more relevant. Instead we are talking about a captive market situation with heavy state backing. The choice is not between "less ideal domestic equipment and better foreign equipment" but between "less ideal domestic equipment or nothing".
 
Wrought

Wrought

Junior Member
Registered Member
latenlazy said:
If this were a full "free market" competition condition then the questions about implementation and scale would be a lot more relevant. Instead we are talking about a captive market situation with heavy state backing. The choice is not between "less ideal domestic equipment and better foreign equipment" but between "less ideal domestic equipment or nothing".
Click to expand...

That is an oversimplification which has already been covered in the past pages. The US is not all-powerful and their sanctions are not enforced perfectly. All the big players are still relying on foreign equipment to a great extent, and stockpiling even more. Better foreign equipment can and should be used for as long as possible while domestic replacements are being developed, because companies still need to survive and state money is not unlimited. So many people here are too impatient. It will take many years before the entire industry is domestic.
 
L

latenlazy

Brigadier
Wrought said:
That is an oversimplification which has already been covered in the past pages. The US is not all-powerful and their sanctions are not enforced perfectly. All the big players are still relying on foreign equipment to a great extent, and stockpiling even more. Better foreign equipment can and should be used for as long as possible while domestic replacements are being developed, because companies still need to survive and state money is not unlimited. So many people here are too impatient. It will take many years before the entire industry is domestic.
Click to expand...
How did the “US is not all powerful and their sanctions are not enforced perfectly” logic work out last October? I don’t disagree that it’s fine for firms to use foreign equipment while domestic alternatives continue to mature but you can’t really plan around the future availability of foreign equipment much either. I’m not making an argument for the whole industry to become 100% domestic today. My point is that there’s no reason to assume that what is in development by domestic firms won’t make it to market or adoption given the geopolitical realities of these tech sanctions.
 
Wrought

Wrought

Junior Member
Registered Member
latenlazy said:
How did the “US is not all powerful and their sanctions are not enforced perfectly” logic work out last October? I don’t disagree that it’s fine for firms to use foreign equipment while domestic alternatives continue to mature but you can’t really plan around the future availability of foreign equipment much either. I’m not making an argument for the whole industry to become 100% domestic today. My point is that there’s no reason to assume that what is in development by domestic firms won’t make it to market or adoption given the geopolitical realities of these tech sanctions.
Click to expand...

It worked because Chinese manufacturers managed to leverage foreign equipment to achieve outcomes the US didn't want or expect, despite all their efforts at sanctioning and enforcement. Unless you somehow think Huawei's supply chain is already full domestic?

My point is that people are criticizing contributors like @hvpc unfairly because he is feeding them uncomfortable truths. Foreign equipment from KLA is superior to domestic alternatives right now, and that's a fact. It won't always be that way, but it will probably stay that way for the next few years. People need to realize that progress takes lots of time and effort across the whole spectrum from lithography to metrology and so on, and not be discouraged by bad news. Sometimes the news will be good and sometimes it will be bad. But complaining about the truth does not make it a lie.
 
T

tokenanalyst

Brigadier
Registered Member
What I did say? Months of negotiations for nothing at the end they did whatever they want.

New US export restrictions sideline Dutch government​


Not satisfied with Dutch export curbs, Washington is imposing restrictions of its own on ASML.
By redefining what ‘US technology’ means, the US is restricting ASML’s sales in China more than the Dutch government is prepared to do. In new rules announced last week, the Biden administration has lowered the minimum requirement for certain devices or equipment to be considered ‘American’ to zero percent. This means ASML will now have to get Washington’s approval to sell certain tools to Chinese entities.
The new rule applies to all scanners with a dedicated chuck overlay (DCO) of 2.4 nanometers or better, whereas the Dutch restrictions allow for 1.5 nanometers. DCO is a measurement of overlay performance, the ability to align one chip layer to the next. A low overlay is essential to perform double or multipatterning, which is currently China’s only option to domestically manufacture advanced chips. A recently launched Huawei smartphone is reportedly powered by a 7nm chip, well below the 14nm capability that the US considers ‘safe’ for China to have.
It’s not yet clear which companies the curbs target. In an initial assessment, ASML CEO Peter Wennink suggested that only a limited number of Chinese chipmakers will be cut off from ASML’s complete immersion DUV product line. “The NXT:1980 is off limits for a handful of fabs, but not for the vast majority of our Chinese customers, for which we don’t need an export control license,” he told analysts on a conference call discussing Q3 results. The NXT:1980Di is the only immersion scanner that isn’t covered by the current Dutch restrictions. It has a DCO of ≤ 1.6 nanometers. An ASML spokesperson said on Monday that the company is still studying the extent of the new rules.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

In other news.

US semiconductor making tools exports to China are their lowest level since 2017 AND STILL China makes the biggest market share,
27% for AMAT, 30% for KLA and 48% HALF for Lam.
​
Is either that the downturn induced by the stooges in Washington D.C. is really really bad.
Or US companies are moving production to outside the United States to South East Asia faster than anyone expected.
Or a combination of both.


1698112908191.png​
 
H

hkky

New Member
Registered Member
Wrought said:
But this is not the PLA, or some super top secret government project. This is a public commercial industry full of public commercial players who are trying to turn a profit. Yes there is for sure secret research with tight security being done here, but the product of that research will eventually be revealed to companies who actually use it to fabricate things that people buy and sell on the open market.
Click to expand...
I once visited a lab in China doing commercial work. There were signs posted everywhere to remind people on the need to maintain secrecy. On a big project, even a commercial one, information is likely compartmentalized and likely only a few people have a complete picture. It should not be too difficult control information flow if they decided not to release.
 
Wrought

Wrought

Junior Member
Registered Member
hkky said:
I once visited a lab in China doing commercial work. There were signs posted everywhere to remind people on the need to maintain secrecy. On a big project, even a commercial one, information is likely compartmentalized and likely only a few people have a complete picture. It should not be too difficult control information flow if they decided not to release.
Click to expand...

Certainly, and I have been to similar facilities. That's not the point. My point is that, for any commercial product, you will eventually need to release either the input/output to upstream/downstream partners in your supply chain. The specific technical details of how you do it can stay secret, but the fact that you are doing it will be known because the final product is being bought and sold. And that's when industry workers will know that X company is doing Y thing now, which will eventually become public knowledge. Otherwise your product is not commercial.

So when someone from the industry says their company is not using some product for some reason, it is wrong to say that doesn't matter because of secret this or that. Because if the secret is useful for making some product work, then it will be known to someone in the industry (maybe not the same person, of course).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top