Chinese semiconductor industry

Status
Not open for further replies.

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
The US claims are bollocks. They sanctioned ZTE and Huawei which are civilian telecoms companies.

China imports more in semiconductors than oil each and every year. A lot of these semiconductors come from US companies. So it is not in the US's financial interest if China develops their own solutions and gets to own the market. As China is the world's largest market, they have the potential to be the largest semiconductor producer in the world. Because with hardware, most of the cost is in the chip design, and making masks. Not in the actual fabrication. You need to sell a lot to get your money back and profit.
 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
well they did sanction Huawei because the US thinks Huawei has ties to the PLA.
These are just excuses. The US's own semiconductor industry was initially started out by people with connections to the US military.
Fairchild Semiconductor is a good example of that. They made transistors which were used in the Minuteman missile. The founders of Intel and AMD came out from Fairchild Semiconductor.

The US also put sanctions on Japanese semiconductors back in the 1980s and 1990s to prevent their ascension. This is nothing new.
Japanese company NEC could not sell its SX series of supercomputers in the US in order for US company Cray to retain its market share for example.

I think the only reason they did not apply similar sanctions on machine tools is that by the time the Japanese semis became a threat, the Japanese already had their own fully independent tool chain.
 
Last edited:

tokenanalyst

Brigadier
Registered Member

It's finally clear to me now. For ages I didn't know why the US wanted to prevent China from developing chips. This video says that the main purpose is to restrict Chinese military development, which poses a substantial threat to US national security. I always thought the US didn't want China to have chips is due the fact that China is a communist and "unfriendly" country. But doesn't the US know that military chips are decades behind commercial chips? China has had no problem developing its own chips for military applications. Right?
Weapons like missiles, tanks, aircraft and so on have to interact a lot with the physical world, with their operators, and their target so they need a lot of analog ICs, sensors, RF and programmable logics circuits, but vast majority of that is mostly mature nodes due physical, budget, reliability, compatibility and other constraints, in some cases the use of exotic materials like SiC or GaN for high power and fast switching and Hard rad ICs is better than just resolution to archive the desired performance but world militaries do NOT consume near the volumes required to justify the building high end semiconductor fabs.

And you may say but what about supercomputers to design nukes and hypersonic missiles, but really? is weapon design the main driving force of compute power or is high end physics like fusion research or bioinformatics or climate prediction or astronomy? I think is the latter, even in the 90s I think was that way, The Chinese in the 70s did the calculation of their nuclear test using mechanical calculators. My hot take is that I don't see the military as a big consumer of computing power compared to the civilian sector, does China 3 exaflops of computing power are going to be used exclusive to hypersonic research? I personally don't think so.

I watched this interview between this guy called Chris Miller, an author and a think tanker i guess and Paul Triolo, a think tanker. and Mr Miller said that the military has been the driven force of the semiconductor industry and Mr. Triolo correct him telling him that has not being that way since the 70s, consumer electronics IS the main driver of the semiconductor industry, the military just piggyback on that success.

The Japanese semiconductor industry in the 80s and early 90s is a testament to that, the Japanese success was driven by the Japanese civilian electronic industry.

In the 90s the US recovered from the Japanese because California was the center of the civilian PC and software revolution, that required a lot of chips, that companies like Intel or AMD supplied.

In the mid 2000s was rise of the fabless model and smartphone who give rise to the success of Taiwan and South Korea semiconductor industry

I think in the case of the Soviet Union was totally contrary, the obsession with national security of the soviets force that nation to allocate most of their quality semiconductor manufacturing resources to military production and because the military is not a huge consumer of chips basically discouraged the Soviets from building a robust a semiconductor supply chain and innovate in top of that, some people say that was Western export controls, I don't think so, semiconductor manufacturing equipment and materials in the 80s was not near as complex as is today, I have no doubt that the country who invented the Atomic Layer Deposition technique would have created an entire advanced semiconductor supply chain on its own. Other people say is capitalism and communism, I don't think is that simple because the Japanese semiconductor industry was heavily supported by the Japanese state, it was not called Japan. Inc for not reason. So that let me to think that was the Soviet obsession with national security that let them to see semiconductor manufacturing as something for the military first and civilian second. ICs for fighter jets and transistors for consumer radios.

In the case of China most of their military IC production is done by CTEC. I think SMEE-CTEC lithography tools are probably more than enough to satisfy more than 99% of China military chips needs by volume.

What had been really worrying the Chinese government since 2010 is China civilian state sector, if you want an idea how big that is, just remember how worry Micron got when they got banned from government purchases, we are talking about the one of the biggest sector in the world, an entire economy on its own right, communications, transportation, oil, mining and so on. Any cuts on ICs could really disrupt the Chinese economy. So is not just the military.
 

RavenClaws

New Member
Registered Member
well they did sanction Huawei because the US thinks Huawei has ties to the PLA.
They sanctioned Huawei because they can't put their NSA spyware on Huawei 5G and are afraid of losing the global spying monopoly they had for LTE. They also projected their own obsessive need to spy everything onto China and Huawei. Not even GCHQ and CSE (5-eyes security agencies) can find spyware for years on Huawei stuff.
 

gelgoog

Lieutenant General
Registered Member
The Soviets were behind the US in semiconductors and computers by like 5-10 years. You could argue that the gap was there from the beginning, but initially computers weren't that important. It came to be a big deal starting in the late 1960s.

You often hear that Stalin was behind the Soviet lag in computer technology. That he banned research in computers altogether. But that is a misnomer. The Soviet Union was a wreck after WW2 ended and massive efforts were expended catching up in several technologies at the same time after the war ended. In Stalin's time there was pushback against the discipline of cybernetics. But cybernetics was at the time highly speculative and theoretical with little practical application. A lot of it was theoretical discussion of artificial intelligence. That was why it was seen by a lot of people in the Soviet scientific establishment as 'bourgeois science'.

In Stalin's time there were still investments in radio-electronics and, yes, also computers as calculating devices. In fact the first Soviet general purpose computer, STRELA, was built when Stalin was still alive in 1953.

The computers the Soviets built in the 1950s and 1960s like the STRELA or the URAL family of computers were largely incompatible with each other and sometimes even with computers of the same family. Computers were custom built for a specific user and the user wrote their own software. This was also the case in the West for a large part, but eventually IBM came up with the System/360 architecture. This meant you could write software in assembly once and use it in different computers from small to large. So software could be reused between machines and the software base available for the architecture quickly grew. System/360 also came up with the concept of byte addressing. The Soviets eventually decided to clone System/360 in the late 1960s but of course that took a long time. Their clone the ES EVM was only available in the early 1970s. About the time the original IBM System/360 systems had been discontinued.

Some also argue that the Soviet government directive to directly clone Western computers led to part of the lag. I would argue that partially led to the destruction of the Soviet computer industry after the collapse of the Soviet Union because the cloned systems couldn't be exported outside the Soviet Block because of infringing on copyright and patent law. But the lag was structural and there from the start. Cloning the System/360 architecture didn't worsen the lag in any significant fashion.

The Soviets also cloned the PDP-11 and eventually made a single chip version of the PDP-11. This was sold in the mid 1980s for personal workstations and personal computers in the Soviet Union. Like the Elektronika BK series of home micros.

In the late 1980s the same team which did the PDP-11 microprocessor in a single chip then developed the K1839. This was a multiple chip clone of the VAX 11/750 32-bit series in 3 um process. They couldn't make the processor in a single chip. For comparison this is the same process which was used in the Intel 8086 process in 1978. i.e. they were close to a decade behind in process technology. So the Soviets couldn't even clone the Intel 80286 with 1.5 um process at that time. A processor from 1982. The K1839 is still used as the control processor in the GLONASS-M satellites.

The Soviets also always had problems with yields in microchips. I think they never had projection lithography. In the West, the increase in yield due to projection lithography led to a 10x decrease in per chip price when it was introduced in the late 1970s.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top