Chinese semiconductor industry

Status
Not open for further replies.

antiterror13

Brigadier
The last I heard China buys 60% of the world's chip market so I don't know why anyone would think the rest of the world's chip industry that shares the remaining 40% gives them the edge over China. They lose 60%. Not to mention how it'll cost them even more than ever to produce chips now. Excluding China... their costs to produce goes up not down. That's how business works. They always find a way to make it cost as less as possible because someone else will beat them eventually. And some spin that other countries that now want to produce chips somehow goes against China? Anyone else who wants to get into the game thinking of excluding China are making that 40% of the world's share worse for everyone else unless they're planning to sell them to China. If everyone is producing their own chips for themselves, that goes against the US. China has little to worry about other players because the rest that has to divide the 40% of the pie among each other even more while China still holds the majority 60% exclusively all by itself.

It is correct about China buys 60% chips, but remember the big part of it to be exported back to the world as TV, Fridge, Computer. etc, etc

Interesting to know how much (in %) that really consume in China
 

ansy1968

Brigadier
Registered Member
The last I heard China buys 60% of the world's chip market so I don't know why anyone would think the rest of the world's chip industry that shares the remaining 40% gives them the edge over China. They lose 60%. Not to mention how it'll cost them even more than ever to produce chips now. Excluding China... their costs to produce goes up not down. That's how business works. They always find a way to make it cost as less as possible because someone else will beat them eventually. And some spin that other countries that now want to produce chips somehow goes against China? Anyone else who wants to get into the game thinking of excluding China are making that 40% of the world's share worse for everyone else unless they're planning to sell them to China. If everyone is producing their own chips for themselves, that goes against the US. China has little to worry about other players because the rest that has to divide the 40% of the pie among each other even more while China still holds the majority 60% exclusively all by itself.
@AssassinsMace Sir to answer your question they simply miscalculated especially the Chinese respond, that's all there is to it. We all blame Trump, but the American Semis and tech industry had a hand in its imposition, they know which sector is vulnerable and they pounce on that. In consolation they didn't anticipate the Chinese resolved and determination, In pinpointing our vulnerabilities it enable the Chinese to correct it. Overall we had seen the progress of Chinese IC within the span of 3 1/2 years starting 2018 which the sanction was implemented, Self sufficiency in 28nm this year and 14nm next year is truly astonishing result. Sir remember 2019 or 2020 were gloom and doom permeates this forum, I for one felt sorry for Huawei and there is a question regarding the SMIC 14nm chips if they able to produced it, now I can't wait for next year and hear reports about China domestic 14nm in mass production. :D
 
Last edited:

tokenanalyst

Brigadier
Registered Member

Is this true about SMEE?
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Fears for Chinese Semiconductor Capital Equipment and Chemical Supply Chain Are Overblown | Cautionary Tale On Trusting Industry Analysts​

Shanhai Micro Electronics Equipment is perhaps the most hyped firm out there due to their role as a lithography tool maker. They have 0 successful tools and even their claimed technology is 20 years back. They have a long way to go before they should be taken seriously.

ACM Research (ACMR) is perhaps the most successful firm because they operate in wafer cleaning, a market with a lower barrier to entry.

Advanced Micro-Fabrication Equipment (AMEC) operates in etch mostly, and they haven’t had too much success either. Additionally, they have also been engrossed in some alleged accounting scandals.

Naura Technology Group claims to operate in Etch, Chemical Vapor Deposition (CVD), and Physical Vapor Deposition (CVD). Their success here is quite limited.

Kingstone Semiconductor operates in ion implantation. As far as semiconductors, they have had little to no success, but their products do sell to the massive Chinese solar market. We do not have the expertise to evaluate the solar business, but from our research, it seems legitimate.

Shangyang Piotech, Hwatsing Technology, and Sizone Technology operate in Physical Vapor Deposition (PVD) and Chemical Mechanical Planarization (CMP). SemiAnalysis has investigated and found that CMP is the only area where they have a usable product.

This is a cautionary tale. We at SemiAnalysis pride ourselves on being very close to the nitty gritty details but have fallen prey to this as well. Company statements and market research only go so far. The ultimate tool for discovery is talking to technology experts and channel checks.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
That final sentence tells you everything, This is not research or a comprehensive analysis, this is nothing more than a cheap marketing ad from that company.
 

jfcarli

Junior Member
Registered Member
It is correct about China buys 60% chips, but remember the big part of it to be exported back to the world as TV, Fridge, Computer. etc, etc

Interesting to know how much (in %) that really consume in China
Actually it is even more difficult because the exported items will have differente treatment depending on who designed the product being exported.

If you are talking about products designed, produced and exported by Chinese firms, it is the Chinese company that decides whether or not to use Chinese chips.

If, however, the product exported is designed and manufactured by a subsidiary of a NON-Chinese company, then the decision whether or not to use Chinese chips is made by the foreign co.

On the other hand, take the case of Apple: they are using every day more Chinese components in their products. Basically because they intend to keep a foothold on the Chinese consumer market. They know that if they want to sell in China, they'd better start using at least some Chinese chips.

It is a completely different thing if the product was designed by a foreign company which determines who to buy the chips from and that company has little or no exposure to the Chinese market.

At the end of the day, one will only know exactly what percentage of the chips China imports can actually be substituted by local content.

I believe it is, however, a very large part of those 60% imported.
 

horse

Colonel
Registered Member
It is correct about China buys 60% chips, but remember the big part of it to be exported back to the world as TV, Fridge, Computer. etc, etc

Interesting to know how much (in %) that really consume in China

It is correct that China buys more chips than the world combined.

Whether those chips put into products to be exported for added-value for more profits, is not really related to China being the biggest market for chips.

==========================

Look at it this way.

There is a market for chips, there is a market for refrigerators.

China has the dominant position in both of them.
 

taxiya

Brigadier
Registered Member
For steel, the Great Leap Forward actually worked. The goal was to double the production, from 5.9 million tons in 1958 to 10.7 million tons.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
China was producing 12.2 million tons. So for steel at least, the GLF was a success. It was unfortunate and simply bad luck that China had consecutive years of drought at the same time, so food production went down.
If you count the "steel" that is made out of household cooking pot, then it "worked", but then people don't have anything to prepare food. My parents' village did not go that far, but far enough that wasting useful object and got pile of useless iron. Those are not steel by any standard.

No offence but do your parents know this?

The whole crazy thing about GLF is that achieving a paper goal without substance.
 

latenlazy

Brigadier
If you count the "steel" that is made out of household cooking pot, then it "worked", but then people don't have anything to prepare food. My parents' village did not go that far, but far enough that wasting useful object and got pile of useless iron. Those are not steel by any standard.

No offence but do your parents know this?

The whole crazy thing about GLF is that achieving a paper goal without substance.
GLF was when we learned that Mao was a great politician and a terrible industrial economist.
 

Nutrient

Junior Member
Registered Member
Not so sure if GLF is success with steel industry because the backyard furnace only produced low quality steel. Eager party functionary count them as good steel. But good thing about GLF is bringing industry to the country side that morph into TVE(township, village enterprises) during the reform era. They really kick start whole swath of industry in vast Chinese country side. Some of then are privatized and become large enterprises specially in textile industry and pot and pan industry

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Yes, that's the Western propaganda; the Americans especially like to laugh at Mao's supposedly amateurish "backyard furnaces".

There were probably some peasant furnaces, but I doubt they contributed much steel during the Great Leap Forward.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
, the total steel production in China was:

YearMillion tons of steel
19585.9
196512.2
196615.2
197620.5

Note that steel production actually continued to rise dramatically despite the shutdown of the backyard furnaces in the early 1960s. To me, this means the amateur furnaces were insignificant.

I notice that the West never bothers to say how many backyard furnaces existed during the Great Leap Forward. Of course, ridiculing them was part of a determined propaganda war intended to discredit Mao's huge achievements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top