Germany Carl Zeiss, heart of Dutch ASML Lithography Equipment.

Status
Not open for further replies.

tidalwave

Senior Member
Registered Member
@tidalwave They must have other designs (14nm) since the draconian measures were put in place? I can understand 7nm being necessary for the smartphone SOCs, but the base stations don't "need" 7nm I would think?

Will SMIC go complete independent from US or stay clear of Huawei?


You can think the base station as the server and the cellphone as the client. How can you have a server running slower than the client??

On the flip side you can have client phone running slower than the server.

So, you have it reversed.

SMIC will support huawei thats why we seeing tje government fund invested in SMIC. Government owns parts of SMIC now.
 

j17wang

Senior Member
Registered Member
I hope so. There is a difference between seeing something coming and then taking massive action pre-emptively early on... for example the 2 billion injection should have been 20 billion and a year ago....

Here is my hunch. The end goal of the US is not just to cripple Huawei and dash China's 5G dreams, but actually to shutdown China altogether. They are doing it in stages like example of frog being boiled alive slowly so that it doesn't react etc, but the US will continue to escalate until soon one day they just come out and say all microprocessors to China are banned.... In this digital age microchips are more important than oil... the intent is not just to curb China tech rise but I believe given the pattern and the MO, it is to have long term goal of completely collapsing China... in this modern age if your country cannot source chips its like as if EMP hit the entire nation and took out the grid...

I also hope your right, and I believe pre-emptive action was taken earlier on at least by mid-April. Keep in mind though that even as of today, China can easily produce at scale the most advanced chips the world had to offer back in 2016 (~14nm). Therefore assuming in the maximal scenario that the US and the rest of the WORLD were to coordinate a 100% ban on all microchips/semi conductors, it would result in only a 4 year setback to china, which is far from enough to collapse the domestic industry, although may make it un-competitive to export.

The other mitigating aspect to understand is china has no meaningful gap when it comes to IC design (i.e. hi-silicon trades performance with samsung/intel/apple depending on which chip was released in which quarter of the year). Right now, china's industry develops/designs chips with an assumption of having access to the most advanced fabs. With IC design, you could also prioritize design economy/efficiency knowing you can't access the latest in physical fab technology. From a practical perspective, a very-well designed and mature 10nm chip can still beat a 7nm chip if you optimized it in conjunction with the software. While china will pursue "manhattan project" levels of investments in EUV, steppers, and fab plants to catch up to TSCM/Samsung/Intel over multiple years, in the interim chinese businesses can still change IC design philosophies to prioritize economy/efficiency under hardware constraints to partially mitigate this 4 year gap.

Another thing to keep in mind, Iran and Russia have been operating for years under similar if not worse sanctions that the US has placed on Huawei. Neither of these country is exactly collapsing their economies as a result (maybe from other factors, but not sanctions), and china has an industrial and technology base many times larger than either of these countries to support the money and investments required to sustain a fully indigenous and capable manufacturing capability. In fact, I believe the US administration has already realized the "substantive" damage to China (not Huawei, which is not the real target) will be quite limited and will likely allow for the extension past 120 days. Like I mentioned earlier, 120 days is perfect timing in the US for another announcement on China a month or so before the actual elections.
 

tidalwave

Senior Member
Registered Member
Going forward, Chinese government has to be more proactive. Like the future EUV project it has inject funding to it
Right now there's minimal funding among the academic institutions.

It has be big funding at least $50 million.

I think now the research institutions are sharing a few millions among them. Its barebone.
 

localizer

Colonel
Registered Member
Going forward, Chinese government has to be more proactive. Like the future EUV project it has inject funding to it
Right now there's minimal funding among the academic institutions.

It has be big funding at least $50 million.

I think now the research institutions are sharing a few millions among them. Its barebone.


14nm isn't exactly inferior to 7nm. Intel's 14nm has comparable performance to AMD's 7nm.
Also, we're talking about ASICs in this case.


SMIC will also get sanctioned by US no?
 

tidalwave

Senior Member
Registered Member
14nm isn't exactly inferior to 7nm. Intel's 14nm has comparable performance to AMD's 7nm.
Also, we're talking about ASICs in this case.


SMIC will also get sanctioned by US no?
Intel has its own way of categorize. Its different than TSMC's. Within TSMC technology 7nm is better than 14nm.

Maybe US will ignore SMIC who knows? The current main target.is TSMC.
 

Mt1701d

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

Perhaps Tanzania Pres.Magufuli has been inspired by Malaysia Pres Mahathir.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Not sure the Tanzania president is the best example, I may be wrong but seems like even the loan cancellation seems to be more political than anything else.

There was a Reuter article from back in Mar 2019 about it too and seems the project has been in limbo for a long time.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

antiterror13

Brigadier
It's not the ROC specifically; it's just that any company that uses US technology can't sell to Huawei, or likely China in the future. It's all the world, not specific to any place. The problem is that it's China's old disease that it does not control all of its own territories, a disease that festered during China's weakest time but one that can be cured with its return to power.

I guess I'll say this again: China and America have fundamentally different strategies in this fight. America uses the old lion strategy, which it will pull out trick after trick from its tool box of weapons that it has accumulated over the years it reigned as king and it will use these to try to stop China from progressing. Traditionally, America has strengths and China has weaknesses (like its inability to control ROC and some extent, HK) so America wants to fight in the realm of a traditional time. But China, on the other hand, uses the young lion strategy, which is to dodge attacks thrown at it so it can focus on its own growth. This is the one area, the area of the future, that the old lion cannot match the young lion, so the young lion doesn't want to dwell and fight in the past but it wants to grow and bring about its more powerful future as quickly as possible. The young lion simply doesn't have as many tools and tricks as the old lion because it hasn't had the time to create them yet. Because of these differences, the fight will not be direct blow-for-blow. It will be each side using the things that work best for it, and that's why China's not fighting America's fight by throwing punches. That's America's realm; it just wants to grow and bring America into China's future where it cannot compete.

The least impressive punishment is some immediate little tit-for-tat; that's what small people revel in. That's what small people call strength. The biggest punishment of all for the US would be seeing China turn the semiconductor and lithography fields from its weakness into its strength in a few short years. Trump will never admit it because he's the type of guy who could leave a fight unconscious in a stretcher to a standing foe and still say he won after he wakes up in the hospital, but every tech group over the world and US will know that Trump's administration spurred China's semiconductor innovation. That's the only true victory worth having.

Totally agreed. Remember when Obama banned high perf Xeon chips to China with a hope would stop Chinese super computer development in 2015 ... it ended up useless and damaging as China still in the top of supercomputer with indigenous CPU. And since then Chinese CPU is getting better and better, especially for super computer world
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top