Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
TSMC will stop making 7 nm chips for Chinese customers (arstechnica.com)
71 points by alsetmusic 4 hours ago | hide | past | favorite | 46 comments





TSMC certainly "stole" the European chip industry. They had an IP transfer agreement with Philips.

Philips at that time also sold off its crown jewels like ASML and ASMI. This was the time when CEOs bragged about restructuring companies with inane statements like "the company should look like a board of asparagus, not like a board of spaghetti". Journalists thought it was brilliant at the time (enjoy your dinner!).

China and Taiwan benefited from this reckless outsourcing. I'm actually in favor of stopping any European or U.S. high tech exports and further outsourcing.

But it should be on an economic level, not on the silly warmongering level.


RCA also gave their crown jewels of semiconductor technology to what became MediaTek as RCA distracted itself with non-core acquisitions (transforming itself into "rugs, chickens, and automobiles," leading to their decline).

https://taiwaninsight.org/2024/05/10/a-short-history-of-semi...

Edit: I'm typing this on a Kindle that uses a MediaTek CPU (I don't know if UMC fabbed it).


Buying Ralink was also a hella good move. Founded in Cupertino California in 2001, made pretty solid wifi chipsets, sold to MediaTek 2011. https://corp.mediatek.com/news-events/press-releases/mediate...

The scope of mergers & acquisitions in semiconductors is mind boggling & terrifying. It feels like there's so much less diversity, that there's a frailty of entirely Too Big To Fail players left.


According to the economic theory behind tarrifs this strengthens them. Funny how we are trying to do the same thing to ourselves.

Yah this is going to have the opposite effect, as it will only encourage China to develop their own EUV stepper and fab development. It might take 10 years to catch up, but 10 years isn't a long time in the grand scheme of things.

Actually it might take them less than 10 years to catch up. I was at ICCAD (https://iccad.com) last week and half the papers were from China. And some of the EDA CAD software is under export controls - specifically Gate-all-around technology used in 2nm and below. Right now the big EDA vendors have developers in China who are making the software they're not allowed to sell in THEIR OWN COUNTRY.

China is basically where Japan was in the 1970s and Korea in the 1980s. Only 10 years before they become dominant in the industry.


Only if they have — or can reasonably develop — the means to produce cutting-edge chips on their own, which is (arguably) not the case.

If push comes to shove, they will.

Wait.

What?

Serious interest here. Can anyone else verify that the Chinese don't have the ability to develop and manufacture these chips?

That's stunning. I had no idea that was the case.

Or is this just a, "they don't manufacture computer chips" kind of thing. Which, strategically speaking, is critically different than, "they don't know how".


China can manufacture all but the best chips. They are continually improving, and I don't think anyone has offered a single reason why they couldn't do it.

Tariffs always benefits someone, just not the majority of people in most cases.

so in the event of effective sanctions on a country, where the tariff is effectively infinite making the amount supplied go to zero… this should be even better for the country affected?

> so in the event of effective sanctions on a country

That's the point. You can't effectively sanction china.

> where the tariff is effectively infinite making the amount supplied go to zero

There is a difference between a complete blockade and targeted sanctions.

> this should be even better for the country affected?

One causes a complete collapse of an economy (north korea) while the latter helps a nation build up a sector of an industry (china).

China is the top trading partner of most countries around the world. Even with these sanctions. Go figure. It would be like if china banned exports of 'rare earth minerals' to the US. It would only make the US stronger because we'd just invest in mining rare earth minerals.


Tariffs are always good for someone. Just not most people.

Is it good for anyone who wants to manufacture chips in China. Obviously, yes it is good for them. But it is not good, in the short term, for people who want to buy chips in China.

But it might be bad for everyone in China, because someone above implied that they actually don't have the knowledge to make these chips. Not sure how true that is? But assuming it is true, that would hurt everyone in China.


That's a really dangerous move that can entice China to invade Taiwan. Let's hope it doesn't happen.

I don't think there is a way to take over Taiwan and preserve TSMC's manufacturing capacity there.

It cuts both ways. That's why I wrote "can entice". Nobody knows what the exact calculus is, that's why breaking status quo is so dangerous.

If they're not getting cutting edge chips from TSMC, why does that matter to them?

It sounds like you agree. Control of TSMC is out of the cards so doesn’t affect a decision or timeline to invade.

Taking out 95%+ of ledging edge semi that adds trillions to western hi tech and supports strategic industries seems worthwhile. Doesn't have to be invasion, but I'd expect grayscale shenanigans on island power grids etc now that there's less reason to hold back.

>Why does China’s near abroad matter to them? Why do they care about national unity? Why would they want unobstructed access to the deep-water Pacific?

Are questions that answer themselves. But they are the wrong questions.

It’s not China that’s the hostile actor here. It’s not China that’s meddling in distant affairs. This very thread pertains to an unilateral, unprompted hostile action by the US against China. And note that it’s not Trump’s doing. He’ll just do more of it, more openly.

And all of this is very much in line with America’s (at least) seven decades old strategic posture:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Island_chain_strategy


If China sees Russia take part or all of Ukraine, why wouldn't they?

I don't feel like China operates under the same geopolitical philosophy as Russia, they have other ambitions that I think are better served by avoiding wars. But who knows given the way things are going.

Kind of agree here.

It's clear if you pay attention, that China's putting inordinate efforts into other places. Africa is one example. (Probably the principal example.) So they clearly have ambitions that lay outside of Asia.

No one fakes moves like that at that scale. They're serious about what they're doing.


A military fight wouldn't serve China's interests. Pouring money into their domestic fabs and using the same market-flooding and subsidies that they're known for in other fields to take customers from TSMC would be a smarter move. They probably wouldn't be taking over the high-end CPU/GPU marketshare anytime soon, but could put significant pressure in other areas while developing capability.

Because war is economically expensive, they subscribe to certain philosophy and would prefer continue trading with Taiwan rather than turning it to rubble.

That being said, even if they would. Under that assumption, I find the idea to further provoke them to doing that morally repulsive. It's an egomaniacal move that disregards Taiwanese people.


They have implied that annexing Taiwan is a key priority and that they are willing to use force if it turns out to be necessary.

"Provoke" means doing something with the intention to trigger an emotional or other reaction. That's not what Taiwan is doing.


Provoke often just means just inciting a reaction. Intent is not included in all defections. If China reacts to this, then China has been provoked.

The calculation is a bit different for a dictator though.

They won't be affected personally (unless the country rebels against them) so they can be fine to tank the economy if it gets them closer to some other goal (such as megalomaniac world domination).


Because war is more complicated than this simplistic discourse.

Because Russia isn't exactly an international export powerhouse. (Energy aside)

The US now has an isolationist regime. I think that's fairly likely to happen in the next few years if it is going to happen. Ukraine is also done unless Europe (probably Poland) steps up in a big way.

>The US now has an isolationist regime.

It doesn’t. But as the Empire’s grip on the world is slipping it will become more brazen, aggressive, openly selfish, erratic. Quod licet Iovi etc. A role Trump was born to play. But, as Europe’s economic woes after four years of D rule should tell you, it’s not just him who’s happy to cannibalize the Empire’s subjects.


Just curious are we not going to be able to take our iPhone or Laptops into China when we visit?

Wondering when we are going to hit the point where our basic every day devices face export controls.


The article says: "no longer manufacture AI chips at advanced process nodes of 7 nanometers or smaller." This was triggered when Huawei produced some kind of device with TSMC wafers of this class.

Maybe standard ARM cores are still approved for export to the mainland.


>Wondering when we are going to hit the point where our basic every day devices face export controls.

Probably never


Nothing is off the table now.

No, unless turning consumer products into data center use becomes relevant at large scale.

There was a time when companies and research labs bought Sony PS2 (and the PS3) to build supercomputer clusters. Japan placed export controls on the PS2 because they had militarily-useful computing power. According to DIA report 4,000 PS2 units had been purchased in the United States and shipped to Iraq in just 2-3 months during 2000.


Were the PS2s shipped to Iraq for computing or just for soldiers to play during their down time? I feel like the latter is far more likely, especially since we know that soldiers had access to game consoles for recreation.

I can't imagine what general purpose software they'd have wanted to run on a PlayStation 2 from 2000 that they couldn't run on a general purpose laptop in 2004.


Do you mean US soldiers? We didn’t have a presence in Iraq in 2000, the invasion occurred in 2003.

The PS2 release price was $299 USD. Consoles used to be cheap.

That's $450 in 2020 dollars. The PS5 launched at $399 in 2020 (digital version)

The PS2 was a state of the art machine with similar hardware of a SGI workstation. Those computers started at 20k. While the PS5 has similar hardware as a low end PC.

If the PS5 had a Nvidia A100 the comparasion would make sense and people would be buying them to create clusters, like they did with the PS2 and 3.


You're being down voted, but it's the truth. PS2 were sold so much below cost it wasn't uncommon to see hobbiests and institutions building beowulf clusters with them.

But these days, consoles aren't sold below cost, and gigabit network isn't fast enough to make cluster computing make sense


https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29651383

A 64 bit MIPS processor that can run linux + networking for 299$.

I know is not exactly the same but how much was a SGI workstation 20k? 40k? 80k?


If anyone does this it's all going to be for theater. What a ludicrous concept.

Seems very unlikely. Manufacturing millions of chips for a country is a totally different scale.



Consider applying for YC's W25 batch! Applications are open till Nov 12.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: