Intel Negotiates 3nm Allocation with TSMC Even as Pat Gelsinger Cautions Against Investing in Taiwan

[phanbuey]

They say candles burn brightest right before they get snuffed out.

Eh, Pat.



Butthurt? No. Laughable, and every time a tremendous show of weakness.

Weakness for sure. US semiconductors are weak now.

There are no US fabs that can touch 5nm and there are only high-end 2 Fab companies in the world - Samsung and TSMC. All of US chip companies rely on them. There's only one company ASML, that makes UV lithography machines at that level.

We are absolutely in a state of weakness, which is what Pat is saying.

 

[the54thvoid]

Too many people are confusing a private company with some sort of sovereign destiny and nationalistic integrity.

TSMC are the global powerhouse they are because of global economic trade. And companies that thrive due to outsourced labour are beneficiaries of unregulated capitalism.

Folks need to understand how these things: market freedom, maximum profit, and lack of regulation, lead to the situation we're in now.

If you want change, choose interventionist policies (regulation) or let markets dictate global trade. Without regulation, companies will do everything and anything to maximize profit, and that includes stripping assets and outsourcing labour.

 

[z1n0x]

Gelsinger is pretty good as comedian. His remarks about Apple, TSMC, AMD are quite amusing. I guess at Intel, CEO now stands for Chief Entertainment Officer. Maybe he should do some more push-ups.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I love how butthurt some people got about Gelsinger's comments. He never said anything bad about TSMC. He pointed out the fact that they are located in a contested country that is bordered by a superpower with very clear and open intentions of taking it over.

Taiwanese will tell you the situation with China is precarious. The whole world says it all the time. We just saw John Cena issue an international apology for calling Taiwan a 'country'.

Gelsinger says it and "LEARN WHEN TO SHUT UP PAT"

Liu CAN'T respond to Gelsinger's statement, because if he did, China would not appreciate it.

So yes, his statement is for sure not worth responding to.

Yeah sounds great, so he believes that the company are in a country with a contested situation, yet IS trying to invest millions in there himself,with his companies direct fab rival and their products rivals maker, sell that shit to your shareholders, sounds like a great plan.

 

[phanbuey]

Too many people are confusing a private company with some sort of sovereign destiny and nationalistic integrity.

TSMC are the global powerhouse they are because of global economic trade. And companies that thrive due to outsourced labour are beneficiaries of unregulated capitalism.

Folks need to understand how these things: market freedom, maximum profit, and lack of regulation, lead to the situation we're in now.

If you want change, choose interventionist policies (regulation) or let markets dictate global trade. Without regulation, companies will do everything and anything to maximize profit, and that includes stripping assets and outsourcing labour.

But you forget that TSMC started because the government of Taiwan ASKED a Tawianese national, who was also an engineer from Texas Instruments for 25 years to start a fab in Taiwan for 'nationalistic' purposes. They then subsidized and regulated that company to become successful. TSMC isn't around because of market freedom, Taiwan did not contract with TI to set up those fabs, they did this purely for nationalisitic purposes, and that is what enabled them to be profitable in the beginning and got them where they are today.

TSMC is a result of imbalanced regulation -- one country made an investment in its fabs (Taiwan) and one country did not (US) and that is why we are in the situation we are in today.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

But you forget that TSMC started because the government of Taiwan ASKED an engineer from Texas Instruments to start a fab in Taiwan for natioinalistic purposes. They then subsidized and regulated that plant to become successful. TSMC isn't around because of market freedom, Taiwan did not contract with TI to set up those fabs, they did this purely for nationalisitic purposes, and that is what enabled them to be profitable in the beginning.

With so many working to be the best it takes a lot of time and talent too.

 

[londiste]

Yeah sounds great, so he believes that the company are in a country with a contested situation, yet IS trying to invest millions in there himself,with his companies direct fab rival and their products rivals maker, sell that shit to your shareholders, sounds like a great plan.

Intel is not investing or trying to invest in TSMC. They are trying to buy TSMC's product.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Yeah sounds great, so he believes that the company are in a country with a contested situation, yet IS trying to invest millions in there himself,with his companies direct fab rival and their products rivals maker, sell that shit to your shareholders, sounds like a great plan.

@londiste beat me to it, but they are not 'investing' in TSMC. They are buying their product and in point of fact have been a long time customer of TSMC. Even when Intel had a node advantage, they were outsourcing overflow items like chipsets to TSMC.

The big difference between then and now is that they are now outsourcing some of the items they can't make, as opposed to ones they don't want to make, like 5nm HPC (GPUs). Within the world of x86 CPUs, Intel actually has node parity with their direct competitor AMD for now, and will maintain node parity until Zen 4 arrives in late 2022 on TSMCs 170MT/mm2 "5nm". Intel's roadmap has mass production of Intel 4 (200MT/mm2) Meteor Lake slated to occur in 2H 2022 though, so that won't last long.

Meanwhile TSMC will be doing mass production run of their "3nm" process 2H 2022. There is however some question as to if that will be soon enough to make Apple's latest and greatest. This is actually the second flub I've seen from TSMC in the past 18 months or so. They're about 6-12 months behind what their roadmaps indicated in 2019.

Apple May Be Forced to Delay Its Custom 3nm Chips Thanks to TSMC

Due to the setback in 3nm chip production, Apple might be forced to delay the launch of its advanced custom silicon for various products

wccftech.com

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

@londiste beat me to it, but they are not 'investing' in TSMC. They are buying their product and in point of fact have been a long time customer of TSMC. Even when Intel had a node advantage, they were outsourcing overflow items like chipsets to TSMC.

The big difference between then and now is that they are now outsourcing some of the items they can't make, as opposed to ones they don't want to make, like 5nm HPC (GPUs). Within the world of x86 CPUs, Intel actually has node parity with their direct competitor AMD for now, and will maintain node parity until Zen 4 arrives in late 2022 on TSMCs 170MT/mm2 "5nm". Intel's roadmap has mass production of Intel 4 (200MT/mm2) Meteor Lake slated to occur in 2H 2022 though, so that won't last long.

Meanwhile TSMC will be doing mass production run of their "3nm" process 2H 2022. There is however some question as to if that will be soon enough to make Apple's latest and greatest. This is actually the second flub I've seen from TSMC in the past 18 months or so. They're about 6-12 months behind what their roadmaps indicated in 2019.

Apple May Be Forced to Delay Its Custom 3nm Chips Thanks to TSMC

Due to the setback in 3nm chip production, Apple might be forced to delay the launch of its advanced custom silicon for various products

wccftech.com

So they are passing tsmc millions, I didn't mean buying share's.

 

[AsRock]

I would find it funny as hell if TSMC said No soup for you.

 

[RandallFlagg]

So they are passing tsmc millions, I didn't mean buying share's.

You said 'investing'. Now you're characterizing it as 'passing tsmc millions'. Pretty intellectually dishonest and misleading IMO. They are merely buying some of their product.

 

[Space Lynx]

He is not doing something wrong here. He is smart to try to get what he can from everyone. 3nm capacity from TSMC and support plus money from the US government.

Ah yes, the human condition of greed and envy... noting that, we just passed 29 trillion in debt on the world calculator... not much longer now, and it will all come crashing down.... hehehehe

skyrocketing inflation wasn't enough of a lesson for them... glorious... our species capable of so much, yet so little.

 

[Vayra86]

Ah yes, the human condition of greed and envy... noting that, we just passed 29 trillion in debt on the world calculator... not much longer now, and it will all come crashing down.... hehehehe

skyrocketing inflation wasn't enough of a lesson for them... glorious... our species capable of so much, yet so little.

Is 30 trillion the magical number then?

Its a bit like those predictions of Apocalypse, the calendars keep moving forward as every time the town criers appear to be wrong. They've been at it since the Middle Ages and in other continents, even longer than that. Repent! The end is nigh!

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

You said 'investing'. Now you're characterizing it as 'passing tsmc millions'. Pretty intellectually dishonest and misleading IMO. They are merely buying some of their product.

One word , let go of your hangups.

Passing another company guaranteed work lots(contracted) , which tend to have 10 year minimum supply terms to accommodate corporate buying policies and warranty schemes is an investment into what that company does, you see only share purchases as investing, it isn't the only way.

 

[RandallFlagg]

One word , let go of your hangups.

Passing another company guaranteed work lots(contracted) , which tend to have 10 year minimum supply terms to accommodate corporate buying policies and warranty schemes is an investment into what that company does, you see only share purchases as investing, it isn't the only way.

No, it's an attempt by you to redefine words to mean something they don't mean. When I buy a car from Ford, I'm not investing in Ford. I might with a small stretch have a 'vested interest' in them, like for maintenance and spare parts, but I'm not investing in them. And that last part of your statement, you are putting words in my mouth, that's called building a straw man argument and it is also deceptive and misleading.

 

[Vayra86]

No, it's an attempt by you to redefine words to mean something they don't mean. When I buy a car from Ford, I'm not investing in Ford. I might with a small stretch have a 'vested interest' in them, like for maintenance and spare parts, but I'm not investing in them. And that last part of your statement, you are putting words in my mouth, that's called building a straw man argument and it is also deceptive and misleading.

But you're not a company buying a car.

The better comparison is a company getting a ten-year contract to take X number of cars every year. That is an effective investment because now Ford is going to scale its production to meet that number, because they have a long term outlook that investment gets a good return. And on top of that, Ford is probably going to want to keep using their extra production capacity beyond those ten years because they've invested in manpower and capital to keep it going.

 

[RandallFlagg]

But you're not a company buying a car.

The better comparison is a company getting a ten-year contract to take X number of cars every year. That is an effective investment because now Ford is going to scale its production to meet that number, because they have a long term outlook that investment gets a good return. And on top of that, Ford is probably going to want to keep using their extra production capacity beyond those ten years because they've invested in manpower and capital to keep it going.

You guys are stretching and distorting the meaning of words. So when a financial institution buys laptops from Dell, they're 'investing' in Dell? When BMW had Benelli make motorcycles for them, they're "investing" in Benelli? If I buy widgets from some Chinese company to sell in my retail shop, does that mean I'm "investing" in that Chinese company? No, that is not what the word investing means.

 

[the54thvoid]

You guys are stretching and distorting the meaning of words. So when a financial institution buys laptops from Dell, they're 'investing' in Dell? When BMW had Benelli make motorcycles for them, they're "investing" in Benelli? If I buy widgets from some Chinese company to sell in my retail shop, does that mean I'm "investing" in that Chinese company? No, that is not what the word investing means.

I agree. Investing is a means to create income by a dividend, or to acquire shares by providing a company with capital. It has a specific meaning. To acquire an agreed quantity of a product is still very much a 'trade' relationship. In fact, investing has nothing to do with acquiring a commodity, it is all to do with increasing the strength of the company that creates the commodity.

Buying in bulk, as others are implying is 'investing' is simply purchasing. When I buy beers from my local craft shop (regularly), I'm not investing. No matter what I spend. To invest, I'd be giving the guy money for no return of product in the hope he will pay me cash when his company gets bigger.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

No, it's an attempt by you to redefine words to mean something they don't mean. When I buy a car from Ford, I'm not investing in Ford. I might with a small stretch have a 'vested interest' in them, like for maintenance and spare parts, but I'm not investing in them. And that last part of your statement, you are putting words in my mouth, that's called building a straw man argument and it is also deceptive and misleading.

I'm done debating investing with you, if I were trying to fool you or anyone I wouldn't be arguing as I am , I'm also not trying to redefine the word but you think one guy buying a part is the same as a company contracting the manufacture of parts, I disagree, your analogy is shite ,one car (or 8 beers?!)isn't millions of the same part is it, you are not then reselling them with a price bump.

Whatever you say.

Let's get back on topic eh.

 

[Space Lynx]

Is 30 trillion the magical number then?

Its a bit like those predictions of Apocalypse, the calendars keep moving forward as every time the town criers appear to be wrong. They've been at it since the Middle Ages and in other continents, even longer than that. Repent! The end is nigh!

What you talking about? The crash is already here if you are poor or lower middle class. Skyrocketing inflation has already made their lives hell.

 

[Vayra86]

What you talking about? The crash is already here if you are poor or lower middle class. Skyrocketing inflation has already made their lives hell.

You might have to zoom out a little bit then, instead of thinking along the lines of the mood of the day.

Historically we've never had more wealth than in the last ten years. Even the current 'snag' isn't enough to change that. We're spending trillions on healthcare that goes to all layers of society.

The US and its rather peculiar stance on how to manage a society is not really a guideline for the rest of the world, either. Its hard to see when you live in it, perhaps, but the vast majority of countries around the globe has a more social stance and this echoes in how the US was leading in covid deaths not too long ago. Its a country of extremes in every way, not a country of nuanced thought and action. It echoes in your statement; something going a bit worse is a 'crash'. When it gets better, I'm sure its 'we're unstoppable and all is great'. It also echoes in the winner takes all mentality.

You're all about philosophy right. I read a piece today saying 'if this pandemic was truly a crisis, we would have responded to it differently'. Consider that for a second, and how true it is. We're not adjusting a thing in our systems, our societies or ways of life to avoid the next pandemic, at all. We're not reflecting on what brought us to this point. It does not inspire radical change. That in itself is the perfect proof we're not crashing at all, we're accomodating. A US example... look at what's happening to rights for abortion - in this day and age, where overpopulation brought us to a pandemic. There is no logic or reason to it, which is what you'd expect if a situation is dire. Similarly, climate - a true crisis - and look how we handle it. Its gonna have to get a LOT worse before it gets better, apparently.

 

[R0H1T]

Historically we've never had more wealth than in the last ten years.

Neither is the all time high accumulation of wealth at the top. For middle class unless they've invested wisely in stocks or real estate, just recently crypto, they can't possibly match the millionaires in wealth accumulation, let alone the billionaires! The lower rungs of society are much worse off than anytime that I can remember, & it's exactly the same across the globe. There's no "socialist" utopia out there who's taking care of everyone

 

[Vayra86]

Neither is the all time high accumulation of wealth at the top. For middle class unless they've invested wisely in stocks or real estate, just recently crypto, they can't possibly match the millionaires in wealth accumulation, let alone the billionaires! The lower rungs of society are much worse off than anytime that I can remember, & it's exactly the same across the globe.

Has that ever been different, really? Again, zoom out.... Accumulation of wealth is nothing other than 'power corrupts'. Its a human condition. It will escalate to a point where a large group considers it unacceptable, they start rioting or shooting, and tháts when we speak of a crisis. Or perhaps not, if we manage to 'manage it away' by making people a scapegoat or just cutting them off from society in some implicit way.

There's no "socialist" utopia out there who's taking care of everyone

Quite a few European countries are quite far along the way in that sense.
Some are regressing and are having issues because costs increase. New questions that beg for refinement of systems. Its not pure socialist either, its just common sense, because the other direction is the rioting and shooting, repression. Its really not about social, its about altruism, we're stuck with each other, you either accept that or you don't. If you don't, the logical result would be that you need to eliminate competition. Build a society on elimination (Winner takes all), and you build it on conflict... well... I don't think I need to point out where that's happening atm.

 

[R0H1T]

Has that ever been different, really? Again, zoom out.... Accumulation of wealth is nothing other than 'power corrupts'. Its a human condition. It will escalate to a point where a large group considers it unacceptable, they start rioting or shooting, and tháts when we speak of a crisis.

The difference is that as the lower rungs of society, or middle class, are priced out of welfare or even some of the basic necessities of life they're now being led into a near eternal cycle of monetary "fascism" ~
you borrow for your needs >> somehow pay all that debt in a decade or two >>> accumulate more debt due to some emergency >>>> spend even more time getting that debt off & finally kick the bucket. This is happening to a disproportionately large number of people, arguably more than ever before ~ definitely wrt cycle of ever increasing cheap loans life crushing debt.

 

[Vayra86]

The difference is that as the lower rungs of society, or middle class, are priced out of welfare or even some of the basic necessities of life they're now being led into a near eternal cycle of monetary "fascism" ~
you borrow for your needs >> somehow pay all that debt in a decade or two >>> accumulate more debt due to some emergency >>>> spend even more time getting that debt off & finally kick the bucket. This is happening to a disproportionately large number of people, arguably more than ever before ~ definitely wrt cycle of ever increasing cheap loans life crushing debt.

I agree, but I don't see it as a difference with old time slavery. We just named it differently and shaved off the sharper edges, we've gained more ways to avoid slavery, ways we call 'opportunity'. Solid systems inspire opportunity in equal measure regardless of class. I call that progress.

And this requires constant readjustment of systems. We're humans, we'll screw any system up over time, so it needs to grow along with our insidious motives.

Aren't we all slaves... if you're wealthy, you spend an excessive amount of time gathering and holding on to wealth, how much of that was careless living after all? And then you 'kick the bucket' with a lot of cash. You're still dead. We should aim these questions not at the individuals, but at the systems we've chosen to live in. Systemic change is required, we can all see it, but nobody knows exactly how.

We're also in a topic about 3nm lol Might want to continue this elsewhere