Samsung to spend $116B in next decade to overtake chipmakers TSMC, Intel, Qualcomm

Posted:
in General Discussion
Samsung this week said it intends to spend $116 billion by 2030 in order to beat the likes of Intel, Qualcomm, and TSMC for a lead role in logic chip manufacturing.

Samsung's Austin facilities.
Samsung's Austin facilities.


The effort also includes a goal of adding 15,000 production and research jobs, Bloomberg reported. Samsung is known for its memory production and Exynos phone processors, but Intel is in firm control of PC and server chips, and Qualcomm is a leader in both cellular modems and mobile processors.

At one stage Samsung was the exclusive manufacturer of A-series processors for iPhones and iPads, but legal and competitive battles ultimately led to Apple transitioning to TSMC. In fact securing new Apple processor orders could be essential if Samsung is to beat out rival chipmakers, given that Apple is often the largest client for any company in its supply chain.

A June 2018 rumor suggested that Samsung was pushing hard to secure "A13" orders for 2019 iPhones. By October, however, it was reported that Apple had once again settled on TSMC.

Semiconductor sales have already become Samsung's best business segment, generating three-quarters of its 2018 operating income. It will have some work to do to catch up with others though -- TSMC, for example, is investing $10-11 billion during 2019, and could spend still more if it looks like Samsung poses a threat.

Intel will likely retain control of the PC world for now, said a director at the Korea Semiconductor Industry Association, Ahn Ki-hyun. The company's chips have been de facto in both Mac and Windows PCs for decades, and while AMD and ARM chips are valid alternatives, they face an uphill struggle for marketshare.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 19
    Johan42Johan42 Posts: 163member
    Sure, in the mobile sector. But Intel will keep their lead in PC/Server even with their 10nm debacle.
  • Reply 2 of 19
    racerhomie3racerhomie3 Posts: 1,090member
    Hope that  dumps Intel on Mac soon.
  • Reply 3 of 19
    cornchipcornchip Posts: 1,311member
    Investing in core competency I see.. Making awesome mobile electronics is hard. Especially when you don't have any good software.
    seanismorrisAppleExposedwatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 19
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,316member
    Johan42 said:
    Sure, in the mobile sector. But Intel will keep their lead in PC/Server even with their 10nm debacle.
    From a silicon point of view mobile and server looks exactly the same (meaning that every chip design for the specific feature size can VHDL’d onto it).
    ARM for example has a big push to be the best in server space, and I think they already got there in $/TFLOP and TFLOP/watt .
    edited April 24 hodarwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 19
    crfcomcrfcom Posts: 13member
    Don't make them foldable.
    brucemcDanManTXStrangeDaysAppleExposedwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 19
    cornchip said:
    Investing in core competency I see.. Making awesome mobile electronics is hard. Especially when you don't have any good software.
    Agreed.  Samsung does a lot of things well.  Their best bet going forward is de-emphasizing phones, and re-up their parts business.

    Phones are a commodity business, and Samsung is poor at software (which would allow them to differentiate).  This just makes sense... 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 19
    crfcomcrfcom Posts: 13member
    cornchip said:
    Investing in core competency I see.. Making awesome mobile electronics is hard. Especially when you don't have any good software.
    Agreed.  Samsung does a lot of things well.  Their best bet going forward is de-emphasizing phones, and re-up their parts business.

    Phones are a commodity business, and Samsung is poor at software (which would allow them to differentiate).  This just makes sense... 
    The margins that Apple holds don't say "commodity" to me and, frankly, I think LG and Motorola both make better phones than Samsung without proprietary software.
    edited April 24 watto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 19
    brucemcbrucemc Posts: 1,527member
    crfcom said:
    cornchip said:
    Investing in core competency I see.. Making awesome mobile electronics is hard. Especially when you don't have any good software.
    Agreed.  Samsung does a lot of things well.  Their best bet going forward is de-emphasizing phones, and re-up their parts business.

    Phones are a commodity business, and Samsung is poor at software (which would allow them to differentiate).  This just makes sense... 
    The margins that Apple holds don't say "commodity" to me. 
    Margins for smartphone business outside of Apple are not high - trending to commodity.  Yes, a few vendors have flagship phones that no doubt have some reasonable margins, but they do not sell enough of them to matter.  Whereas that is all that Apple sells.
    tmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 19
    KuyangkohKuyangkoh Posts: 326member
    Hope that  dumps Intel on Mac soon.
    Why?? They are good for now....just because 
  • Reply 10 of 19
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 7,562member
    Can't Samsung just bring them...into the fold?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 11 of 19
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,612member
    Kuyangkoh said:
    Hope that  dumps Intel on Mac soon.
    Why?? They are good for now....just because 
    I for one need my macs to retain x86 compatibility as I use it to run Windows.  It's the primary reason I purchased a Mac.  It would be a shame if that ability disappeared.  I'm not alone on this.

    That being said, Intel shot themselves in the foot with their never-ending delays for CPU's.  There is no reason to not believe that Apple got fed up with it and is looking to use its new expertise in ARM to basically shove Intel aside.  
    caladanianwatto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 19
    sflocal said:
    Kuyangkoh said:
    Hope that  dumps Intel on Mac soon.
    Why?? They are good for now....just because 
    I for one need my macs to retain x86 compatibility as I use it to run Windows.  It's the primary reason I purchased a Mac.  It would be a shame if that ability disappeared.  I'm not alone on this.

    That being said, Intel shot themselves in the foot with their never-ending delays for CPU's.  There is no reason to not believe that Apple got fed up with it and is looking to use its new expertise in ARM to basically shove Intel aside.  
    I don't really think x86 compatibility is going to be a roadblock for Windows on Macs. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/arm/ 
    edited April 24 MacPro
  • Reply 13 of 19
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 849unconfirmed, member
    Now Apple should pump money into TSMC.

    Fuc* shamesung. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 19
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,215member
    sflocal said:
    Kuyangkoh said:
    Hope that  dumps Intel on Mac soon.
    Why?? They are good for now....just because 
    I for one need my macs to retain x86 compatibility as I use it to run Windows.  It's the primary reason I purchased a Mac.  It would be a shame if that ability disappeared.  I'm not alone on this.

    That being said, Intel shot themselves in the foot with their never-ending delays for CPU's.  There is no reason to not believe that Apple got fed up with it and is looking to use its new expertise in ARM to basically shove Intel aside.  
    I don't really think x86 compatibility is going to be a roadblock for Windows on Macs. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/arm/ 
    So much for that argument. Thanks for that link.
    1STnTENDERBITSwatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 19
    colinngcolinng Posts: 107member
    Apple is leading the silicon revolution right now. The 7nm processor in the iPad Pro outruns 90+% of all laptops sold (not sure if they were referring to unit volume, model lineups, or dollars).

    We've hit the end of Moore's law 3 years ago, and the industry looks like it's consolidating. You can make money in this era by maximizing sales of existing lines (Intel at 14nm and re-opening 22nm lines), or you can forge ahead with new lines (Apple, TSMC at 7nm and going to 5nm) though with high risk and exponentially increasing R&D costs. It looks like Samsung feels that going forward is better. 

    I seldom see a 11-year plan announced, especially in the technology industry where things change so fast. 
    Bloomberg's comment, "Samsung unveiled the investment plans the same week it suffered a setback in its mobile phone business." gives a very strong rationale for the announcement. 

    Plan A Folded, so on to Plan B: improving its most important area of revenue. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 19
    WLeeWLee Posts: 14unconfirmed, member
    cornchip said:
    Investing in core competency I see.. Making awesome mobile electronics is hard. Especially when you don't have any good software.
    Agreed.  Samsung does a lot of things well.  Their best bet going forward is de-emphasizing phones, and re-up their parts business.

    Phones are a commodity business, and Samsung is poor at software (which would allow them to differentiate).  This just makes sense... 
    Yikes, these two comments are utterly astonishing.  Samsung makes brilliant phones, the hardware and current design is the best of ANY phone maker, including Apple who are sticking out ugly phones that would never have got past Jobs, remember when tech was meant to be art? Have you seen the leaks of the camera mountain on the next phone?

    As for software, it is very fair to say that Samsung used to release terrible software. However one ui which came out with pie is generally very good. In fact I have never had an app or phone crash on my note 9, ever! I have however on my iPad. It’s fine for us to have preferences but let’s accept that is what they. 
    Dudoji87
  • Reply 17 of 19
    crfcomcrfcom Posts: 13member
    brucemc said:
    crfcom said:
    cornchip said:
    Investing in core competency I see.. Making awesome mobile electronics is hard. Especially when you don't have any good software.
    Agreed.  Samsung does a lot of things well.  Their best bet going forward is de-emphasizing phones, and re-up their parts business.

    Phones are a commodity business, and Samsung is poor at software (which would allow them to differentiate).  This just makes sense... 
    The margins that Apple holds don't say "commodity" to me. 
    Margins for smartphone business outside of Apple are not high - trending to commodity.  Yes, a few vendors have flagship phones that no doubt have some reasonable margins, but they do not sell enough of them to matter.  Whereas that is all that Apple sells.
    Well, I'm reading that Apple is working on a lower-priced and smaller iPhone for the more price-oriented buyer, so maybe they will show everyone how to sell down and hold margin too. I'm an old sales and marketing guy, and I always taught that the best answer to a price challenge is to down-sell.

  • Reply 18 of 19
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 3,761member
    Now Apple should pump money into TSMC.

    Fuc* shamesung. 
    Apple already has (to cover its own orders).
  • Reply 19 of 19
    1st1st Posts: 362member
    hate to say money is not everything - some talent can not be brought at any price (never heard about team member would willing to jump ship just for working with someone "cool", even for free or reduced pay? if not, you missed something in hi-tech field).  Besides, with Nuke next door in Korea, i would worry about alpha particle damage - take out many block just one recoil event for 5, 7, 10 nm device, not mention encapsulation filler sourcing issues.  At least in USA, unless POTUS hit wrong button, the mainland still got enough place radiation minimum.  
Sign In or Register to comment.