"A market situation in which there is only one buyer."
I'm loving that Apple can do that, and I'm guessing that everyone else goes to Samsung.
That's a good vocabulary word for people to know, but Apple isn't a monopsonist in silicon (though they do have some market power). There are multiple suppliers (TSMC, GloFo, Samsung, and Intel) and multiple buyers (Apple, Qualcomm, Nvidia, AMD, and Intel).
It's true that TSMC is the biggest supplier and Apple is the biggest buyer. It's true Apple might be (according to this article) taking all of the *initial* 3nm production from TSMC. That's not a small thing. But it's a long, long way from "Apple has a monopsony in silicon."
...of leading edge silicon...which TMSC 3nm node would be.
He was right. And he spelled out *initial* to make his point crystal clear.
Apple is not the only customer for 3nm. If it weren't for US extraterritorial 'sanctions' on Huawei, I can assure you that TSMC would be serving both Apple and Huawei in parallel.
Just like it has for the last few years now.
And let's not forget what TSMC itself said about 3nm and Graphcore
There is nothing said about when others besides Apple will get access to 3 nm technology. I understood news that Apple will be the only one who will get 3nm till supply increase above Apple needs.
Question for me is if there is mentioned 4 nm process when they gonna to implement it when enhanced 5 is coming 2021 and 3 nm in 2022. Will 4 nm for rest who won't get 3 nm at the beginning?
I don't know why people are not concerned about the red Chinese hiring away TSMC blue Chinese engineers. No one here seems to be concerned that China is about to become technologically superior to us in advanced semiconductor production. They already beat us in infrastructure building. Just how many industries will we continue to lose before we wake the f&^k up? Later, they can just cut us off from their supply and there won't be a damn thing we can do about it since we're too dumb to produce any here in the U.S.
Because such sentiments are considered fascist by the Democratic Party, the mainstream media and even moderate and neoconservative Republicans. Intel did raise the issue of semiconductor manufacturing being nearly dead in the United States and suggested the government take action to preserve the industry a few years ago, but not very loudly or very long. Remember: the Trump campaign was called fascist by the mainstream of both parties for even suggesting that we should try to get some of our manufacturing jobs back. And not a day passes without seeing half a dozen articles gleefully declaring the end of Intel in favor of Apple and TSMC (and maybe AMD and Samsung). Look, when IBM shut their foundries down and sold their PC division to (Chinese) Lenovo, no one from that crowd shed a tear. They were too busy celebrating - prematurely - the PC being killed off by iPhones, iPads and Macs.
These folks consider protecting American manufacturing (and energy and agriculture) jobs to be the road to fascism and are cheering the death of our 70s/80s/90s tech sector, starting with Wintel. So if by 2025 Intel has gone belly up and everyone who isn't using a Mac is using a Windows or ChromeOS laptop with a Chinese-made ARM SOC in it, these folks will regard it as a victory over Trumpism with Apple leading the way.
...of leading edge silicon...which TMSC 3nm node would be.
He was right. And he spelled out *initial* to make his point crystal clear.
Apple is not the only customer for 3nm. If it weren't for US extraterritorial 'sanctions' on Huawei, I can assure you that TSMC would be serving both Apple and Huawei in parallel.
Just like it has for the last few years now.
And let's not forget what TSMC itself said about 3nm and Graphcore
TSMC's being regarded to have "leading edge silicon" is a recent development and primarily because Apple left Samsung for them. Also, TSMC serves Apple, Huawei and Qualcomm in parallel. Qualcomm jumped ship this year only because TSMC used making the M1 chips as an excuse to try to charge Qualcomm extra money for chips that they were going to deliver late. Samsung stepped up with an offer for less money and the chips delivered early. Samsung was actually ahead of TSMC in getting to 5nm for months before hitting a snag that forced them to cancel the 5nm Exynos 995 that was supposed to launch in August. They did get the 5nm Exynos 1080 out in a device that launched in mid-November.
Qualcomm will be back with TSMC in 2021. The reason isn't due to Samsung being inferior but rather Qualcomm's preferring not to buy their chips from a direct competitor (meaning the same reason that Apple left Samsung). If TSMC can't accommodate Qualcomm in 2022 due to not having enough 3nm EUVs, they will just go back to Samsung.
50k processors per month on a bleeding-edge fab tech might be enough for the Mac Pro. Definitely not enough for anything more mainstream.
As an aside, TSMC uses wafers 300mm in diameter in most of its fab processes. That's 70,685mm^2. The A14 is 88mm^2. You lose about 6% of the area of a wafer to the edges and unmasked regions for handling. That means very roughly 750 A14 processors per wafer (before you lose some to flaws). 50k processors per month at that density would be about two wafers per day. That's believable preview volume for a bleeding-edge fab process while the fab works on scaling it out effectively.
That means about 225 mil processors a year. I think it could be Apple whole production combined. They roughly ship 200 mil iPones, 50 mil iPads and 20 mil Macs. It will increase but not all use latest processors. On other hand iPad and Mac processors are bigger. But it can be rally true they bought out whole production for whole year.
There is nothing said about when others besides Apple will get access to 3 nm technology. I understood news that Apple will be the only one who will get 3nm till supply increase above Apple needs.
Question for me is if there is mentioned 4 nm process when they gonna to implement it when enhanced 5 is coming 2021 and 3 nm in 2022. Will 4 nm for rest who won't get 3 nm at the beginning?
TSMC "4 nm" may just be their "N5FF+" fab process. It's just a different branding name for the process, which may have improve density enough to get the marketers to say 4nm instead of 5nm+. So, everyone is going to be using TSMC 5 nm and 4 nm fab processes eventually in 2021 and 2022.
Apple gets in front of the line because they can afford to pre-pay for capacity. But yes, eventually AMD, Nvidia, Mediatek, HiSilicon, Qualcomm, Amazon, custom whoever, and even Intel will use it if they think they are getting a good deal.
According to Money.UDN, supply chain sources say that trials are progressing smoothly. The sources estimate that TSMC's 3nm line is on course to produce 600,000 processors annually, or 50,000 per month, with mass production starting in 2022.
The original article is translatet by google to
"According to the supply chain, TSMC’s 3nm and 4nm trial production preparations are progressing smoothly. Among them, 3nm is actively moving towards the goal of an annual production capacity of 600,000 pieces and a converted monthly production capacity of more than 50,000 pieces."
I don't know why people are not concerned about the red Chinese hiring away TSMC blue Chinese engineers. No one here seems to be concerned that China is about to become technologically superior to us in advanced semiconductor production. They already beat us in infrastructure building. Just how many industries will we continue to lose before we wake the f&^k up? Later, they can just cut us off from their supply and there won't be a damn thing we can do about it since we're too dumb to produce any here in the U.S.
I read an interesting thread a while back (I think it was Reddit) were some supposed former TSMC employees that were poached by China were discussing what was essentially horror stories about how these Chinese companies were essentially exploiting them specifically for TSMC's IP, and then essentially firing them after they got what they wanted. They wanted Chinese-only (i.e. "loyal") people essentially to take over. Yes, they were offered tons of money to these people, but they were let go within a year after they got whatever IP they were going after.
That China is probably the most egregious thief of IP, I don't think there is really anything that TSMC, or Taiwan can do. China will just give them the middle-finger and move on. I supposed Taiwan could maybe hope that the U.S. and other countries could deny imports of anything with Chinese chips, but in the end China is the one holding the cards.
These folks consider protecting American manufacturing (and energy and agriculture) jobs to be the road to fascism and are cheering the death of our 70s/80s/90s tech sector, starting with Wintel. So if by 2025 Intel has gone belly up and everyone who isn't using a Mac is using a Windows or ChromeOS laptop with a Chinese-made ARM SOC in it, these folks will regard it as a victory over Trumpism with Apple leading the way.
What the experts all said was that we needed to use our massive leverage, as their biggest market, to make China play by the rules. What we did instead was try to sabotage them and gave them even more incentive to steal IP. And remember that Republicans used to be the globalists, who believed that coddling weak industries just hurt our economy. The US built the modern international order, and has been its biggest beneficiary -- we just forgot to do anything for the workers who were hurt in the process. But if we've now decided to dismantle the world order we built, how about putting some people in charge of that who actually know what the hell they're talking about, okay?
I don't know why people are not concerned about the red Chinese hiring away TSMC blue Chinese engineers. No one here seems to be concerned that China is about to become technologically superior to us in advanced semiconductor production. They already beat us in infrastructure building. Just how many industries will we continue to lose before we wake the f&^k up? Later, they can just cut us off from their supply and there won't be a damn thing we can do about it since we're too dumb to produce any here in the U.S.
Because such sentiments are considered fascist by the Democratic Party, the mainstream media and even moderate and neoconservative Republicans. Intel did raise the issue of semiconductor manufacturing being nearly dead in the United States and suggested the government take action to preserve the industry a few years ago, but not very loudly or very long. Remember: the Trump campaign was called fascist by the mainstream of both parties for even suggesting that we should try to get some of our manufacturing jobs back. And not a day passes without seeing half a dozen articles gleefully declaring the end of Intel in favor of Apple and TSMC (and maybe AMD and Samsung). Look, when IBM shut their foundries down and sold their PC division to (Chinese) Lenovo, no one from that crowd shed a tear. They were too busy celebrating - prematurely - the PC being killed off by iPhones, iPads and Macs.
These folks consider protecting American manufacturing (and energy and agriculture) jobs to be the road to fascism and are cheering the death of our 70s/80s/90s tech sector, starting with Wintel. So if by 2025 Intel has gone belly up and everyone who isn't using a Mac is using a Windows or ChromeOS laptop with a Chinese-made ARM SOC in it, these folks will regard it as a victory over Trumpism with Apple leading the way.
You have a distorted view.
I absolutely consider Trump a fascist but not for the reasons you list. I agree with the US government taking action to support industry/technology vital to the national interest.
"A market situation in which there is only one buyer."
I'm loving that Apple can do that, and I'm guessing that everyone else goes to Samsung.
That's a good vocabulary word for people to know, but Apple isn't a monopsonist in silicon (though they do have some market power). There are multiple suppliers (TSMC, GloFo, Samsung, and Intel) and multiple buyers (Apple, Qualcomm, Nvidia, AMD, and Intel).
It's true that TSMC is the biggest supplier and Apple is the biggest buyer. It's true Apple might be (according to this article) taking all of the *initial* 3nm production from TSMC. That's not a small thing. But it's a long, long way from "Apple has a monopsony in silicon."
...of leading edge silicon...which TMSC 3nm node would be.
He was right. And he spelled out *initial* to make his point crystal clear.
Apple is not the only customer for 3nm. If it weren't for US extraterritorial 'sanctions' on Huawei, I can assure you that TSMC would be serving both Apple and Huawei in parallel.
Just like it has for the last few years now.
And let's not forget what TSMC itself said about 3nm and Graphcore
"A market situation in which there is only one buyer."
I'm loving that Apple can do that, and I'm guessing that everyone else goes to Samsung.
That's a good vocabulary word for people to know, but Apple isn't a monopsonist in silicon (though they do have some market power). There are multiple suppliers (TSMC, GloFo, Samsung, and Intel) and multiple buyers (Apple, Qualcomm, Nvidia, AMD, and Intel).
It's true that TSMC is the biggest supplier and Apple is the biggest buyer. It's true Apple might be (according to this article) taking all of the *initial* 3nm production from TSMC. That's not a small thing. But it's a long, long way from "Apple has a monopsony in silicon."
...of leading edge silicon...which TMSC 3nm node would be.
He was right. And he spelled out *initial* to make his point crystal clear.
Apple is not the only customer for 3nm. If it weren't for US extraterritorial 'sanctions' on Huawei, I can assure you that TSMC would be serving both Apple and Huawei in parallel.
Just like it has for the last few years now.
And let's not forget what TSMC itself said about 3nm and Graphcore
According to what I have read, Samsung is 1 quarter behind TSMC, not 6 months. But that is academic anyway. Apple always comes out with devices featuring their new chips in September. Devices with the new Qualcomm and Samsung chips debut a few weeks later in November (except when midrange Samsung Exynos devices at times launch a bit earlier than the new iPhones). So the 3nm A16 would be first sold in iPhones and iPads that debut September 2022. While some obscure midrange 3nm Android devices may launch at about the same time or even slightly earlier, the flagship 3nm Android phones will launch starting with the Chinese brands in December 2022 and the rest in 2023.
Your comment assumes TSMC and Samsung's process nodes are the same based on similar marketing naming conventions such as 5nm. They are not. TSMC's 5nm process (5N) has a density of 173 million transistors per square millimeter. Samsung's 5nm process (5LPE) has a density of only 127 million. The point being, even at the same marketing name, TSMC has the superior process. Honestly, Samsung's 5nm process is only marginally better than TSMC's 7nm process.
Also, who would be the other buyers for TSMC's 5nm process anyway? MediaTek avoids the latest process nodes in order to save money. Their best 2021 chips will use a 6nm process and their 2023 ones a 4nm. While Qualcomm prefers TSMC, going back to Samsung is fine for them, as it would be for Huawei - presuming they are allowed to buy chips again - also. AMD's 5nm chips won't launch until 4Q 2021 meaning their 3nm versions won't until 4Q 2023. As for Intel, as they are considering having Samsung make their first batch of 7nm chips in 2021 (Intel would prefer TSMC but TSMC's 7nm nodes are fully occupied with chips for Qualcomm, MediaTek and AMD right now) they may be ready for 5nm by 2023.
Who would buyer's of TSMC's 5nm process be? Anyone that has the chance. This is currently the world's leading process. TSMC has customers lined up to buy what's left over. Apple gets first dibs because they are laying out huge amounts of capital upfront that other companies can't afford to do. This in turn gives Apple a perpetual advantage.
So even were Apple to have exclusive access to TSMC's 3nm process for all of 2022, that statement isn't very meaningful anyway: Apple, Qualcomm and Samsung are going to be the only swimmers in that pool, and Samsung will make the 3nm chips for Qualcomm and themselves. That will be the same situation as with the 5nm this year. The first 5nm chip was actually supposed to be the Samsung Exynos 995, which was going to be in certain international Galaxy Note 20, Galaxy Fold 2 and Galaxy Flip 2 phones as well as all Galaxy S20 Fan Edition phones. Samsung suffered a setback at the last stage resulting in bad yields and the 995 was cancelled. However, Samsung did release the 5nm Exynos 1080 midrange chip in a Vivo phone 3 weeks after the iPhone 12's release.
Again, your assumption that the marketing name of 3nm actually means the process nodes are truly equivalent. They are not. There is a reason Apple switched from Samsung to TSMC. Yes, Samsung will put something out called 3nm, but for the past few generations, TSMC's clearly had the superior process node with the same marketing name. I highly doubt Samsung is magically going to leapfrog anyone with their 3nm process being somehow better than TSMC's.
"A market situation in which there is only one buyer."
I'm loving that Apple can do that, and I'm guessing that everyone else goes to Samsung.
That's a good vocabulary word for people to know, but Apple isn't a monopsonist in silicon (though they do have some market power). There are multiple suppliers (TSMC, GloFo, Samsung, and Intel) and multiple buyers (Apple, Qualcomm, Nvidia, AMD, and Intel).
It's true that TSMC is the biggest supplier and Apple is the biggest buyer. It's true Apple might be (according to this article) taking all of the *initial* 3nm production from TSMC. That's not a small thing. But it's a long, long way from "Apple has a monopsony in silicon."
...of leading edge silicon...which TMSC 3nm node would be.
He was right. And he spelled out *initial* to make his point crystal clear.
Apple is not the only customer for 3nm. If it weren't for US extraterritorial 'sanctions' on Huawei, I can assure you that TSMC would be serving both Apple and Huawei in parallel.
Just like it has for the last few years now.
And let's not forget what TSMC itself said about 3nm and Graphcore
When should we expect the knockoff AirPods Max from Huawei to come out?
Oops! The Freebuds Studio were released before the AirPods Max.
I suppose by your own wacky definition, the Max are in fact a knockoff of the Freebuds!
Isn't that how you see things?
I'm kidding. I hope you can laugh at yourself from time to time.
They’re not the same thing.
Really? They're bluetooth true wireless over ear headphones. I have a pair. What specifically are you referring too?
They’re just standard Bluetooth phones. Apple’s are much more sophisticated. They can do what Huawei;s can’t. Aye=tonatically connect to your s=device. Apple’s wireless chip for that and improved Bluetooth reception, etc., but you know that.
"A market situation in which there is only one buyer."
I'm loving that Apple can do that, and I'm guessing that everyone else goes to Samsung.
That's a good vocabulary word for people to know, but Apple isn't a monopsonist in silicon (though they do have some market power). There are multiple suppliers (TSMC, GloFo, Samsung, and Intel) and multiple buyers (Apple, Qualcomm, Nvidia, AMD, and Intel).
It's true that TSMC is the biggest supplier and Apple is the biggest buyer. It's true Apple might be (according to this article) taking all of the *initial* 3nm production from TSMC. That's not a small thing. But it's a long, long way from "Apple has a monopsony in silicon."
...of leading edge silicon...which TMSC 3nm node would be.
He was right. And he spelled out *initial* to make his point crystal clear.
Apple is not the only customer for 3nm. If it weren't for US extraterritorial 'sanctions' on Huawei, I can assure you that TSMC would be serving both Apple and Huawei in parallel.
Just like it has for the last few years now.
And let's not forget what TSMC itself said about 3nm and Graphcore
When should we expect the knockoff AirPods Max from Huawei to come out?
Oops! The Freebuds Studio were released before the AirPods Max.
I suppose by your own wacky definition, the Max are in fact a knockoff of the Freebuds!
Isn't that how you see things?
I'm kidding. I hope you can laugh at yourself from time to time.
They’re not the same thing.
Really? They're bluetooth true wireless over ear headphones. I have a pair. What specifically are you referring too?
They’re just standard Bluetooth phones. Apple’s are much more sophisticated. They can do what Huawei;s can’t. Aye=tonatically connect to your s=device. Apple’s wireless chip for that and improved Bluetooth reception, etc., but you know that.
Well, now it is clear you have no idea what you are talking about.
"A market situation in which there is only one buyer."
I'm loving that Apple can do that, and I'm guessing that everyone else goes to Samsung.
That's a good vocabulary word for people to know, but Apple isn't a monopsonist in silicon (though they do have some market power). There are multiple suppliers (TSMC, GloFo, Samsung, and Intel) and multiple buyers (Apple, Qualcomm, Nvidia, AMD, and Intel).
It's true that TSMC is the biggest supplier and Apple is the biggest buyer. It's true Apple might be (according to this article) taking all of the *initial* 3nm production from TSMC. That's not a small thing. But it's a long, long way from "Apple has a monopsony in silicon."
...of leading edge silicon...which TMSC 3nm node would be.
He was right. And he spelled out *initial* to make his point crystal clear.
Apple is not the only customer for 3nm. If it weren't for US extraterritorial 'sanctions' on Huawei, I can assure you that TSMC would be serving both Apple and Huawei in parallel.
Just like it has for the last few years now.
And let's not forget what TSMC itself said about 3nm and Graphcore
When should we expect the knockoff AirPods Max from Huawei to come out?
Oops! The Freebuds Studio were released before the AirPods Max.
I suppose by your own wacky definition, the Max are in fact a knockoff of the Freebuds!
Isn't that how you see things?
I'm kidding. I hope you can laugh at yourself from time to time.
They’re not the same thing.
Really? They're bluetooth true wireless over ear headphones. I have a pair. What specifically are you referring too?
They’re just standard Bluetooth phones. Apple’s are much more sophisticated. They can do what Huawei;s can’t. Aye=tonatically connect to your s=device. Apple’s wireless chip for that and improved Bluetooth reception, etc., but you know that.
All bluetooth headphones can automatically connect to your device. Apple's wireless chip means it can manage being connected to multiple devices better, though it causes some issues too.
I haven't noticed any improvement to bluetooth reception with Apple AirPods, and don't remember reading that anywhere either.
Bluetooth isn't that much of an advantage in AirPods.
I don't know why people are not concerned about the red Chinese hiring away TSMC blue Chinese engineers. No one here seems to be concerned that China is about to become technologically superior to us in advanced semiconductor production. They already beat us in infrastructure building. Just how many industries will we continue to lose before we wake the f&^k up? Later, they can just cut us off from their supply and there won't be a damn thing we can do about it since we're too dumb to produce any here in the U.S.
Because such sentiments are considered fascist by the Democratic Party, the mainstream media and even moderate and neoconservative Republicans. Intel did raise the issue of semiconductor manufacturing being nearly dead in the United States and suggested the government take action to preserve the industry a few years ago, but not very loudly or very long. Remember: the Trump campaign was called fascist by the mainstream of both parties for even suggesting that we should try to get some of our manufacturing jobs back. And not a day passes without seeing half a dozen articles gleefully declaring the end of Intel in favor of Apple and TSMC (and maybe AMD and Samsung). Look, when IBM shut their foundries down and sold their PC division to (Chinese) Lenovo, no one from that crowd shed a tear. They were too busy celebrating - prematurely - the PC being killed off by iPhones, iPads and Macs.
These folks consider protecting American manufacturing (and energy and agriculture) jobs to be the road to fascism and are cheering the death of our 70s/80s/90s tech sector, starting with Wintel. So if by 2025 Intel has gone belly up and everyone who isn't using a Mac is using a Windows or ChromeOS laptop with a Chinese-made ARM SOC in it, these folks will regard it as a victory over Trumpism with Apple leading the way.
I think you have it exactly backward. It's the Republicans who would sell their mothers for a buck. The Democrats always wanted to protect workers and markets in the U.S. I think the way to deal with China is to remove them from the trade equation. The rest of the world can just form a trading block with them excluded until they change their policy. Also, there need to be certain limits as to how much manufacturing can be offshored. We can arbitrarily set floors to certain industries say, 15% of the total market, that must be produced here in the U.S. no matter the cost.
I don't know why people are not concerned about the red Chinese hiring away TSMC blue Chinese engineers. No one here seems to be concerned that China is about to become technologically superior to us in advanced semiconductor production. They already beat us in infrastructure building. Just how many industries will we continue to lose before we wake the f&^k up? Later, they can just cut us off from their supply and there won't be a damn thing we can do about it since we're too dumb to produce any here in the U.S.
Because such sentiments are considered fascist by the Democratic Party, the mainstream media and even moderate and neoconservative Republicans. Intel did raise the issue of semiconductor manufacturing being nearly dead in the United States and suggested the government take action to preserve the industry a few years ago, but not very loudly or very long. Remember: the Trump campaign was called fascist by the mainstream of both parties for even suggesting that we should try to get some of our manufacturing jobs back. And not a day passes without seeing half a dozen articles gleefully declaring the end of Intel in favor of Apple and TSMC (and maybe AMD and Samsung). Look, when IBM shut their foundries down and sold their PC division to (Chinese) Lenovo, no one from that crowd shed a tear. They were too busy celebrating - prematurely - the PC being killed off by iPhones, iPads and Macs.
These folks consider protecting American manufacturing (and energy and agriculture) jobs to be the road to fascism and are cheering the death of our 70s/80s/90s tech sector, starting with Wintel. So if by 2025 Intel has gone belly up and everyone who isn't using a Mac is using a Windows or ChromeOS laptop with a Chinese-made ARM SOC in it, these folks will regard it as a victory over Trumpism with Apple leading the way.
I think you have it exactly backward. It's the Republicans who would sell their mothers for a buck. The Democrats always wanted to protect workers and markets in the U.S. I think the way to deal with China is to remove them from the trade equation. The rest of the world can just form a trading block with them excluded until they change their policy. Also, there need to be certain limits as to how much manufacturing can be offshored. We can arbitrarily set floors to certain industries say, 15% of the total market, that must be produced here in the U.S. no matter the cost.
The stated goals from the outset were to reduce and eliminate dependency on U.S technology and other outside technologies.
China and Russia have their own similar goals.
The arrival of Trump followed by his ill-thought out efforts to outright de-capitate China's efforts have actually decimated any possibility of U.S technologies being able to keep ahead in the long term and backfired horribly.
It has been the wake up call to the non-U.S world that no one is safe from the U.S pulling the rug out from anybody's feet at any moment via extra-territorial moves.
The world has duly taken note and reacted. In the case of China, it has initiated a truly gigantic acceleration of its silicon independency plans. Trump's efforts will go down in history as one of the biggest strategic technology policy blunders of all time.
Initial results have seen U.S tech revenues impacted. The different tech U.S associations (representing over a thousand U.S companies) complained directly to Trump. To no avail.
Now China is re-directing those billions in short term needs to the EU and Japan while it ramps up domestic options.
Google basically pleaded for the madness to stop but still hasn't received a licence to protect it from Huawei's (forced) moves to walk over Google territory. Huawei was forced to create its very own mobile services to substitute everything Google has and now has just released its own search alternative AND made it available to anyone. It isn't limited to Huawei's own ecosystem like before.
HarmonyOS (already on routers, watches, cars and TVs) is coming to smartphones next year. It would be fair to say Google isn't pleased with any of this, especially as Huawei was a major and willing partner.
The upshot is that we are well beyond the point of no return and the U.S will pay a high price for its government policy actions.
Comments
Question for me is if there is mentioned 4 nm process when they gonna to implement it when enhanced 5 is coming 2021 and 3 nm in 2022. Will 4 nm for rest who won't get 3 nm at the beginning?
These folks consider protecting American manufacturing (and energy and agriculture) jobs to be the road to fascism and are cheering the death of our 70s/80s/90s tech sector, starting with Wintel. So if by 2025 Intel has gone belly up and everyone who isn't using a Mac is using a Windows or ChromeOS laptop with a Chinese-made ARM SOC in it, these folks will regard it as a victory over Trumpism with Apple leading the way.
Qualcomm will be back with TSMC in 2021. The reason isn't due to Samsung being inferior but rather Qualcomm's preferring not to buy their chips from a direct competitor (meaning the same reason that Apple left Samsung). If TSMC can't accommodate Qualcomm in 2022 due to not having enough 3nm EUVs, they will just go back to Samsung.
That means about 225 mil processors a year. I think it could be Apple whole production combined. They roughly ship 200 mil iPones, 50 mil iPads and 20 mil Macs. It will increase but not all use latest processors. On other hand iPad and Mac processors are bigger. But it can be rally true they bought out whole production for whole year.
Apple gets in front of the line because they can afford to pre-pay for capacity. But yes, eventually AMD, Nvidia, Mediatek, HiSilicon, Qualcomm, Amazon, custom whoever, and even Intel will use it if they think they are getting a good deal.
"According to the supply chain, TSMC’s 3nm and 4nm trial production preparations are progressing smoothly. Among them, 3nm is actively moving towards the goal of an annual production capacity of 600,000 pieces and a converted monthly production capacity of more than 50,000 pieces."
TSMC does not produce CPUs they produce wafers.
Who would buyer's of TSMC's 5nm process be? Anyone that has the chance. This is currently the world's leading process. TSMC has customers lined up to buy what's left over. Apple gets first dibs because they are laying out huge amounts of capital upfront that other companies can't afford to do. This in turn gives Apple a perpetual advantage.
Again, your assumption that the marketing name of 3nm actually means the process nodes are truly equivalent. They are not. There is a reason Apple switched from Samsung to TSMC. Yes, Samsung will put something out called 3nm, but for the past few generations, TSMC's clearly had the superior process node with the same marketing name. I highly doubt Samsung is magically going to leapfrog anyone with their 3nm process being somehow better than TSMC's.
https://consumer.huawei.com/en/audio/freebuds-studio/
I haven't noticed any improvement to bluetooth reception with Apple AirPods, and don't remember reading that anywhere either.
Bluetooth isn't that much of an advantage in AirPods.
You can see that China is now mobilizing to kill us in semiconductors. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/24/technology/china-semiconductors.html
They will succeed. We don't have much time left.
https://www.european-processor-initiative.eu/
The stated goals from the outset were to reduce and eliminate dependency on U.S technology and other outside technologies.
China and Russia have their own similar goals.
The arrival of Trump followed by his ill-thought out efforts to outright de-capitate China's efforts have actually decimated any possibility of U.S technologies being able to keep ahead in the long term and backfired horribly.
It has been the wake up call to the non-U.S world that no one is safe from the U.S pulling the rug out from anybody's feet at any moment via extra-territorial moves.
The world has duly taken note and reacted. In the case of China, it has initiated a truly gigantic acceleration of its silicon independency plans. Trump's efforts will go down in history as one of the biggest strategic technology policy blunders of all time.
Initial results have seen U.S tech revenues impacted. The different tech U.S associations (representing over a thousand U.S companies) complained directly to Trump. To no avail.
Now China is re-directing those billions in short term needs to the EU and Japan while it ramps up domestic options.
Google basically pleaded for the madness to stop but still hasn't received a licence to protect it from Huawei's (forced) moves to walk over Google territory. Huawei was forced to create its very own mobile services to substitute everything Google has and now has just released its own search alternative AND made it available to anyone. It isn't limited to Huawei's own ecosystem like before.
https://www.explica.co/huaweis-petal-search-comes-to-the-iphone-thanks-to-the-new-search-in-the-browser/
HarmonyOS (already on routers, watches, cars and TVs) is coming to smartphones next year. It would be fair to say Google isn't pleased with any of this, especially as Huawei was a major and willing partner.
The upshot is that we are well beyond the point of no return and the U.S will pay a high price for its government policy actions.