[HN Gopher] TSMC sees chip shortage lasting into 2022 ___________________________________________________________________ TSMC sees chip shortage lasting into 2022 Author : tosh Score : 226 points Date : 2021-04-15 16:35 UTC (6 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.reuters.com) (TXT) w3m dump (www.reuters.com) | seiferteric wrote: | Damn, at this point I might just wait until zen 4 stuff comes out | before replacing my current desktop (circa 2012) since it still | seems fine for most stuff. | kelp wrote: | Ryzen 5 5600x and Ryzen 7 5800x prices / stock have about | equalized lately. So they are pretty easy to find at MSRP. You | can currently get a Ryzen 7 5800x from many major retails for | MSRP. The Ryzen 9 5900x and 5950x are harder to get. | | It's GPUs that are nearly impossible to get right now. I've | been trying for weeks to get one for a friend. I'm intently | watching the stock notification Discords. There are frequent | restocks, but they seem to sell out in seconds. | throwastrike wrote: | I strongly believe this is going to allow Intel to make a | dramatic comeback. It will buy them enough time to catch up while | everyone is stuck buying Intel still as a result of supply | constraint. | cardy31 wrote: | Intel seems to be multiple years behind at this point. They | might make a bit of a comeback, but it would have to be a huge | process size shrink to be competitive. Based on their previous | years, I doubt that an extra year will help that much. | dannyw wrote: | Intel is shipping 10nm superfin (I'm typing this on a Tiger | Lake NUC). Density wise, this is comparable to TSMC 7nm (used | by AMD). | adrian_b wrote: | While Intel 10 nm SuperFin might be comparable in density | with TSMC 7 nm, it definitely is much worse for the yields | of chips with large area. | | Six years ago, in 2015, Intel had no problems to introduce | the smaller Skylake U and the larger Skylake H at the same | time. | | Now, Intel needs more than half of year to increase the | yields of 10 nm SuperFin enough to be able to introduce the | larger Tiger Lake H after the smaller Tiger Lake U | introduced last year. | | This happens even if now the area difference between Tiger | Lake H and Tiger Lake U is not so great as in the previous | generations, because a good part of the twice larger CPU is | compensated by the 3 times smaller GPU. | | On the other hand, the previous variant of the Intel 10 nm | process (non-SuperFin), which is still used for Ice Lake | Server, has much worse electrical properties than the TSMC | 7 nm, because at the same number of active cores and the | same power consumption AMD Epyc 7xx3 can have a clock | frequency up to 50% higher. | | Moreover, the similar density of the Intel process means | absolutely nothing when the competition using the TSMC | process can deliver a more than 3 times greater L3 cache | memory at the same price and in the same package size. | | The density does not have any importance if you cannot | deliver more transistors in a given package, because you | cannot manufacture large enough chips and because you have | been unable to predict that you will never be able to | manufacture large enough chips, so that you should have | designed from the beginning your product as multi-chip. | axaxs wrote: | Behind on...what? Against the latest and greatest Apple or | AMD? Maybe. I'd probably put it at a generation at most. | | That aside, there's a -huge- market for chips that aren't the | latest and greatest. Intel expanding into that, which if I | read right is what they're doing, could be a huge moneymaker. | ajross wrote: | That seems unlikely, for the same reason that TSMC isn't able | to put Intel down permanently. We're reaching the end of | silicon scaling. Transistor densities might continue to rise | with 3D techniques, etc... but the actual logic is reaching | physical limits. So transistors per price and per power are | hitting walls. | | TSMC pulled ahead, but they don't have a lot of runway to pull | _far_ ahead. Likewise Intel can catch up, but they can 't | retake the kind of lead they had a decade ago. | | Semiconductors are turning into commodities, basically. | throwastrike wrote: | That's an interesting take. I feel the chip space is driven | by marketing a bit too much. At the data center level I don't | believe the performance difference is as dramatic in | practical terms. For the most part, you're not missing out | that much by going Intel unless you are working on something | time critical. | dvdkon wrote: | If we're talking AMD vs Intel, then the biggest difference | I see is cost (when the CPUs are in stock, anyway). Intel's | performance is fine, but the CPUs can cost multiple times | that of the competition. With Xeon, a small municipality | would never be able to say "You know what? Just go with the | 32-core CPU, it's not that much more." | chasil wrote: | I would prefer a 2-core CPU, when Oracle Enterprise | Databases run around $24k/core after discount, and SQL | Server Enterprise runs around $15k/core. | | From single-core performance and low core count, Intel | appears to be the better choice. | doikor wrote: | > We're reaching the end of silicon scaling. | | For the next 2 shrinks at least TSMC disagrees. | | According to roadmap of TSMC they are roling out 3nm risk | production this year and they built a new research lab for | 2nm last year and already picked a site for the new 2nm fab | (Hsinchu, Taiwan). Beyond that I don't think anyone has any | real plans (yet). | tedunangst wrote: | I think the question is if anyone is going to refuse a 5nm | product because 3nm is available. | Miraste wrote: | Maybe not, but they might start refusing 14nm products. | codezero wrote: | A valuable and strategic commodity I'd add. | agloeregrets wrote: | Not really, the limits you see from TSMC here are for the | lesser of the important chip sales. Apple's orders that will | put a hurting on Intel in the market and mindshare are still | good. So Maybe Intel may sell more units in a small way by the | M1X will still hurt Intel's lead by just existing. | | Did I mention that Intel Xe uses TSMC as well? | narrator wrote: | Intel has been trying to get their 5nm fab process right for | sometime now. So far, they have not been able to make it work. | This is not software. It's physics. It's chemistry. It's | material science. These are very hard problems to solve and | there's currently only one company that can do it and their | machines cost $200 million dollars and have a several year | backlog of orders. | mschuster91 wrote: | > there's currently only one company that can do it and their | machines cost $200 million dollars and have a several year | backlog of orders. | | ASML has a market cap of 223 billion $, and their stock value | has doubled in a year. That's a _lot_ of growth... | freedomben wrote: | anecdotally two friends of mine wanted AMD but bought Intel | because of availability. You may be right. | throwastrike wrote: | I could get away with using my old 2013 Macbook Pro for 90% | of my computing needs. I could run the rest in the cloud. | Sure I have the latest AMD and I know the headline numbers | but I wouldn't be able to tell you that consumer chips | improved all that much in the past few years purely from a | practical pov. | totalZero wrote: | Same here, but that last 10% of computing needs can | complicate things. | | Try running two 4k external monitors on a Haswell MBP. | | They look about the same, but a Haswell MBP13 (Late 2013) | is very much less capable than an Ice Lake MBP13 (2020). | Not all of that difference is attributable to the CPU I | suppose, but the graphics and thermal throttling under load | certainly are. | KptMarchewa wrote: | Even 2019 i9 MBP can't do that without extreme | overheating and throttling, measured with pmset -g | thermlog. | ngngngng wrote: | That's just because no one wants Intel at the moment. | tedunangst wrote: | Intel still gets paid even if the people buying their CPUs | don't want them. | Black101 wrote: | that might help the global warming... | Thorentis wrote: | Imagine if we get to the point that critical medical or | infrastructure devices cannot be produced because all the chips | were taken up by Bitcoin miners wanting to speculate on a fake | currency bubble. Our own greed will be our destruction. | varispeed wrote: | I found that the chips for a project that I am working on are no | longer available and I got the lead time of 13 months, without | guarantee. It essentially means that I have to redesign the | project using different part which may take me few months and I | have no guarantee the other chip I choose will be available. The | problem is, however, that I can see those chips available in | their thousands on aliexpress and similar sites for 10x the | price. I also read on forums that Chinese entrepreneurs buy all | the chips and stockpile them. Is this some new kind of war? | thorwasdfasdf wrote: | according to one news outlet, I heard, the chinese have a long | history of double ordering chips. Now, the strategy final pays | off, as they can continue development. Most businesses don't | double order because of the additional costs, now they're | hurting more. | coliveira wrote: | > Is this some new kind of war? | | No, this is called capitalism! Everyone should be proud. | Guthur wrote: | You show a distinct lack of understanding of what capitalism | is. | | I can very easily hoard goods in a controlled centralised | economy as well, the only major downside is the governmnent | will likely throw me in some Gulag if they caught me. | | It's actually market forces, nothing whatsoever to do with | capital. | KptMarchewa wrote: | One of the most common themes of propaganda in communist | Poland was how speculants are responsible for all | shortages. | scruffyherder wrote: | North Korea has all the chips you need comrade | tkinom wrote: | High tech version of "toilet paper hoarding" | swiley wrote: | The difference here is that people are used to not being able | to buy chips at costco/wallmart so you might have a chance at | selling your stock. | throwaway4good wrote: | Yeah. It is called the US-China tech war. | pojzon wrote: | Its not war, just a good way to make a lot of money now. You | buy cheap and sell absurdly high (10-20x the price). People | still buy because they have no other option. | pvarangot wrote: | Old-new stock and "unofficial" chips and parts has been a thing | for like ever. Now I hear of more "mainstream" projects having | to tap into that market but it has always been there. | temp667 wrote: | China def is stockpiling more chips I think. The Huawei | situation really brought home to china how the US or others | could basically try and cut them off and they are doing a lot | of things to reduce that potentially impact (all out on chip | mfg, chip orders etc) so having stock may be of benefit to them | in that environment. | baybal2 wrote: | Not stockpiling, a lot of people just do actual hoarding, and | speculation. | | Buying out all stocks of some rare MCU which only has | probably few million units on the market at any given time at | $0.1 just to resell for a few dollars later is quite real | given the unprecedented squeeze. | | How much would a car company pay for a rare, out of stock | chip which is the only thing missing in a car worth $100k? | | There is murmur in Chinese BBSes frequented by industry | insiders about distributors intentionally either stuffing | their part stock counts, or diminish them to play the price. | Scoundreller wrote: | So Martin Shkreli, but instead of pharma, chips. | | And designing products around perceived availability that | doesn't actually exist. | WrtCdEvrydy wrote: | Just-in-time manufacturing is pre-medidated on the idea | that whatever you need is available immediately for a | fair price. | | I think we'll see some of this in the future where a | company's only purpose may be to hedge on bets on what | will be unavailable in the near future for "a fair price" | neonological wrote: | After China restricted other companies from entering their | own market then the only fair thing to do is to restrict | Chinas' access to other markets. | | I'm not a trump supporter but he did the right thing on this | front. | echelon wrote: | It's a totally fair game. | | > I'm not a trump supporter but he did the right thing on | this front. | | It's a shame you have to admit that. I'm a liberal and | think we should be putting a hard squeeze on unilateral | trade. This policy makes sense for the US and other | countries regardless of your party. | | You can see that the US is starting to ramp up hard core. | With international navies now sailing into the South China | sea and a deafening rise of anti-CCP news and (admittedly) | some propaganda, player two has finally entered the game. | | I live near an air force base and over the last few weeks | have seen (and definitely heard!) an almost daily fighter | jet exercise. This hasn't happened in years. | | China is going to be in a very tough spot soon. | neonological wrote: | >It's a shame you have to admit that. I'm a liberal and | think we should be putting a hard squeeze on unilateral | trade. This policy makes sense for the US and other | countries regardless of your party. | | People like to join teams. So if I have an opinion that's | not part of the "team" or part of the "other" team then | people like to attack those opinions. That's why I make | sure I say something along the lines of "Hey, I'm not on | the other team, but I have a different opinion." | nickff wrote: | Those AliExpress chips may not be genuine. Buying from | unauthorized distributors has always been risky, and some | companies (especially Chinese ones) have been know to stamp | blank or generic parts with whatever part number you're looking | for. The really tricky vendors will put a few (10-50) genuine | parts at the beginning and end of a reel (to pass validation | testing), with defective or fake ones in between. Non-genuine | parts may also be lower-spec versions of what they are labelled | as (like a slower microcontroller or a higher offset op-amp). | Syonyk wrote: | For a fun set of reads on this ("Label the chips as what the | buyer wants regardless of what they actually are") from a | decade ago, Sparkfun got some "fake" ATMega 328p chips in | that, in fact, were nothing remotely resembling an ATMega | 328p. | | In the words of someone after they'd puzzled out the puzzle, | "...so it looks like that die in the picture is pre-release | engineering material. Where the hell did you find that?" | | https://www.sparkfun.com/news/350 | | https://www.sparkfun.com/news/364 | | https://www.sparkfun.com/news/384 | | https://www.sparkfun.com/news/395 | Scoundreller wrote: | A proper scale should be able to detect weak effort fraud | like this. | Syonyk wrote: | A proper scale can detect all sorts of weak effort fraud. | | Years back, I talked to someone who had done some | analysis on some of the "fake silver/gold" bars floating | around places (I think they were common on Silk Road for | a while?). Apparently some of the people faking metal | bars didn't actually bother learning what a "Troy Ounce" | was. | | There was a "10 oz" bar that was 10 ounces - 283.5 grams. | Except, in metals, "oz" means Troy Ounce - so it should | have been 311 grams. You could literally feel that it was | light if you were used to dealing with metals. | dan-robertson wrote: | I suspect it wasn't really trying to defraud people who | know what a Troy Ounce is. I'd find it believable if | people thought fake bars at 311g were frauds for not | weighing 10oz. | routerl wrote: | This was a great read, thanks! | jandrese wrote: | I'm guessing it's a sample run and the company realized | there was a bug in the silicon and told the fab to destroy | the rest of the samples. Instead someone at the fab set | them aside for the future when they need some raw material | to scam people with. | | I find it strange that whoever decided to do this kept the | correct datecode on the packaging. Presumably they didn't | label them as ATMega 328s until the order came in, it would | have been trivial to change the datecode to something | reasonable for that chip. | swiley wrote: | This is why buying chips off amazon isn't always a great | idea. | La1n wrote: | >entrepreneurs buy all the chips and stockpile them. Is this | some new kind of war? | | No, that's capitalism. | [deleted] | foobarian wrote: | Heh. Let me tell you about how I tried to buy a new Nvidia RTX | 3090... | polskibus wrote: | Why doesn't TSMC just raise prices 100% or so ? Surely everyone | would just have to pay up? | ChuckNorris89 wrote: | Semi orders are made years in advance with pricing fixed in the | contract. | birktj wrote: | Question: does the chip shortage only apply to the smallest | process sizes? That is what I would assume, but with the talk | about problems for car manufactures having supply issues it would | seem the shortage extends to larger process sizes as well? (Do | they really need the newest snapdragon processor in a modern | car?) | Scoundreller wrote: | I wonder if auto has been moving to smaller processes just for | better efficiency. | blihp wrote: | It's across the board. Makers of small scale microcontroller | projects/kits (whose chips typically use 28nm and larger | process nodes) are reporting problems getting parts. Apparently | some of the parts the autos need are >100nm. | | I suspect that this problem started with the Huwai sanctions | causing lots of Chinese companies to start panic buying | inventory not knowing of they're going to be the next hit with | sanctions. Add to that the demand shifts caused by the | pandemic. Then throw in other companies realizing how | vulnerable they are (and therefore trying to add to their own | inventories) and some speculators and it makes for a real mess. | mmoskal wrote: | COVID induced demands for consumer electronics, while | constraining supply of ICs. There's lots of low-end chips (not | the CPU or GPU, but say power controllers, etc) going into | laptops and peripherals (mice, keyboard, etc.). | | Hence the squeeze all around. | | On top some distributors are selling whatever they have left at | whatever market is willing to pay, which may mean 100x the | usual price... | high_priest wrote: | Looking at the amount of driver assists and video analysis | solutions packed onto modern cars, maybe? | agloeregrets wrote: | Other way around. Small process sizes have already been called | for a long time ago so no changes were made in the demand. For | example, TSMC's 5nm process was bought out by Apple two years | ago. It's the more JIT processes with shorter order lead that | have impacts. | | Apple will be able to get things like the M1X with no problem | but they will have trouble getting things like microprocessors | used for power management. | baybal2 wrote: | No, it's actually much worse for legacy processes, discretes, | and some components. | | It's stuff that was usually made on non-300mm fabs, and 130nm+ | nodes. | stefan_ wrote: | Everything is short in supply. Part of that is because analog | chips generally use older processes anyway and part of it is | that old fabs have a very long tail of selling older process | size chips. I think right now the best bang for your buck is | 40nm. | coliveira wrote: | This is the result of something called just-in-time | manufacturing. The geniuses who created this method of | manufacturing always thought that there would be no interruption | of supply chains, and that we could forever produce only what we | could consume at the moment. | dyingkneepad wrote: | I feel like this comment is kinda like blaming the inventors of | the Knife for the people who were stabbed. JIT was an amazing | invention and a progress to mankind. | digikata wrote: | Toyota was one of the creators of Just in Time manufacturing, | and they planned for this particular supply chain interruption. | | https://jalopnik.com/toyota-prepared-for-the-chip-shortage-y... | a9h74j wrote: | Kanban is not incompatible with queuing theory. | reader_mode wrote: | Reminds me of a joke - if economist designed humans instead of | having two kidneys we would share one between five people. | scruffyherder wrote: | And I can make a baby in 1 month with 10 women. | KingMachiavelli wrote: | If you look at the numbers 50% of TSMC's revenue is made up by | the 5nm and 7nm as of 2021. And just one company, Apple, makes up | 25% of TSMC's revenue. While the M1 is a great chip - it also | just launched and Apple has been one fourth of TSMC's revenue for | years. This means that around 40 to 50% of the top performance | nodes suitable for general purpose use in data centers, | workstations, etc. is being used for mobile devices -> mostly | phones and tablets. | | On one hand I have to thank Apple for pushing semiconducter | development and making ARM a real x86 replacement outside the DC. | However, it seems really wasteful and like a mis-allocation of | resources to put the top performing silicon in devices that don't | really need it. Even the M1 architecture is handicapped by Apple | itself. Besides the most obnoxious use of M1 Mac mini's in DC | basically for the sole purpose of iOS and macOS app development, | the CPUs are mostly used in consumer devices. Their main purpose | for use in consumer devices? To eliminate the need for a fan and | to improve battery life. Both of these things are great but also | just not high on the list of problems humanity needs to solve. | | What I am trying to say is that, for the last few decades, it at | least seemed like 'real' work drove semiconductor development. | From cloud giants to a local companies data center, performance | and power efficiency were what drove and purchased the bleeding | edge CPU/GPUs (I suppose in some ways GPUs were driven by | consumers/entertainment reasons). Now it seems like luxury | products are taking on that role. | | I call these mobile iOS/Android products luxury products because | outside of novelty purposes no one is really producing movies or | something of value beyond a word document on these devices. | Traditional laptops and desktops "won" in a way for the same | reason that the M1 processor exists; mobile operating systems | still have never matured to replace then so instead even Apple is | bringing mobile software _back_ to the traditional computer. | | The most worrying aspect of this development of course is how | locked down most of these devices are. iOS devices are of course | in a walled garden and even macOS has more & more restrictions. I | can easily imagine a day where consumer level electronics are | completely locked down and the only way to get a open/free | platform is to buy server hardware - if that is even possible. | Server hardware is also moving to ARM and while not locked down | in a software or hardware way it is locked down in the sense that | only a few companies can buy it or at least no one so far is | interested in selling single digit volumes of ARM servers. The | days of open computing for the general person certainly seem | numbered. | zxcero wrote: | > However, it seems really wasteful and like a mis-allocation | of resources to put the top performing silicon in devices that | don't really need it | | Semiconductor research requires a lot of capital. If Apple is | providing that upfront capital at a higher rate, then that's | great for TMSC. More capital for spearheading development. And | with better and better yield at smaller node sizes, it'll | trinkle down. 2 years later 5nm would become common place and | can be used to produce chips for servers. It's just the | question between now and a couple years later. | | > Both of these things are great but also just not high on the | list of problems humanity needs to solve. | | At the end of the day, it's the market that determines | innovation and R&D. More money for a specific product results | in more money spent in researching and development. It's about | what people need rather it's about what people want. Also not | having a fan and improved battery life means less ewaste, | smaller batteries and less electricity use. | | > What I am trying to say is that, for the last few decades, it | at least seemed like 'real' work drove semiconductor | development. | | First it was military spending that funded CPU development. | Later on, it was enterprise because of companies had money. Now | with cheaper and faster hardware, more and more people are able | to get their hands on a PC. You can watch educational videos | online. Talk to thousands of people or connect with relatives. | You can do online webinars or shows. Heck, you can even learn | languages on apps on your phone. In the end, mobile phones are | a tool. They can be beneficial or detrimental on the use. | | > mobile operating systems still have never matured to replace | then so instead even Apple is bringing mobile software back to | the traditional computer. | | It's about centralizing software development between platforms. | It's cheaper and easier to develop one software OS across | platforms than to have MacOS and iOS separate. This might mean | that later on your Ipad can run VScode. | | > I can easily imagine a day where consumer level electronics | are completely locked down and the only way to get a open/free | platform is to buy server hardware - if that is even possible. | | Its the opposite. The prices for all these microprocessors have | been getting lower and lower while becoming exceeding more | powerful. You can buy an integrated microcontroller with | bluetooth and wifi modules for <$10. In fact, open computing | has expanded due to cheaper cost to PCs and faster hardware. | More people can afford to do software and hardware development. | There's so many resources nowadays for open source development | or even hobbyist tinkering of hardware. This is one of the best | times you can be in for open computing. | throwaway4good wrote: | I thought this article about purchases of chip manufacturing | equipment was very interesting: | | https://www.scmp.com/tech/tech-trends/article/3129611/us-chi... | | US-China tech war: China becomes world's top semiconductor | equipment market as Beijing pushes local chip industry | | Mainland China topping the list for the first time ever. South | Korea is investing a lot more than usual. Taiwan is stable. The | US is down. | | Will be very interesting how the chip situation will look on the | other side of the current shortage. The shortage is all over, not | just for high end processes. The high end processes will probably | still be done by SK, Taiwan and the US but a lot of the lower end | will go to China. | baybal2 wrote: | If anybody been watching the second hand semi equipment market, | all kinds of opportunistic players from China been scouring the | market clean for last 5 years. | | One of those opportunistic players hoping on becoming a n-th | tier fab player is for example Galanz -- a kitchenware company: | https://twitter.com/ogawa_tter/status/1310852850033946624 | | Though, there is notion that those are just manoeuvres to get | giant tax subsidies from the state. Semiconductor companies in | China pay near no tax, even if they have 1 wafer per month | fabs. | throwaway4good wrote: | Well. Nokia started with rubber boots. | jamiek88 wrote: | Nintendo playing cards! | sudosysgen wrote: | Their rubber venture is still alive and well and makes good | studded winter tires for bicycles | Black101 wrote: | https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/04/intel-nvidia-tsmc-ex... | ArkanExplorer wrote: | How much fab capacity is indirectly dedicated towards Crypto | mining? | | Could blocking the fiat inroads, and causing a price fall, be a | solution to this chip shortage? | jagger27 wrote: | It's direct competition. Nvidia sells normal graphics card | chips directly to miners. | PhantomGremlin wrote: | That's an interesting question. Crypto mining wants to do more | and more cycles, faster and faster, so of course they need | chips from the newest processes. | | But in reality I don't think "blocking" is possible now. That | ship has sailed (feel free to use your own cliche here). There | are now exchange listed companies, eg Coinbase, that deal in | crypto. There are mutual funds that deal in crypto. Tesla owns | a bunch of crypto :) | | A lot of older ICs, eg automotive, don't need leading edge | fabs, and those other fabs also are seeing record demand. | ArkanExplorer wrote: | But what does eg. Germany, Korea, Japan have to gain from | Crypto activity? | | What does humanity have to gain generally, with an increasing | share of our energy and chip manufacturing output going | towards an essentially pointless activity? | | Why not more individual action, like India has taken? | | Much of the wealth seems to be funneled into the USA, where | many of the earliest entrants and major Crypto traders are | located. | kelp wrote: | It seems to be a net negative to society to me. One of | those cases where a small group gets rich, while everyone | else pays the externalities. | baybal2 wrote: | Miners buy at cost parity with coin costs. | | Even at the current ridiculous price of crypto, they can't | afford latest nodes. And TSMC make them pay cash because they | were previously burned by few mining chip makers going bust | after their bet on coin prices didn't pay put. | | But only underlines how chipmaking is the next most lucrative | thing after, effectively, printing money. | throwaway4good wrote: | TSMC lumps crypto into their HPC segment which is rising. How | much of it is crypto is unclear. Bitmain manufactures their | mining equipment on the latest TSMC process. | xwdv wrote: | What if chip shortage just became the new normal? Any | alternatives? | CoastalCoder wrote: | That's a fantastic question! Here's my hot take: | | - Price increases on all products that require chips. | | - Right-to-repair laws make some headway, as the cost of repair | becomes more competitive with the cost of replacement. | | - Commercial software developers shift their focus a little | more towards program efficiency, at the cost of slower feature | development and/or higher code complexity. | BlueTemplar wrote: | Kind of : http://collapseos.org/ | j_walter wrote: | https://wccftech.com/tsmc-plant-hit-by-power-outage-millions... | | This certainly won't help. Just like the weeks that Samsung's | fabs were down in Texas after the storms in February...it doesn't | take much to disrupt a facility for weeks. | simonh wrote: | So this seems to be about increased demand for high end | components driven by increased IT equipment purchases during the | lockdown as people depend on this stuff more. That's the | implication from the article. | | Meanwhile I'm also reading about chip shortages affecting car | manufacturers, and possibly some other industries. The dynamic | there seems to be that car makers (and possibly others) cut | orders drastically early in the lockdown, which means component | makers shut down manufacturing capacity and it's taking a long | time to ramp it up and also clear the backlog of orders as demand | came back earlier than expected. | | So this seems to be two completely different effects going on. I | know very little about these industries, but I wouldn't be | surprised if there's a meeting of these effects in the middle. | High end devices often have some lower end components (peripheral | and glue logic on desktop motherboards for example) in addition | to the potentially pricier main CPU. | | Is that the story? | ksec wrote: | So to _over simplify_. | | 1. Car Manufactures canceled their order (X) for 6 months. | | 2. Fab sold those capacity to others | | 3. Demand for All electronics increases because of WFH ( and | possibly bitcoin ) | | 4. Demand for Car actually _raised_ during COVID. | | 5. Now Car Manufacture want X, their original order, another X | for their next 6 months, as well as 0.5X where 0.5 was the | increase in demand. So total 2.5X | | 2.5X increase in order to catch up with their production All | while other electronics such as iPhone 5G, Tablet, PC are | selling record number in recent years. | | It also doesn't help when Samsung's yield are failing yet | _again_ | | Now let's take this even further. Apple is predicted to sell | record number of iPhone, Mac, and iPad. TSMC will do | preferential treatment to all orders relating to Apple with | Apple courting their suppliers. So that uses up those bigger | nodes as well. You end up having industry fighting for whatever | that is left. | | And just like any product or commodities, you have people | hoarding them for profits. It is the same with PS5, Switch, | Graphics Card or any other with limited quantities and high | demand. This will attract interest to trade them and make | money. Which add even more strain to supply chain. | | From a Supplier perspective, all of a sudden you are looking at | a market with seemingly _unlimited_ demand and you have limited | supply. This scenario is similar to what happened with DRAM and | NAND in 2015 - 2019. Although the cause is different. | cogman10 wrote: | A couple of other things that happened. | | Intel has been struggling to shrink their dies, so they went | to TSMC for some of their chip production. | | Apple ditched intel with their latest macbooks (with the M1), | which also requires more TSMC capacity. | skohan wrote: | From what I understand, Intel's announcement that they | would use TSMC was basically hot air. TSMC's capacity was | already tapped, and they have little incentive to use it | for a competitor when it's been planned for other customers | since years back. | officeplant wrote: | IIRC, Intel only planned on using TSMC to produce some of | their low cost celeron chips. | girvo wrote: | Aren't they using them for their upcoming dGPU | production?) | | https://www.techpowerup.com/277134/intel-xe-hpg-to-be- | built-... | Guthur wrote: | Not to mention AMD moved from mostly using Globalfoundries | to using TSMC for most of their new CPU/GPU including | consoles. And AMD have had quite the resurgence over the | last 5 years in terms of sales. | | It's definitely a confluence of demand scenarios which | would have been difficult to plan for at the best of times | and then there was the overall disruption to supply chains | and long term planning that Covid would have presented. | jaflo wrote: | I am not really familiar with the industry, why will TSMC | give preferential treatment to Apple orders? | KptMarchewa wrote: | Who were those others in point 2)? That's the question. | | Either they would want the capacity either way, or it's some | kind of customer induced by temporarily reduced prices, so | price sensitive. | PragmaticPulp wrote: | I think the focus on automotive manufacturers has been | exaggerated. Automotive orders are definitely a contributing | factor, but the popular narrative is putting too much | emphasis on a single industry. | | The reality is, like you said, demand for consumer devices | across the board has spiked. Not just cars, but phones and | video game consoles and everything else. Cars are a part of | it, but I don't see how we would have avoided a chip shortage | if auto makers hadn't cancelled some previous orders and then | resubmitted them. | vkou wrote: | Component makers did not shut down manufacturing capacity, they | just re-allocated the timeshares formerly set aside for car | manufacturers to other customers. | | Notice that there's no shortages of Intel CPUs, and few serious | shortages of console gaming systems. That's where the | manufacturing capacity went. | doikor wrote: | > component makers shut down manufacturing capacity and it's | taking a long time to ramp it up | | Not really. The component manufacturers canceled their fab time | contracts with fab companies as they could not afford to hold | onto them if their customer (the car manufacturers) were not | buying from them. And once they did that fabs just sold the | capacity to the next buyer. | | So now the component manufacturers only option is to buyout the | contract from someone else (really really expensive with | current available capacity) or just wait until the contracts | expire to get a chance to bid for them again. Also as fab time | is auctioned if the shortage still continues then the fab time | will be really expensive even then. | jhgb wrote: | I consider myself lucky to have upgraded a few months ago. Now I | might not have to worry for two or three years. | RicoElectrico wrote: | Yeah, consolidate more [1]. What could possibly go wrong. | | https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/technology_node#Leading_edge_tr... | ip26 wrote: | As far as I know, these were not consolidation so much as | trailing players dropping out of the race in a winner-take-all | market. | jagger27 wrote: | I only hope in the next decade or so that fab tech becomes more | commoditized so GlobalFoundries and co can get back onto the | leading edge node. | mlinksva wrote: | Interesting chart. For someone who doesn't follow the industry, | does it show current capability, or capability at the time a | given node was cutting edge? If the latter it really does show | a tremendous winnowing. To what extent is that winnowing | attributable to consolidation (M&A) vs dropping out? | taurath wrote: | Maybe one of the ultra billionaires could make a competitor, | but the amount of expertise built up over time in those | companies seems insurmountable. Possible maybe, but quite a | tall order, people would rather just build a space company it's | easier | KptMarchewa wrote: | Development costs of each generation rises exponentially. Would | not be surprised if that number dropped even more around 3-2nm | nodes. | [deleted] | fest wrote: | TI DC-DC switcher IC in one of my designs cost about 0.7EUR | before this. For current production batch we had to buy it for | around 22EUR (qty 100). | cm2187 wrote: | On that topic has anyone seen any EPYC Milan CPU available | anywhere? They were supposed to have been released last month but | are nowhere to be seen. | bogwog wrote: | That link points to an "article" (it's like 3 sentences long) | with the title | | > TSMC's Q1 profit up 19%, beats market estimates | | And says nothing about a chip shortage | KingOfCoders wrote: | Wasn't able to get a new dishwasher because of "no chips". | egeozcan wrote: | Does anyone else also feel like we're in a factorio game and | someone realized we're not producing enough green chips after | all? | antisthenes wrote: | I think it's more the case of getting to 7nm Blue Chips and | realizing how much more costly they are in terms of | prerequisite requirements. | CivBase wrote: | I know, I know! But I didn't make the bus wide enough for all | the iron plates and copper plates I'd need to increase green | circuit capacity. I could upgrade to blue transport belts, but | that will take _forever!!!_ | | How could past me have ever been foolish enough to believe I'd | never need more than 20 lanes on the main bus? I was so _stupid | stupid stupid!_ | | Woah. Sorry. I blacked out for a minute there. What were we | talking about? | skykooler wrote: | And the GPU shortage is because all our red circuit production | is going to the miners. | PartiallyTyped wrote: | Speaking of, this is a blog post that I really liked on | factorio from a functional programming perspective. | | https://bartoszmilewski.com/2021/02/16/functorio/ | MivLives wrote: | If only the real world worked in Factorio timescales. | gnulinux wrote: | I'd like to carry thousands of chip factories in my pocket | and create gigafactories using robots in a matter of days | (in-game days). | _JamesA_ wrote: | Or M.U.L.E. for us old timers. | grenoire wrote: | I hope that doesn't mean that I have to build a rail line to a | new copper sector to the north-east... | BlueTemplar wrote: | No, but you might have to "liberate" some oil fields in the | mid-east... | Groxx wrote: | We put all our green chips in a mega-factory or two, and used | trains to move them to the major places that needed them. | | Unfortunately it's a multiplayer server, and someone started | rerouting the trains because they wanted to build more cars. | ericwood wrote: | I'm a bit confused; the linked article talks about TSMC's profits | and makes no mention of the chip shortage or any predictions | related to it. Am I missing something? | tosh wrote: | looks like Reuters changed the content: | | https://www.reuters.com/world/china/tsmcs-q1-profit-rises-19... | justinzollars wrote: | I think the article was updated | PhantomGremlin wrote: | Real Men Have Fabs. | | The above quip came from TJ Rodgers of AMD/Cypress. It was | popularized by Jerry Sanders, CEO of AMD.[1] | | There were many fabs back in the day. Now they're mostly EPA | Superfund sites in Silicon Valley. | | The IC industry has done thru many many boom/bust cycles. This | cycle could be one of the worst because fabs are so expensive | that everyone has chosen to simply buy their chips from the few | remaining "real men" who still have fabs. | | Not entirely unforeseen. | | [1] https://semiwiki.com/john-east/273760-real-men-have-fabs- | jer... | sand500 wrote: | Bigger and bigger risk to build state of the art fabs if | TSMC/Samsung are just going to beat you anyways | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_second_law | Skunkleton wrote: | Bigger and bigger risk for the likes of Apple and AMD | depending so totally on TSMC. I don't see how this dependency | benefits them in the long run. | bluescrn wrote: | Apple seems strangely unaffected by the chip shortage, with | a seemingly-plentiful supply of new iPhones, iPads, and M1 | Macs. | agloeregrets wrote: | Apple is less harmed than AMD. TSMC basicly is Apple | Taiwan, without Apple as a customer paying for R&D and | providing custom 5nm designs to build and push R&D, TSMC | has no business. Apple is an ensured sale with very long | term contracts in place (> 5 years). By time any contract | expires, Intel will have caught up. | e9 wrote: | On the bright side, this might encourage reuse of used/old parts | and care about being more efficient with what we currently have, | which is a form of innovation on its own | christiansakai wrote: | RIP all gamers everywhere. | dyingkneepad wrote: | And the gaming industry that may be holding off their PS5 | releases. | [deleted] | libeclipse wrote: | That is not what the article says. Did anyone open it? | Yoofie wrote: | Shocking to absolutely no one. When you are the only game in town | and everyone wants the latest greatest (high demand), shortages | are going to last into the foreseeable future[1]. | | [1] - Foreseeable future = multiple years on end | dannyw wrote: | Samsung is shipping 5nm too, it's not as good as tsmc 5nm but | it is close. | Black101 wrote: | 2 sources is not much better then 1 ... we have seen 3 and 4 | sources collude in the past | InitialLastName wrote: | This article doesn't say what is in the title. This might be | better: | | https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/15/22385240/tsmc-chip-shorta... | | To that point, this issue is already painful for anyone making | electronics, and is going to hurt the small electronics | manufacturers more (if you aren't in a position to buy a million | parts, good luck getting any priority as things come back on | line). ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-04-15 23:00 UTC)