Intel, the United States and the Chip War - VisualPolitik EN
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 มิ.ย. 2024
- 📽 👉 We recommend you watch this related video: Why has TAIWAN become the most IMPORTANT country in the world? • Why has TAIWAN become ...
Join the VisualPolitik community and support us on Patreon: / visualpolitik
The chip industry is one of the hottest sectors of the moment.
From the new 5G iPhones to the fifth-generation F-35 fighter jets, from cars with autonomous driving capabilities to the large servers on which the cloud is built. Everything, absolutely everything, depends on the chip industry.
Historically, the United States has been a major producer of semiconductors. For decades, chips have been one of the most advanced and strategic products of US industry. Now, however, the situation is very different. The big companies that design chips are still American, but the bulk of cutting-edge production is in Taiwanese and South Korean hands, something that Washington has begun to see as a risk to national security, which is why both the White House and Congress want to boost local production.
And if we talk about a North American chip producer, we really have to talk about Intel. A company that, despite its good results, is generating many doubts in the market. In this video we tell you how the United States is currently positioned in the chip war and particularly, what problems are facing Intel, the iconic US producer.
Support us on Patreon!
/ visualpolitik
And don't forget to visit our friend’s podcast, Reconsider Media:
www.reconsidermedia.com/
In Britain it's called "the crisp war"
I love the Phishing and chips my self
In France it's called fries
Good one
@@r.arulkumar7349 you dont wanna hear what we call it in Turkey
😂😂
Appreciate the video, though the effort not to mention AMD competing in try hard mode against Intel is a bit misleading
Maybe, but i think they skipped AMD because they outsource their chip(www.nytimes.com/2008/10/07/technology/07chip.html)
AMD is an interesting because of their recent success after going fabless.
@@GoldenWolf141 broken link. Either way Intel and Samsung are about the only two that make their own.
AMD, Apple, Nvidia, Qualcomm, ect. all outsource production.
Amd outsources chip production to tsmc and others
Intel and Samsung will lead in fabrication domain by competing with Tsmc.
The Belgian company Melexis almost finished the first production plant for manufacturing of semiconductors in Bulgaria ever. It took them 3 years to build and equip the factory, not to mention the design and planning process...
Also Melexis is a very small company compared to TSMC, it will put much less pressure on the entire supply chain than TSMC if TSMC expands. ;)
Having said that, I do expect that we will get better availability of CPU's and GPU's in the next few years before the supply can increase substantially. People who just bought a PC for working at home and gaming (yes, Steam shows that many more people picked up gaming in the last year) don't need to buy new hardware for quite a few years, other sectors which buy up all those CPU's (like car manufactureres) might adapt a bit because of the higher prices which will lower the demand again a bit. But I also expect that only after at least 4-5 years the supply and demand are fully in balance. Time will tell.
@Jinx Vanderz It is not only about money, you can't buy everything. You need those few geniuses who have great ideas. Somehow Intel missed the boat and could not get a smaller node than their '14 nm' to work.
@Jinx Vanderz it's a lot more than just throwing money at the problem. It takes years to build fabs. Intel also lacks the technology to compete at the very top right now. That itself takes years to develop. Then there's the problem of getting the machines used in the fabs. The company that makes the most advanced ones are booked out for years to come.
This is all while either TSMC or Samsung are standing still.
Great news, Europe is missing out on big tech nowadays.
whats that?! belgium and the politicians are doing something genius?
Bring out the popcorn and CHIPS, this is gonna be fun
I see what you did there
🙄
Oof, size small.
I like having fish and CHIPs
Get a life dodo
Thank you for a most informative run down on this high tech industry, well presented.
And not one mention of AMD and how they have dealt a huge blow to Intel with Ryzen CPU's being manufactured by TSMC's advanced manufacturing processes for the last few years.
TSMC has been manufacturing 5nm chips for a short while now. Apple's M1 is manufactured by TSMC and is at 5nm.
It looks like the old policy of outsourcing chip manufacturing for decades is backfiring on the West. Investing locally didn’t seem that bad after all. 🤔
Not really.
This dude fails to to let people know that the architectures are all American.
At least the ones that matter.
Like Intel,AMD,Qualcomm and Apple all American companies who build cpu architectures.
It's not as cut and dry as this channel makes it.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 And if you are going to nitpick: those US designs are made in SEA using Dutch tech (ASML).
@@Lord_RFAS You mean like ASML uses American EUV?
You are peanuts.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 Wrong answer, boychick.
I was hoping you'd say to me that ASML is a multinational these days. To which I'd reply: so are the companies you listed.
But then, I forgot: 'MERICA!!! 🤣
AMD didn't start outsourcing because it was cheaper. They started outsourcing to TSMC because they were stuck and TSMC wasn't.
People in this comment section seem to think that US companies are outsourcing to save a buck, but it's because TSMC and Samsung are doing it better.
Thanks to chips, I can enjoy my weekly dose of watching Josh Faulkner.
I'm seeing you everywhere Frenchie
The real quest for power begins here
One side note: Intel's 10nm process is about the same size as TSMC's 7nm. The nm numbers quoted aren't comparable anymore nowadays, but more just marketing.
But apart that: yeah, Intel has had a hell of a time fixing their 10nm process up to such extent they had to refresh the excisting 14nm proces to the umpthtenth time (it's about 14nm++++++++++++++++++++++++++ right now, right?) I believe there's also talk of skipping 10 and going on to 7nm (which by estemation would be equal to TSMC 5nm).
@Robert Groot process nodes are just that hard to make. Also they have to do it in a way that’s different from TSMC and Saumsung too, the only companies capable of making more advance nodes than Intel. All the other foundries have given up on the cutting edge ones.
@Robert Groot
The chips get smaller. But the phones keep growing larger.
Of course small phones don't work well with an aging population. I have too have the largest screen they make.
My first phone lasted me 10 yrs. They finally stopped supporting it. Now I am lucky if the new ones survive 2 yrs.
@@UnitedTSR TSMC 5nm is a marketing label. According to my boss (a long time semiconductor infrastructure designer), the actual feature size of a 5nm part is closer to 13nm. Confused? Yes, so am I. Marketing is marketing.
The problem is Intel was being run in a manner one normally only see's in government. As long as the money was still coming in they just kept kicking the can down the road. They were deaf and dumb to what was happening around the world. They just assumed I guess that they would maintain dominance just because they are Intel! I think they were too confident that PC's and phones especialy apple would continue to be cash cow for them!
This isn't entirely the full picture. Despite Intel and TSMC's leading edge nodes being comparible in density, TSMC still has the edge with the clockspeeds and yields they can achieve on their leading node. Just because Intel, TSMC and Samsung all buy their DUV/EUV equipment from ASML it doesn't mean what they can achieve with these huge machines is identical. Chip fabrication is still an insanely complex and requires insane amounts of talent from thousands of engineers to produce. So even though Intel/Samsung/TSMC all buy the same lithography equipment from ASML there is still so much to making chips. In a cruder sense its like 3 woodworkers/carpenters all with the same tools. One of those woodworkers/carpenters may simply be more talented then the others and able to make superior quality wood furniture/building frames despite the tools being the same.
Each and every company you're mentioning, not even one excluded are all entirely dependent on just ONE company: ASML.
Like ASML depends on a phletora of suppliers
@@remedytee Absolutely, but ASML has the monopoly for the end product
@@3pan1 No doubt about that
Im so glad youtube has the play back speed option..
wow intel sponsored video. Talking about Intel and TSMC without even *mentioning* AMD as TSMCs second largest customer after Apple and Intels No. 1 competitor in the CPU and server space... LOL
Missing the big point about this story, it's not about companies, it's about international security. It's about manufacturing chips in the West at all cost.
This is not merely about fan boys computer games, it's the future of Western society. TSMC is a basket with everyone's eggs in it... that has to change.
ok @@chuzzbot I will try and explain:
- The point of this video is totally valid and I agree with it. It's about what context was provided when talking about these issues.
- If the video wanted to talk about Foundries, then talk about foundries. TSMC, Samsung, Intel, SMIC, Global Foundries, etc. No problem.
- If you talk about Foundries (in this case TSMC) and their customers then there is no reason to arbitrarily omit one of the biggest ones. No.1 TSMC client: Apple, No.2: AMD, after those two it's Qualcom, Broadcom , Amazon, Tesla, Nvidia etc. (Don't know the order.).
- If you talk about Intel struggling with their process nodes and stock prices going down because of that, you supposed to mention AMD. No one cares about the process node, because process nodes are irrelevant if there is no need for a smaller process. There are tons of chips made on extremely old nodes, like 28nm and larger and those chips are competitive in the market. The reason for why it is bad for Intel to be behind on process node technology is because they have to compete with AMD products in the consumer / server space. It's not because of TSMC that Intel's stock price went down, it was because of AMD. So you talk about Intel stock, you talk about AMD.
- This has nothing to be with fanboy-ism. I f***ing hate fanboys. I couldn't care less about AMD, Intel or Nvidia. I'm only interest in the semiconductor industry. It's about drawing an unbiased picture and providing an accurate context.
- When it comes to national security one could argue, Intel, Broadcom and Qualcomm are the most important. They probably have military contracts and they supply essential chips for 5G, networking, phones, etc. AMD has many consumer facing products in game consoles, desktop and currently compared to Intel very little server market share. So yes, you could argument that AMD isn't security critical, and I agree. But WHY mention Apple and Amazon then as TSMCs clients and not AMD? OMEGALUL! Amazon makes chips for their personal cloud and public cloud service. And you can bet the military servers or any other major security critical infrastructure is NOT hosted on the amazon cloud XD. They have their own private servers. And those servers won't be MACs and won't be running iOs.
All I'm saying it is **odd** to say it politely that AMD wasn't even mentioned once in all this.
And for the channel to **highlight** your reply to my criticism is... well judge for yourself I guess.
@@earllemongrab7960 You're looking at the trees not the forest.
No amount of explaining can help you with that, it's a mental block.
@@chuzzbot Well I guess someone who has never seen a forest before, this is definitely a sight to enjoy. Someone who has seen a forest or two already, a palm tree in the middle of a pine forest sticks out like a sore thumb.
Thanks you have been Added to "My TH-cam Channel Playlist" Frank a private citizen of Melbourne Australia
I would argue that 'Photo lithography' is a 4th type of company, which is arguably the most critical to the industry. ASML is the world leader in producing the machines ... which produce the chips. While ASML makes the machines however, they use optical systems made by Zeiss. Together, these two companies are driving die sizes down and causing Intel SO MUCH grief, because it is their technology which Intel is struggling to keep up with.
Zeiss is based in which country?
@@arbaz79 "Carl Zeiss SMT GmbH comprises the Semiconductor Manufacturing Technology business group of ZEISS and develops and produces equipment for the manufacture of microchips. The company is fully owned by Carl Zeiss AG.
Headquarters location: Oberkochen, Germany"
www.zeiss.com/semiconductor-manufacturing-technology/home.html
Zeiss SMT is the company that provides the optical systems for extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography tool to ASML
Intel is a customer of ASML, apart from being an ASML stockholder, Intel fabs are full of ASML equipment.
@@arbaz79 Zeiss is German and owned for like 23% by ASML.
@@Frankybeanselevators In 2017 Intel was smart enough to sell all the ASML stock.... and a year ago they canceled the euv machines... now they are begging on them I gues...
American semiconductor industry association AKA ASIA so ironic
Intel screwed themselves when they became too arrogant and decided not to heavily invest in Smart phones earlier in the game, instead focusing on PC's and laptops. They were complacent in their timelines and doubted that other competitors would catch up to them let alone surpass their capacities. This opened the door for Samsung and other major players to get into this. Intel was also arrogant into thinking that their rivals would never be able to catchup to them, and they were wrong. Not only have their rivals caught up but they have and in several places have surpassed them.
Nice Video. One detail I’d like to point out though.
When they say the chip size is 5 nm or 3 nm, it’s not the dimension of the chip. It is the transistor width. Smaller transistor widths allow a higher clock frequency signals to be computed and thus faster computations. When they say better performance, it’s usually this faster computation they are talking about. It’s not packing of more components in a small space that gives the better performance.
Sorry, but this is almost completely wrong.
"When they say the chip size is 5 nm or 3 nm, it’s not the dimension of the chip. It is the transistor width." - it used to be like that, what matters is transistor density, ex. Intel 10nm is equivalent of TSMC 7nm, some are trying to push new branding based on transistor density,, because current marketing is confusing
"Smaller transistor widths allow a higher clock frequency signals to be computed and thus faster computations." - not really, with current materials we will probably never see 6GHz CPU, anything above 5GHz gives diminishing returns in terms of power consumption and CPU capabilities, at least that's true for SiO2
"When they say better performance, it’s usually this faster computation they are talking about" - I mean, they are usually correct, but it depends on application, ex. usually in gaming L3 size and memory latency can be more important than just raw CPU power
"It’s not packing of more components in a small space that gives the better performance." - it just is, the smaller transitors are the shorter paths are and less energy is consumed for moving 1 bit, also with transistor density grows transistor number, so overall without significant power consumption cpu is just faster (to clarify, CPU architecture also plays large role, but that's different think and I know little about that).
I'm pretty sure that you know a lot, but it seems that you need to update your knowledge a bit, just watch some GamersNexus, Hardware Unboxed, LinusTechTips, or TechTechPotato, channel of Dr Ian Cutress from Anandtech.
Great I found LTT (in the techquickie channel) video it adresses some points: th-cam.com/video/ROS008Av4E4/w-d-xo.html
I thought that it was in the clock speed of a chip and not the number of transistors in a small space but there's more transistors translate to better performance of a microprocessor?
Nice work
Dr. Su, please, they're already dead... stop kicking them
an apple a day, will keep the Dr away ...
Ok. "TSMC" if from Taiwan, not "Thailand at 1:42.,,,,,,
Don't ask too much of US media. It's already good they placed it in Asia... ;)
If you measure a companies success just in terms of the bottom line, you will be disappointed in the future. A companies future success is only as good as its R&D. Myopic management can easily lead to a companies demise. A nation can only be successful if it is self sufficient in critical industries.
Why is self sufficiency that important?
@@somethinglikethat2176 there many reasons. Firstly, it is a matter of security. No nation/country can be safe if it is dependent on other nations/countries for its critical industries. Even more so when the counties on which it is dependent are competitors. Worse if they do not share the same values and/or have different political systems. Failure to maintain maximum self sufficiency is an open invitation to be held hostage by any nation/country on which it is dependent.. From a political point of view, the world governance is more stable if there is a more equitable balance in technological competance between nations. From a scientific point of view, it is beneficial if as many countries as possible are striving for scientific and engineering advancement in every field.
From a less political/military perspective, is is better for the environment, and survival of the species. Self sufficiency implies resiliency and redundancy in the face of major disasters, be that war or natural. It also reduces the need to transport products long distances from the point of manufacture. With respect to the internal social organisation of a country, it maximises high quality job opportunities in as many fields as possible. It links taxation to the national government, reducing the power of multinational conglomerates.
The risk of conflict is reduced when there is technological parity between nations.
If all the above are not sufficient reasons, then there is the economic advantage of it being anti globalisation, a system that increases the wealth gap between the super rich and the rest, while using up global resources faster than they can be replaced.
I could continue, but i feel sure you get the idea. Essentially it is better not to have all you eggs in one basket.
The US delegated manufacturing to what it thought were its obedient servants, unfortunately, the servants have now better skills than there former master, and now the former servants are the new masters. The US rich elite, who thought they were being so clever delegating the manufacturing jobs to low wage countries, leaving them more time to make money from stock manipulation, are about to find that real power is in the hand of the makers of real things, and all they are left with is valueless virtual money and hollowed out zombie companies.
@@nigeljohnson9820 if you get chips whose production is 100% from one country they're not going to be that best on the market. Actually they would suck.
Without completive chips a lot of companies would go under. Even the biggest like Apple and Intel rely on overseas suppliers. The US is about 1/5 of global GPD, even if the US used only US stuff their companies would still lose to as the rest of the world bought the superior products.
Losing companies like that would hurt the US economy and the flow on effect would be less money for things like the military.
It's just a fact of a globally competitive world that no one country can do it all.
@@somethinglikethat2176 so if China cuts the supply of critical component from military electronics, how is the US going to defend itself? The US cannot afford to fall behind in any technology, if it wants to remain in control of its own destiny. It is telling that you think that US made components will be inferior to those made else where in the world. The US is well behind in GSM 5G technology, it is falling behind China in AI. China is building its own earth orbiting space station.
You imply that the US is too small to do it all, I contend that one of the definitions of a viable nation,is a group of people who can do it all. Competition does not exist if specific manufacturing tasks are left to just a few multinationals. In fact this is a recipe for complacent stagnation. This is evident in some of the big names in computer technology. There is a risk of corporate think, where only the corporate view prevails. Big corporations are driven by profit, not technology.
Your argument about US success would be more convincing if the us has not abdicated responsibility in some many areas, but you are in a far better position than the UK, which actively gives away its best technology before it has even had a chance to produce its profit potential. There is is all sold for a short term gain, resulting in a nation of increasingly indebted and impoverished, unskilled, under educated consumers. This is the date of the US and most complacent decadent Western countries, unless they wake up and recognise their perilous position. Ever wondered how the third world countries became so backward, when they were once so advanced. You are watching it happen to the west.
@@nigeljohnson9820 And why would China cut the supply of one of the world's most sought after good to one of the world's biggest consumer of it?
Then again, if one country can manage to aggravate anyone into doing this, it has to be the USA. So maybe they CAN actually manage to get cut-off. LOL Either way, who cares now that the US-ers have managed to aggravate even their most traditional allies in the last few years? I know I don't. A good thing though is that it made the reset of the world realize it shouldn't rely on the US for anything because all it gets you is to be at the mercy of a madman.
So good job Taiwan and Korea. I root for those guys! They will eventually even be able to design their own stuff, then sell it to the USA at a much better price than they can produce it themselves. Just like almost anything else in tech nowadays. Take cellphones for instance. Huawei and now Xiaomi are major players... and no protectionism is going to change that. It's too late. They already rule Asia, are taking Europe by storm and are only barely kept at bay on the US market. But in the long run, they can only win at this stuff. After all, they know how to design, build and sell stuff now. ;)
Oh come on! 3 ad breaks in a 13 minute video?!
am i the only one who realised he NEVER mentioned the word AMD not even once?
Well... They turned French Fries into Freedom Fries... IDK if they can pull that one again...
which is peculiar because the semiconductor stocks are basically flatlined when they should be skyrocketing
The technology basically hit it's peak 10 years ago.
They are did some fine tuning with higher precision lithography and gates with fins along the way.
However, computer performance has not increase much in years now.
It's obvious that AMD is going to catch on to intel and it is obvious the rest of the world will eventually catch on with the technology and manufacturing techniques.
This is why everyone is chasing for the next break through like quantum computing.
@@porcorosso4330 In my opinion amd already passed the intel production methods. 7 nm cpu's anyone?
@@nielsdebakker3283
I think they mentioned AMD is now fab-less, but sure they could already went past Intel.
@@porcorosso4330 > computer performance has not increase much in years now
It has, just not in as directly-obvious ways as a raw clock speed increase.
Moore's law has definitely been getting slower over the past few decades, but it doesn't actually measure CPU speed (as many people think). It measures transistor count, and that number has still been growing more-or-less exponentially. I think its running somewhere around the 2.5-3 year doubling rate these days? Maybe a bit slower by now even and certainly slower than Moore's original 1.5 year proclamation.. but still exponential.
Now those extra transistors _could_ be used to try and increase clock speeds, and Intel has attempted that (pushing some of their chips over 5GHz). The problem they're running into though isn't the transistor count - its the heat generation. We're pushing electrons around pretty much as fast as they go without running into major energy loss to heat (not to mention the additional cooling equipment to try and disperse the heat).
So transistors have been going towards other things - circuitry to adjust clock speeds based on demand and other such power-regulation systems, more cores per die, larger on-die caches, integrating GPU features into the CPU (yet again), etc. Basically anything they can think of to do with the extra transistors that doesn't involve generating more heat in the core itself is fair game.
Now most of that doesn't improve software speed to any great degree (extra cores is always nice but it tends to scale logarithmically - most software is unable to take full advantage of parallel execution. On-die cache size increases is similarly limited to the ability of any particular software package to make use of them. GPU work is handy for really small/tight form factor equipment but most "real" computers like your desktop, laptop and even cell phones have dedicated GPUs that will be much more powerful than anything tacked onto the CPU).
The real benefit we've been seeing though the past 10 or so years has been on the power management side. That doesn't improve performance at all (hurts it in some cases) but it allows us to run more powerful chips with less energy requirements. Battery life is a pretty big selling point for mobile devices in particular, but it also helps to lower the world's energy use (and thus carbon footprint) a bit as well. Maybe not the _biggest_ dent in the climate change problem but every little bit helps, and if those chips are going to be used anyway they may as well be used as energy-efficiently as possible.
@@altrag
Of course, clock speed is not the only measures.
However, let's be honest, Moore's law is basically at the stall right now and not growing exponentially like you claimed.
I am not sure you understand what determines clock speed or the fundamentals of semiconductor technologies.
It is not the number of transistors that determines the clock speed, but the size of the transistors.
Smaller transistors means less capacitance between the gates. This potentially means faster clock rates.
Sure, smaller transistors can mean higher resistance and more heat. That said, I doubt that is the main determining factor.
Of course, with the rise of mobile computing, heat and power management have become increasingly important.
Even in these conditions, if making transistors smaller increase performance and leads to a competitive advantage, I doubt Intel will give up that advantage if they had the choice.
The fact that we can draw finer features and unable to increase the clock speed might simply mean we are keeping transistors the same size due to physical limitations.
Like I said, the technology has peaked.
Time for Heavy Press Program 2 then.
best vid in ages.
Now it’s impossible to get a graphics card for under $200... even used
Josh, great job presenting -- looks like the irrepressible Simon has some competition. Great video overall as always.
good info but the music popping in and out makes it a difficult listen.
As an American living in the Netherlands I was surprised there was no mention of ASML.
Yes all companies depend on asml at the moment. Never the less the big money invested and made by TSMC and Samsung.
So its nice money but still a small part of the cake.
I like how you managed to go this entire video without using the words "gamers" , "workstations", "AMD" or "Ryzen" at all
@@MAKIUSO : You would never even know that AMD existed in this video or that it had been giving Intel alot of trouble the past 2 years. The erasure of AMD from this video strikes me as both intentional and suspicious. Like either he was paid to do so, or he has some sort of agenda. This would be sort of like making a video about the current American car market and even just sticking to American car companies but totally leaving out Tesla.
@@MAKIUSO They made several hundred thousand last year, up from like numbers in the hundreds scarcely 7 years before. Don't underestimate them.
@@MAKIUSO : That's cute (about the 'in house' stuff), when this video admits that there are three types of chip makers, so what is your point? Apple, which last I looked was the most valuable company in the entire world is in this video. It doesn't make its own chips. Then there are the fabs, which produce chips but don't design them. You really need to make a coherent argument. AMD is arguably Intel's main competition and it's not even mentioned once even though its been grabbing far large slices of the computer chip market than Apple ever did in the PC market. As for Tesla, I'm 50. I remember when it was said that Tesla was nought but a Ponzi scheme that would never produce a single car. Then when it did that, the car would never sell. Then when the car sold it was a 'rich man's ' automaker that would never make more than maybe 1000 cars a year. Certainly not 100 thousand. Then Tesla did that. Now it's at half a million and people like you are still pretending your predictions of imminent doom for Tesla are any more accurate today then they've been for ten years now.
Interesting video. The constant narrative to leave AMD out of the picture was very toxic. AMD was also a foundry player before they sold out that part of business (recent event). AMD has been slashing Intel's market share and forcing Intel to compete in design department, at very least.
Please be less biased. It shows.
Yeah but you cannot really compare the two.
Intel makes way more money than AMD.
I mean way more.
It's not even close.
AMD changed the game with Ryzen to the point that Intel has to follow (glued together cpus, outsourcing,and a engineer ceo). The whole reason Intel is hurting is because of AMD.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 Intel are much more than a CPU marker but haemorrhaging market share to AMD is hurting them. Also remember it would take years for Intel to catch TSMC, if TSMC stopped RnD. AMD are going to be fighting downhill for a long time to come.
@@somethinglikethat2176 Not really.
TSMC 7nm is not 7nm it is only 7nm in name only.
Intel's 10nm is a real 10nm and denser than TSMC "7nm".
I do not think you understand.
Even with AMD taking market share Intel is posting record earnings.
www.intc.com/news-events/press-releases/detail/1439/intel-reports-fourth-quarter-and-full-year-2020-financial
@@iddan1205 Actually in reality it is because Jim Keller left.
Jim Keller made what AMD is today.
Then went to Intel but left because of family issues.
I'll let you look him up.
Very interesting subject, but the editing was too jumpy even when flipping my phone screen down.
Yea! I been running the sane pos computer since the last major update to disblo3 all I need!
I mean they're just thinly cut fried potatoes. I really think we're blowing this one out of proportions
Let's see, in the foundry business Intel does not know how to be a service company, it has a messed-up business model that competes with its customers, and it is behind TSMC/Samsung technologically.
My guess is that Intel's foundry business will end up competing mainly with second-tier foundries like GF, UMC, SMIC, etc. In good times it may be able to limp along, but when the capacity glut hits then it will be a money-losing business.
It would have been better if Intel just spins off its foundry business completely (just like AMD did), and for the sake of US security also acquire GF to become more competitive.
Samsung competes with its customers too fool... For instance Samsung Exynos chips compete directly against Qualcomm Snapdragon chips, yet Qualcomm manufactures its chips at Samsung at the moment. Intel is definitely within reach of Samsung and TSMC still, their main issue is the fact they didn't jump on ASML's EUV machines early enough. They're slowly acquiring them now and in certain ways they're even ahead of competition actually. The problem really is they need EUV machines and TSMC has been buying nearly all of them.
At first I thought "Where's the bald guy?" By the end I'm like "New guy's pretty cool".
They all talk about chips, forgetting it is incomplete without the cod fish
Ehm, the world's production of high density chips is lagging because it completely relies on the production machines which are only built by one Dutch company: ASML. Companies like Intel were simply late with their orders and now have to wait in line.
If only it was that simple.
Chip size comparisons are unfair,
You should have mentioned that the "nanometer size" is not comparable between companies, so for example Intel's 7nm is similar to TSMC's 5nm
The difference is that TSMC's 5nm exists. While nm isn't the be all and end all, TSMC is definitely well ahead at this point and the gap is still growing.
TSMC is at least able to produce something on its 5nm line and has been making 7nm chips for what, years now? Intel is only just struggling to move completely to its 10nm process... and is nowhere near to anything smaller. So face it: They won't be caught up anytime soon. You can't just say we'll be caught up to today's tech in 2 or 3 years. Because by then, it won't be leading edge anymore.
Looks like Intel is going to make fridges and cars processors from now on...
Intel's 7nm node is equal to TSMC's 5nm process - while others have speculated that Intel's 7nm might very well be equal to TSMC's 3nm. Intel uses EUV throughout the 7nm stack, while TSMC is limited in the number of layers that use the technology.
wccftech.com/intel-vs-tsmc-chip-war-has-started-and-heres-everything-you-need-to-know/amp/
IBM creates the world’s first 2 nm chip.
@@user-pq3ro9xr3j create the sample in the lab is one thing, to mass production is another
Hello Visualpolitik rookies. U guys do touch on relevant topics affecting political affairs of the world tdy. Kudos to at least that. Isn’t Qualcomm a behemoth in semiconductors & an American company, with its manufacturing done by TCMC? Enlighten me if I’m wrong will ya u rookies.
Don't you think in the future, Could it has something in stead of Chip Technology?
I actually liked this video more because it didn't have the angry voiceovers. A less distracting, softer style.
There’s a misconception not explained in the video that intel’s 14 nm is equal to TSMC or Samsung’s 14 nm. That’s wrong. The naming schemes are now almost arbitrary and have became a marketing strategy since the 90’s. Intel’s 14 nm is comparable to TSMC’s 10 nm, and intel’s 10 nm is comparable to TSMC’s 7 nm. Intel is behind TSMC in node density, but not THAT far behind.
You think they could catch up and exceed the Taiwanese after getting all those Biden bux in their sentence bill within the 2 years? Or you think Apple and amd will take even more market share ?
"The Cloud" lol
To view Taiwan, China, and the semiconductor supply chain, go to:
th-cam.com/video/B4OJBtnElRA/w-d-xo.html
Are TSMC and Intel building manufacturing facilities in Arizona because of the recent Helium discovery there by Desert Mountain Energy ? … I heard that Helium is a requirement in the manufacturing process for some high grade chips.
no ; there are already fabs such as Intel and Micron in AZ. Also the infrastructure (water, electricity, suppliers) is already in AZ.
Not sure where you found that Helium is used in mfg process of hi-end chips except in some tools for lo-temp needs and some pump etc applications. Nitrogen in volume is much more important. also, For example, one of the main producers of helium do not need az - they just sourced helium from Doe Canyon, CO.
no ; the main industrial suppliers of helium are not drivers to AZ.
@@kevinkanter2537
It was in an interview by SUPERCHARGED STOCKS with the CEO of DME on TH-cam that I first heard mention of HELIUM requirement for Semi conductor manufacturing , they were excited by the announcement of TSMC’s announcement to build a plant in Arizona.
I then checked out a report by TSMC themselves in which they mentioned the requirement for Helium.
I am, at the moment, unsure as to how much Helium is actually required, but this report on page 2 under the SUPPLY headed paragraph, states the it is one of the Bulk gases required in large quantities.
PS .. from what I’ve read from DESERT MOUNTAIN ENERGY’s reports on the other gases in their wells, it looks like DME will be the nearest ‘Go To’ provider of all the gases required by Semiconductor manufacturers.
www.linde-gas.com/en/images/Gasworld%20-%20Creating%20a%20Semiconductor%20FEB18_tcm17-477345.pdf
@@B-Grizzly I REALLY appreciate the info. I will look at the supply chain for helium but a major Intel supplier, Air Products, has Helium sources to cover the next 2-3+ years to commit to buildout contracts for any chip company. I do not see DME providing processing to the purity required so they are a commodity - might be an interesting commodity play (financially / stock wise) but the processing/distribution networks vs "local sourcing" (sorry i feel like going out to buy some vegetables, LOL) of a supply ecosystem is more important.
@@kevinkanter2537 DME Certainly has been an interesting, and rewarding play so far, but it seems there may be a long way to go
The CEO has recently stated that he won’t be selling his shares for less than $30, almost 9 X today’s price.
They’ve also stated that they have customers lined up to take the Helium that they produce, but at the moment these customers prefer a non disclosure policy, so I’m trying to figure if it would be these CHIP manufacturers.
It’s looking likely.
TSMC are building in the US because they got billions in subsidies. Helium's not that hard to transport.
This whole discussion is necessarily oversimplified.
Many of the chips in the 'shortage' aren't 'state of the art' anything, they're commodity devices with larger device geometries and low transistor counts. These are the chips for turning on the brake lights in cars or for TV remote controls. Many of these chips are made in fabs by other companies, such as Microchip and Texas Instruments.
IBM and AMD make a lot of their chips in a fab in upstate New York. AMD is 'ahead of Intel' in some metrics, so their leadership needs to be taken into account.
However, there is the 'bigger picture'.
Arduino's and Raspberry Pi's, and similar 'hobbyist' embedded controllers, have been a staple in high school and university education for the last ten to fifteen years. Originally they cost around $30 US, however more recently there are variants at or under $10. This has created 'armies' of embedded chip developers that are now finished with their schooling. These may be working for appliance manufacturers, car companies, crowd-funded startups, or defense contractors. They 'take it for granted' that whatever product they build will use computer chips. Chip manufacturers are getting orders from 'out of the blue' - companies they've never heard of before.
The market is not merely making more smartphones and laptops, it's making 3D printers, water leak alarms, drone-based 'night vision' cameras, etc. One example is a company named FLIR - they make 'night vision' cameras and sensors. Originally this was for hunters and soldiers. Now it's for home building contractors and pipeline engineers looking for leaks. One variant has nothing to do with IR - it builds up an image of ultrasonic emitters, making it possible to locate leaking compressed air or bad wiring.
Each innovation grows markets exponentially. If chip demand doubles, then companies like SMIC, Samsung, and Intel will need to double their fab capacity. If this runs to $20 billion a shot, it isn't just a question of equipment - someone has to staff those plants. This tracks back to demand for engineers and scientists. Are there enough people in the world with appropriate skills to handle a doubling of chip demand?
0:57 - you say 400+ billion, the graph shows 40 billion - Which is it?
Chips for th F-35? They use 20 year old PowerPC chips. So the main challenge would be to find something that old. If they don't get them they can just connect a few typewriters...
Presenter got great teeth!
Without Dutch ASML chipmachines ,nothing is gonna happen !
You underestimate the efficasity of the brute force the american army has.
that's European one
Edit: not only Dutch
@@herrputschy54 ASML & NXP both hatched from Philips !
ASML is a Dutch multinational company specializing in development and manufacturing of photolithography systems. Currently it is the largest supplier of photolithography systems for primarily the semiconductor industry. The company manufactures machines for the production of integrated circuits.
-founded in 1984 as a joint venture between the Dutch companies Advanced Semiconductor Materials International (ASMI) and Philips-
@@ihatehandles3 You underestimate the power of a future without chipmachines , the tech inside can't be reproduced its to complicated .
@@MrLlcoolveer The laser mirrors and the optics come from Germany.
A good European cooperation.
Probably because the French are not committed.
Transporting in process chips? Will they be packed in nitrogen filled bags?
Musk: i feel like making some chips.
Domestically produced RISC-V chips!
RISC-V is still some 10 years away to competing at the high-end. It's only started entering the lowend market.
@@autohmae it's not like you're going to be gaming on your electric water kettle or slow cooker. Small, simple chips make up a huge amount of the chip market.
@@simoncleret Sure but also extremely cheap and low margin. So the calculation of 'market share' is usually expressed in a currency when it's about chips. And also the military, etc. where it counts for domestic (because it can't easily be re-created) is at the highend. Their are some higher end RISC-V chips produced in China I believe: XT910 Xuantie. But nobody has seen one working or did independent benchmarks, etc. as far as I'm aware.
@@autohmae There are some RISC-V SOC's about to hit the market, aren't there?
intel waited for you to drop this video so they can announce their new chips lol now you have to make a new one
looks like you are comparing transistor size between the different manufacturers which is really misleading.
Did I miss all of the parts mentioning AMD or is it just another Intel advertisement?
Can America win the chips war?
Lays: hold my bag
*pump more air in that pack o' Lays*
No
Microchips were invented and first manufactured in the United States. Early on the low level components of computers such as circuit boards and transistors were shifted to Asia because it was cheaper and because these operations were very toxic in nature. And as more and more of computing shifted from expensive, specialized high value computer servers to more general purpose servers running on Intel chips due to advances to Moore's law, competition started heating up on the race to faster speeds. That race meant pushing Moore's law and getting the most bang for the buck out of each process node. Most companies could not compete with Intel on manufacturing their own chips and thus sold off their foundries, such as AMD and IBM. So it is the race to faster chips that caused the growth of TSMC on one side.
Most chips made today are not super advanced high performance chips. These microchips are more mundane and seen in various applications across the spectrum and that side of the industry was long ago off shored due to being a low margin, high volume business. Meanwhile the United States focused mainly on R&D and IP licensing, such as IBM.
Now we are moving towards a new era of specialized chips for various applications at the high end, including chips for AI acceleration, new types of "general purpose" chips based on ARM designs and so forth. All of these types of chips also benefit from economies of scale and having one or two large foundries that keep costs low. That isn't going to change any time soon.
However, for specialized and non general purpose customized niche applications, such as military, research, scientific applications and so forth, you can always have smaller foundries created for just that purpose. The problem however is how much business will they get and will it be enough to cover their operations. It is impossible to say that the US government is going to force chip designers to buy their chips from an American foundry that doesn't exist. Sure the US could fund the development of such a corporation and help finance it, but would that cause companies to buy from them?
Este no está en el canal original ;-;
Wow. Analyzing this a week before the CPI came out for why used cars prices are up and new cars are in shortage because of semiconductors (microchips) in a supply chain holdup.
America can win with the potato chips war!
"When Apple designs the M1 chip ... you mean when Apple has the M1 chip designed in Israel, has it manufactured in Taiwan, buys memory and screens from South-Korea, has the product manufactured in China...
Oh sorry, please continue... you were talking about decoupling from Asia...
Oh please... the narrative of designed in the US. Huawei's chips designed in China were monsters... you hold some software patents and misuse the democratic alliance to prohibit sales of EUV (80% of its components are sourced in Japan). For the first time ASML has the upperhand in an industry that was dominated by Nikon amd Canon.
But again, continue reinforcing your story that the West designs and the East produces..
That's why USA is scratching its head. Coz semiconductor industry is being dominated by Asian companies , and Americans have no more monopoly .
@@mdhasmatalimondal1216 bro did you know that taiwan use U.S technology machine to make wafers right?
@@wangyi3537 I used to work at Applied Materials and I remember TSMC.
@@mdhasmatalimondal1216 The USA has a complete monopoly on advanced chips as they own the EUV technology used to make them and license it to lithography companies. The ONLY reason ASML became bigger than their Japanese counterparts is because the USA let them license the technology first and the USA can control who uses EUV technology.
@@nick21614 Which makes sense. I have been trying hard to figure out who is who in this whole thing, but it seems to me that the US was pretty nice to the world in choosing TSMC for this. They didn't have to.
Thanks for the vid! Maybe lessen the pauses and switch to music in between. It cuts the flow…
Is this channel based in the UK or the USA?
UK
Where is AMD on your first list? 🤔
Amd don't make there own chips
@@shaneoakes3201 AMD designs the chips just like Nvidia does and pays TSMC to make them.
@@shaneoakes3201 Neither does nVidia 😜
Another reason why Taiwan must stay independant
And no doubt, also the very same reason why China wants to see that it doesn't.
Nah. As a Taiwanese, I prefer the reunification of Taiwan and China over being fodder for US imperialism.
@@lolollolol1436 You are Chinese. No one believes you are Taiwanese.
@@lolollolol1436 the elections in Taiwan show that most don't want to join the mainland.
Whsre is ARM in the chip game?
Great breakdown. Hopefully Intels new leadership brings some better competition in the consumer space at least, and the server landscape.
Intel's new leadership? Just because they release a marketing statement so as to keep the stock price stable?
Interesting.
A few months late, but fleshes out what's common knowlege a little bit.
Intel will NOT recover from their self inflicted damages.
Yes, they will
American here and i got to say yes. my P1, P4 and core I7 all work great i should be just fine
German here, my 8 core 16 thread CPU also works fine for games and work and costs much less than comparable i7
Did they mention AMD even once?
Apple will love you forever for calling them the Cupertino company.
@Christopher Meisner Calling taiwan people chinese is the worst insult they can think of. Off course muricans do not understand that concept.
@@nielsdebakker3283 And still he calls others clueless. LOL
At least people in other places know where and what Taiwan is.
@Christopher Meisner
50+ countries are involved in the iPhone supply chain.
Looks like Intel has a chip on their shoulders.
the major trend in the financial world is quantum combinatorics, AKA quantum computing. Deployment is already expected to happen within 2 to 3 years, and public deployment in 5 to 7 years.
Now be a good courier, and deliver it.
Buy TSMC shares..
Washington should have considered how important chip making, and other high tech industries are before they allowed yuppie corporate raiders to destroy US industrial capacity.
Gee, what if international companies could influence American legislatures and administrators to do their bidding?
What evidence is there that "yuppies" destroyed US industrial capacity?
@@rabokarabekian409 ,
Just look at the history of corporate raiding and the yuppie corporate raiders behind it. Corporate raiders destroyed many viable companies to get at the pensions and profit in many other non productive ways. Raiders pushed short term investment thinking that hampered the sort of long term mind set necessary to running competitive chip making, and other high tech industries.
The entire US corporate structure was upended by yuppie financial professionals, but corporate raiders committed the most egregious offenses to US industrial capabilities by selling manufacturing facilities to foreign, especially Chinese interests. The yuppie raiders forced short term thinking on American industry at the expense of proper long term investment in productive enterprise. The entire US rare earth industry was sold to Communist China in the early 1990s right under regulators' noses. This never would have been allowed during the Cold War, and it never should have been allowed after the cold War, either.
There are certain industries that are too important to allow greedy, selfish, dishonest, traitorous yuppie corporate raiders to sell out to foreign interests. Among them is all basic smokestack manufacturing, all high tech manufacturing, mining, and control of domestic materials, food, resources, and finances, to name just a few. Jimmy Carter's gift of the Panama Canal back to Panama was a huge mistake as well. Carter did no favors for Panama, who now lost the Canal at both ends to Communist China as part of the Belt and Road debt trap.
Someone at Intel decided that instead of ordering new modern FAB's; they would give them selves pay rises instead.
Lol, one year ago they even canceled the new machines from ASML...
It is brilliant and I'm from the Republic of Kiribati would like to inform the USA that, the connection form Vodafone and Oceanlink is very poor compare to communication expenses is much more costly so if could help us to use internet connections more effectively and efficiently.
Where is my damn GPU!
Ask crypto miners pre ordering 60k GPU's at once at retail price to dig bitcoin. I want new as well ;/
@@Petrezen1982 hope ETH crashes
To be honest "They had us in the first half"
If itel failed to beat TSMC and Samsung.US govt can kidnap boss of TSMC and Samsung for infringing US sanction law. This is an area USA is good at. They did to Japan, France and lately on China.
@@user-ep3zs4vd4j I hope they wouldn't or shouldn't.
I believe Jon and Ponch can overcome...
Nice shirt
No, if and only if; American capitalism is fixed, American educational system is fixed, American tax system is fixed, and in the short term Americans politics stop pandering to old archaic and costly industries or keep creating costly policies at taxpayer expense to keep these old Industries being a leading indicator in American economy. So, no.
The usa is falling behind in everything nowdays.
Will be hard to turn that around.
Simple way to allocate budget. Stop waging war
When you have a capital market rewarding for short term profit and overlook long term strategic investments, this is exactly why US is losing all these battles.
Bingo. It takes a while to erode away, but eventually you will end up falling behind.
Intel lost the war and trump said TSMC, move to USA, you're Intel now, oh yeah.
*What happened to Simon the Ostrich?*
4:38 "keep our country at the top"'
Bruh, youre NOT at the top NOW. not by a long shot actually...
IBM creates the world’s first 2 nm chip.
www.reuters.com/technology/ibm-unveils-2-nanometer-chip-technology-faster-computing-2021-05-06/
Yeah, if you ignore our world leading chip design. Lmao
@@user-pq3ro9xr3j Lol 2nm chip is only a lab sample and will take years to get in production.
Also... the chip used by USA companies are mostly designed in other countries.
So yes... what is left is marketing in the usa.... and that will be the next step to fall.
TSMC is quite ahead of Intel at the moment. Will Intel be able to catch up? I doubt it, once you lost the race it is incredibly difficult to get back in it.
Agreed. I dont think intel will ever catch up - TSMC is throwing too much money at it.
However, Intel has a good future ahead. More low nm capacity for the global market will always be welcome for consumer products.
They announed a chiplet strategy with their processors as well - probably ordering cores at TSMC, and making their own I/O chips on a bigger node - very similar to AMD's strategy currently.
What may kill them is if they lose the server market to AMD - intel may only make wifi chipsets then xD
Or perhaps they ll go full GPU production... who knows.
I agree. It took AMD a lot of time to get back to the top tier of PC processors. x86 architecture that intel was focusing on is in decline. Yes we are using it in PCs, servers and most laptops, but everything else in running on RISC chips like ARM.
Intel will have hard times getting back into a dominant position, they might have lost the game for good.
@@pingwingugu5 keep in mind that AMD also same position as Intel in terms of x86 focus. Also you forgot to mention game consoles, which mostly run on x86 ( Switch is ARM though).
I think Intel can catch up if TSMC suffers slowdowns and delays in the future nodes. That said I agree it is difficult.
@@HexerPsy Obviously we need to separate Intel semiconductor desing from Intel fab. For a few decades we saw fabs fall everywhere, until only Intel, TSMC and GF remained for X86-CPU's and now basically only TSMC and Intel for X86-CPU's. None of the companies which dropped off could get back in the race.
Intel as a semiconductor designer certainly is not out of the race yet. I think that it is fair to state that AMD at the moment has the better architecture. I am not negative about Intel's 11*-series CPU's, the single core performance is quite good but the cores are too large on their highly optimized '14 nm' node. I am curious how it will work out on a better node. For design you don't need to invest as much as for a fab and only a few geniuses is all that you really need to get a great design, AMD has shown that with Mark Papermaster and of course Jim Keller.
@@kicapanmanis1060 This video is about the fab, AMD does not even have a fab, unfortunately. If you know the history then you might agree with me that Intel had a lot to do with that (anti-competitive behavior including illegal offenses) but that is all in the history. Intel will probably gradually also use TSMC more to produce the CPU's, they will have to to remain competitive unless they can get their fab-problems solved. I don't think it is a bad thing that designers don't have fabs but it is a bad thing to have so little competition, both for fabs and for X86-design.
Intel 10 nm is about equivalent to Tsmc 7nm. The size comparison is no longer straightforward as different foundries define their leading edge differently. This distinction needs to be make clear. Then it be much more obvious why Intel will be 1-2 years behind.
Russia also has a chip building industry with its own brand, although currently not as advanced as the western ones but maybe enough to fulfill the demand for it's domestic uses and even maybe export to other countries to manufacture low tech products which can possibly compete due to their much lower prices.
They would need to be able to scale production if they want to compete with TSMC or ASML, and Russia has a tendency to not properly fund the sectors of the future.
Not gonna happen russia is batter then it comes to energy industry but not when it comes to tech TMSC(Taiwan) And Samsung(Korea) is far ahead of anyone and china invested 236% in semiconductor and india is another possible because of their IT industry is massive but not Russia beacuse they can't invest any money into it or have experience
Russia produces its own electronics for its developed aerospace industry (Su-35S,Mig-35,Su-57) and likely also for power plants but I don't see a Russian processor in my next PC anytime soon...
Yes. They have AMD and Apple. China has a “thousand core” 2 core processor on a 28nm process
@HMS Blackprice Taiwan isn't really China. And AMD is looking at opening up a few fabs elsewhere.
@HMS Blackprice well, Intel’s already got 10nm on their laptop chips.
@@soreloser6018 AMD doesn’t have fabs, but yeah I’m pretty sure tsmc has a fab or smth like that in China
@ea s False
😆
It will take time... But imagine when China develops technology independent of American dependence, Americans will loose a lot of potential customers.
Please do your research!
China is super behind
Intel Should have opened their Fabs to third parties years ago. They could have tapped into military industrial complex and automobile industry
I’m happy that the journalist is wearing normal clothes in this video.