Hacker News Reader

Comment by mrtksn | Hacker News Reader

People root for anything-but-intel because competition is a good thing and intel had none for very long time.

I don't know where the notion of "Intel is about to die and TMSC will make us suffer due to monopoly" comes from but before having people cheer for Intel again they probably need some time to have their execs cure some disease in some poor part of the world, do a few AMAs on reddit, open-source something, donate to some cool projects in tandem with actually improving their products before regaining the goodwill of the people. Can take some clues from Bill gates and Microsoft.

The consumers are pissed. AMD's comeback is attracting a lot of fanfare because of people being sick of the not having an option beside "should I get i3, i5 or i7" for very long time.

View on HN

> TMSC will make us suffer due to monopoly

The fears have less to do with TSMC the company and more the fact it's a pawn in the geopolitical chess game between the US (and her pacific allies) and China.

The issues with supply chains through Taiwan have little to do with whether gamers are buying their CPUs from AMD or Intel, but the fact that a critical piece of infrastructure in the Western economy is very precariously located, and in the event of war or political strife is not going to be able to be mobilized for domestic (or even friendly-allied) production.

And moreover, is going to be instantly destroyed and unrepairable.

I agree with you. But I think it's a "can't-see-the-forest-for-the-tree symptom" that is possibly due to the typical HN demographics. It has been a decade or longer that the US relies on China manufacturing for industrial infrastructure that is as (or even more) critical as wafers. It doesn't help fix the problem by simply singling out semiconductors and keeping every other industry locked in China as-is.

All of those have second sources.

5nm silicon is, literally, the only thing that only one company can make.

It would have to be quite a long war where the military couldn’t rely on existing equipment and inventories of chips for a while. It’s not like most military equipment uses the latest CPUs anyway.

And if a war did drag on for years there would be opportunity to switch suppliers and manufacturers or build new infrastructure.

Some industries take decades to establish, you don't have 5-year stock of CPUs and you will probably be left high and dry if the supply is cut off by a natural disaster or something.

Where do you even get people with the knowledge required to run the 5nm fabs, there night be none at all on thr continent.

Who said anything about any wars? There are rumors abound about TSMC infrastructure being booby-trapped due to national security concerns. As soon as China reaches 14-28nm and is able to sustain internal needs using home grown foundries an "accident" in TSMC facilities could put mainland in a position of silicon leader for at least half a decade.

Why half a decade? They just have to buy new equipment. The know-how remains.

Sounds like US screw up to prevent a monopoly which is being broken by an outsider, now complaining that there are no western alternatives to the outsider.

Anyway, the machinery that TSMC is using is produced in Netherlands AFAIK. US should be fine, there's a lot of capital available to buy the machinery, recruit the talent and build the Fabs if it comes to TSMC not being reliable partner at some point.

Critical technologies like optical proximity correction are fab proprietary

That's why your recruit the talent too.

Even if TSMC is western comany, monopoly on bleeding edge process is bad for world. I wish no more fabs (TSMC, Samsung, Intel) drop out from the race.

Tech enthusiasm and criticism has become extremely cyclical in the past decade. It’s easy to forget that we were all cheering for Facebook and the Zuckerberg success story before it became uncool to be pro-Facebook.

Intel is stumbling, but up until very recently they were still the fastest gaming CPUs available. That didn’t stop gamers from criticizing them endlessly and cheering their demise. Intel went from cool to uncool.

Give it a few years and they might be able to leverage the underdog position into a comeback story.

> It’s easy to forget that we were all cheering for Facebook and the Zuckerberg success story before it became uncool to be pro-Facebook.

This is emphatically untrue. There was always a significant minority in "Hacker" and privacy circles that were intensely sceptical of Facebook in specific and "social media" in general.

Dude, I was never cheering Facebook.

The most positive opinion I have ever had of it could be described as indifference.

> leverage the underdog position into a comeback story

The comback story will need Intel to become more productive with CPU manufacturing R&D. Is there any reason why after such prolonged decline Intel may have a comback?

> I don't know where the notion of "Intel is about to die and TMSC will make us suffer due to monopoly" comes from

Semiconductor R&D costs have been going up, companies consolidating or went into niches. There are jokes about having to buy from The Semiconductor Company® in the future.

Intel is sitting on a lot of money, so they're not going to die soon. But they haven't been showing signs of improving the situation since 14nm was delayed in 2013. This saga didn't start with 10nm. Remember that the cadence used to be tick-tock every 18 months. We still can't get 10nm desktop chips. So there are some questions how they'll fare in the future.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com