News U.S. Cannot Halt China's Semiconductor Advance to 5nm: Ex TSMC VP

[thestryker]

As the article said, multi-patterning takes longer and hurts yield, both of which serve to limit fab throughput on these advanced nodes.

The costs of multi-patterning are immense and while we'll probably never know the exact cost it's telling that this is a driving factor behind TSMC rushing N3E and Intel not licensing Intel 7 to anyone.

The costs involved for SMIC could definitely be hidden due to the way many Chinese companies do business and the national importance for the company. I doubt it's something they could feasibly deal with long term so I wouldn't be surprised to see a plateau of node improvement as lithography machines are developed.

 

[bit_user]

The costs involved for SMIC could definitely be hidden due to the way many Chinese companies do business and the national importance for the company. I doubt it's something they could feasibly deal with long term so I wouldn't be surprised to see a plateau of node improvement as lithography machines are developed.

It's not the costs that are the main issue, though. If they can't buy more lithography machines, the key point is that they'll be very limited in how many 5 nm wafers per month they can produce. That should ultimately be the limiting factor in how usable it is. Because of that, I wouldn't be surprised if they only make server CPU and AI chips with single-patterning, even though it means 7 nm.

 

[anonymousdude]

Isn't the big point of interest China's ability to develop the aspects of the significant portions that can't be done in China? It does seem the main focus on what China can't easily do is patterning wafers (at least as well as other countries) and that's the reason the US has gone after that specific element(s) (there are a couple other elements like the EDA and design software) to sanction as opposed to wider measures?

I was under the impression that the current sanctions have some people worried that this just accelerates China's drive to make sure that the portion that can't be done in China ATM becomes doable relatively quickly. Which articles like this and several other recent ones only serve to confirm their suspicions.

How much of this development was already expected though? We already knew 7nm was possible with just DUV as we saw TSMC and Intel do it. 5nm with DUV we also knew was possible. Intel, TSMC and Samsung just deemed the yields too low since EUV was available. IMO, I don't think we can really say at this point if anything has been accelerated yet, though I do understand the concerns.

It's not the costs that are the main issue, though. If they can't buy more lithography machines, the key point is that they'll be very limited in how many 5 nm wafers per month they can produce. That should ultimately be the limiting factor in how usable it is. Because of that, I wouldn't be surprised if they only make server CPU and AI chips with single-patterning, even though it means 7 nm.

Agreed. Costs in this scenario might as well be 0. China will prop up SMIC and any other company they deem essential. Production volume as you pointed out is the major limiting factor. At the end of the day you have to be able to make product to sell regardless of your technological prowess. How many times have we heard X company developed Y breakthrough and it just never comes to market? Also if you don't care about power efficiency, costs, and physical server footprint then you could just continue to make chips on 7nm. You get to the point where it's good enough for your needs.

 

[watzupken]

While this is an opinion of someone from TSMC, I feel this is spot on. It is not just about SMIC already having the tools to progress, but rather what we observed so far from SMIC/Huawei, just shows that sanction is ineffective. China is not some impoverished country that cannot afford to throw money at a problem. So sanctions are just speed bumps, and not an gantry to keep them out. Having said that, it may be too late to undo the effects of the sanction. China is not going to stop onshoring chip producing capabilities, and demand from the rest of the world will continue to fall as they won't just lose China as a customer, but more nations will start to diversify for fear of US sanctions in case they get into US's bad books.

 

[NinoPino]

More competition, more good for consumers.

If so, then this will stoke competition and innovation while lowering prices for consumers. Time will tell.

After past US bans and restrictions I bet they will use cutting edge nodes for internal server CPUs/GPUs demand.

 

[NinoPino]

Tariffs and/or blocking of chip sales by collective blocking by all Western Allied countries by adversarial nations would limit their market reach.

Chinese money can buy market share very easily.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

Chinese money can buy market share very easily.

RMB is not nearly as influential as it once was.

 

[NinoPino]

Only if it's fair competition. If it's unfair, like when China entered the market for rare earth minerals, then it will drive existing suppliers & supply chains out of business. The end result is actually fewer suppliers and less competition.

In a capitalistic system, whatever they do legally is fair competition. So what is the problem with rare minerals if they bought mines ?

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

In a capitalistic system, whatever they do legally is fair competition. So what is the problem with rare minerals if they bought mines ?

Dumping supply in markets with the goal of strangling out competition is illegal in most economies.

 

[NinoPino]

...rather one where they merely have a somewhat delayed effect that's yet to be fully observed.

It's a hope. Maybe at the time China will be at 3nm/2nm/1nm.

 

[NinoPino]

RMB is not nearly as influential as it once was.

Here in EU and also in Africa sure it is.

 

[NinoPino]

Dumping supply in markets with the goal of strangling out competition is illegal in most economies.

Dumping is not illegal, it is fought with duties and sometimes governments decide to block some goods.
Ironically both "import limitations" and "dumping" are anti-competitive measures.

 

[deesider]

How so? It's unlikely that they might have been produced without (some) US technology and, technically speaking, those companies were not allowed to use those technologies to produce 7nm semiconductors. Of course no ones give two expletives about US sanctions in China, but it does matter when it comes to commercialising the product elsewhere. Going forward SMIC's 7nm, if they can keep up with production, might be found in Russia and other countries that are not very friendly with the US, but it's decidedly unlikely to appear elsewhere.

There is no sanction on SMIC producing 7nm semiconductors. The sanctions being referred to are export restrictions to prevent certain advanced technology being sold to manufacturers in China. They are not restrictions on the use of that technology in China, and are not intended to be since that would have no effect or any legal bearing. As a sovereign nation, the government of China can overrule any commercial licensing agreement or patent restriction it pleases - exactly as the US government is doing itself by applying the sanctions that restrict private companies from selling equipment into China.

In any case, those export sanctions are irrelevant, since the point of the article is that SMIC is producing 7nm semiconductors using deep UV equipment that it already has - before any sanctions were applied that might have prevented that equipment being exported to China. The article also notes that DUV equipment can be used to produce 5nm semiconductors by combining multiple masks that essentially overcome the relative fuzziness that would be avoided by using more advanced EUV equipment.

 

[bit_user]

It's a hope. Maybe at the time China will be at 3nm/2nm/1nm.

As the article points out, they accomplished this using ASML lithography machines they had previously purchased. To build their own comparable lithography machines will require years' worth of R&D - and that's just to reach the same point they're at now.

 

[The Historical Fidelity]

Dumping is not illegal, it is fought with duties and sometimes governments decide to block some goods.
Ironically both "import limitations" and "dumping" are anti-competitive measures.

Dumping is illegal according to the World Trade Organization when the country can prove market detriment and harm occurred due to it. Also most foreign trade agreements prohibit dumping. So yes it is illegal!

 

[bit_user]

Dumping is not illegal, it is fought with duties and sometimes governments decide to block some goods.
Ironically both "import limitations" and "dumping" are anti-competitive measures.

The WTO serves as a neutral body for litigating these cases. You can bring a case in WTO trade court against unfair trade practices and have the facts reviewed by a 3rd party. So, it's not usually as much "anything goes" as recent events might suggest.

BTW, the court considers any trade treaties the respective countries are a party to. If not, the WTO has some baseline rules that all members are supposed to follow. The baseline rules are established and voted on by all WTO members.

 

[George³]

First you have to prove that they are selling these raw materials at a loss, ie. that the sale prices do not compensate for all the costs incurred. Good luck with that, as long as you don't have any real ability to access the companies' corporate financial statements. The fact that something is offered at lower prices than all other competitors is not yet evidence of dumping. For example, there are countries in Africa with salaries of XX dollars a month and mining is tens of times cheaper than in the USA. These countries can, if they wish, sell at tens of times lower price and still make a profit.

 

[waltc3]

This is the only place I've read anywhere that says that US sanctions on China have anything to do with what products Chinese-owned Fabs can make. US sanctions involve only what products may be purchased by US companies & government, AFAIK. Particularly, the US government wants to ban all Chinese designed and made chips being used by the government and/or military--not in civilian use. It's due to a suspicion of backdoors the Chinese may have engineered into those chips. Trying to dictate to Chinese Fabs what nm production nodes they can use cannot possibly work. The only US entity I can think of that would back an unworkable, ridiculous sanction like that would be Intel, whose latest CPUs are still 10nm, apparently.

 

[endocine]

Its amazing what a dedicated and smart group of people can accomplish with spying and IP theft on an industrial scale

 

[George³]

Its amazing what a dedicated and smart group of people can accomplish with spying and IP theft on an industrial scale

Yesterday I almost caught a Chinese student with a stolen IP he was carrying in his pocket. But he surprised me with kung fu and now I suffer with bruises on my body and self-esteem. /s

 

[COLGeek]

It seems this thread has now run its course. Thank you to those who contributed and stayed on topic.