• GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Intel has only been behind for the last 7 years or so, because they were several years delayed in rolling out their 10nm node. Before 14nm, Intel was always about about 3 years ahead of TSMC. Intel got leapfrogged at that stage because it struggled to implement the finFET technology that is necessary for progressing beyond 14nm.

    The forward progress of semiconductor manufacturing tech isn’t an inevitable march towards improvement. Each generation presents new challenges, and some of them are quite significant.

    In the near future, the challenge is in certain three dimensional gate structures more complicated than finFET (known as Gate All Around FETs) and in backside power delivery. TSMC has decided to delay introducing those techniques because of the complexity and challenges while they squeeze out a few more generations, but it remains to be seen whether they’ll hit a wall where Samsung and/or Intel leapfrog them again. Or maybe Samsung or Intel hit a wall and fall even further behind. Either way, we’re not yet at a stage where we know what things look like beyond 2nm, so there’s still active competition for that future market.

    Edit: this is a pretty good description of the engineering challenges facing the semiconductor industry next:

    https://www.semianalysis.com/p/clash-of-the-foundries

    • Varyk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      25 minutes ago

      “Intel has only been behind for the last 7 years or so”

      what is your source for this?

      at what point was intel even at par with tsmc in semiconductor/fab quality and production?

      I’ve heard this twice now, but as far as I understand, Intel has never met the fabrication technology or demand that TSMC has and has been playing catch up for three decades.

      I’m very willing to read a sourced article offering more historical context.

      as for the article you’ve linked, it’s a more technical iteration of the “yea but maybe?” articles.

      There’s zero refutation of tsmc dominance and zero evidence of a true emergent competitor.

      “but it remains to be seen whether they’ll hit a wall where Samsung and/or Intel leapfrog them again. Or maybe Samsung or Intel hit a wall and fall even further behind. Either way, we’re not yet at a stage where we know what things look like beyond 2nm”

      their point is “heyvwe don’t know”, but if tsmc next-gen R&D and production fails, and if another company is able to close the distance between themselves and tsmc’s current held advantage, and if that theoretical company is then able to pull ahead with theoretical technologies, then TSMC might not be in first place in terms of semiconductor manufacturing.

      “but what if…” isn’t exactly a compelling or relevatory argument.

      if a new zero emissions concrete dropped tomorrow and if a company secured the funding to produce it commercially and if they partnered with a next-gen 3d-printing company and real estate developer exclusively committed to low-income housing, then they could build a national chain of economically viable housing units.

      None of that has happened and there’s no evidence of it happening, so it’s just a hypothetical series of events.