this post was submitted on 19 Nov 2024
12 points (100.0% liked)
Hardware
838 readers
353 users here now
All things related to technology hardware, with a focus on computing hardware.
Rules (Click to Expand):
-
Follow the Lemmy.world Rules - https://mastodon.world/about
-
Be kind. No bullying, harassment, racism, sexism etc. against other users.
-
No Spam, illegal content, or NSFW content.
-
Please stay on topic, adjacent topics (e.g. software) are fine if they are strongly relevant to technology hardware. Another example would be business news for hardware-focused companies.
-
Please try and post original sources when possible (as opposed to summaries).
-
If posting an archived version of the article, please include a URL link to the original article in the body of the post.
Some other hardware communities across Lemmy:
- Augmented Reality - [email protected]
- Gaming Laptops - [email protected]
- Laptops - [email protected]
- Linux Hardware - [email protected]
- Mechanical Keyboards - [email protected]
- Microcontrollers - [email protected]
- Monitors - [email protected]
- Raspberry Pi - [email protected]
- Retro Computing - [email protected]
- Single Board Computers - [email protected]
- Virtual Reality - [email protected]
Icon by "icon lauk" under CC BY 3.0
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I was always skeptical about China's 7nm fab process. It did not seem economically viable.
Their 7nm is fine, but it seems like their 5nm plans are over.
That's not what the information implies.
The quadruple patterning approach does not seem viable even if they can deliver products with 7nm.
What information? SMIC has been delivering 7nm chips for years.
Every single manufacturer (Samsung, TSMC, Intel) uses multiple patterning, it’s inevitable and in no way “not viable”. China’s problem is that they don’t have access to better equipment, so even multiple patterning techniques are not enough for good 5 nm.
I never claimed they haven't been delivering 7 nm. I claimed that it didn't seem viable and could be more of a state sanctioned push.
I am referring to this comment by Bloomberg:
Which is further by a more context:
That quote is disproven by the fact that you can order Huawei phones which contain 7nm chips. If they weren’t “able to secure enough smartphone processors” the phones would be sold out, as they couldn’t produce enough. You can call that low demand or whatever, but it seems obvious that they can produce enough 7nm chips to satisfy their customer needs.
Yes, multiple patterning techniques are not the most efficient, but they are pretty much required to work with these sizes. This is proven by the fact that every single company that makes 7nm and lower makes use of multiple patterning (TSMC, Samsung, Intel). Huawei’s problem is that they have old ASML equipment (DUV), which is enough for their customer demands at 7nm, but starts showing its age at smaller nodes.
I think readers can make up their own minds with respect to the article and your claims.