←back to thread

US Intel

(stratechery.com)
539 points maguay | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
themgt ◴[] No.45026515[source]
I’ll be honest: there is a very good chance this won’t work .... At the same time, the China concerns are real, Intel Foundry needs a guarantee of existence to even court customers, and there really is no coming back from an exit. There won’t be a startup to fill Intel’s place. The U.S. will be completely dependent on foreign companies for the most important products on earth, and while everything may seem fine for the next five, ten, or even fifteen years, the seeds of that failure will eventually sprout, just like those 2007 seeds sprouted for Intel over the last couple of years. The only difference is that the repercussions of this failure will be catastrophic not for the U.S.’s leading semiconductor company, but for the U.S. itself.

Very well argued. It's such a stunning dereliction the US let things get to this point. We were doing the "pivot to Asia" over a decade ago but no one thought to find TSMC on a map and ask whether Intel was driving itself into the dirt? "For want of a nail the kingdom was lost" but in this case the nail is like your entire metallurgical industry outsourced to the territory you plan on fighting over.

replies(19): >>45026609 #>>45026778 #>>45026847 #>>45027040 #>>45027203 #>>45027671 #>>45028085 #>>45028186 #>>45029665 #>>45029679 #>>45030185 #>>45031538 #>>45032843 #>>45034153 #>>45034357 #>>45034925 #>>45035444 #>>45035539 #>>45037189 #
mvc ◴[] No.45027203[source]
If all advanced countries follow this reasoning, where does that leave us?
replies(1): >>45027509 #
minkzilla ◴[] No.45027509[source]
Robust and redundant manufacturing spread across the world with more opportunity for innovation?
replies(1): >>45027711 #
mallets ◴[] No.45027711[source]
Trillions of dollars spent just for redundancy? Most wouldn't even succeed in building a working process, forget profitable.
replies(5): >>45029013 #>>45029726 #>>45029826 #>>45031965 #>>45034302 #
bee_rider ◴[] No.45029826[source]
I think it depends on what the goal is. Like, lots of countries (and probably a few US state) could, I bet, do their own foundries for, like, 22nm. Process node names are bullshit of course, but we’re talking about stuff that Intel was doing in 2012, Global Foundries in 2015.

22nm is already overkill for a lot of applications. But, like, if your country gets embargoed, you should be able to make computer chips for cars and farming equipment. Top end GPUs? Not necessary. Some basic RISC-V cpu for compute appliances? That should be a capability that everybody has.

replies(1): >>45034199 #
1. SlowTao ◴[] No.45034199[source]
That doesn't sound unreasonable. That is Ivy Bridge/Intel Core 3rd gen capabilities. You aren't running a generative AI but can do all manner of work loads. Combined with some software efficiency gains and you could be fairly comfortable.

This part of why I have been advocating for years that the open source/free software folks should be focusing on optimization and stability/security as long term it will probably be much more useful that adding features that can be dumped on top.