Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC), the world's largest contract chip maker, is expected to announce a massive $100 billion investment in advanced semiconductor manufacturing facilities in the United States over the next three years. This substantial commitment aims to boost domestic chip production and reduce U.S. reliance on foreign suppliers, particularly in light of escalating tensions with China and growing concerns about semiconductor supply chain security. The investment includes plans for multiple new factories, potentially creating thousands of jobs.
TSMC is reportedly in talks with Intel to potentially manufacture chips for Intel's GPU division using TSMC's advanced 3nm process. This presents a dilemma for TSMC, as accepting Intel's business would mean allocating valuable 3nm capacity away from existing customers like Apple and Nvidia, potentially impacting their product roadmaps. Further complicating matters is the geopolitical pressure TSMC faces to reduce its reliance on China, with the US CHIPS Act incentivizing domestic production. While taking on Intel's business could strengthen TSMC's US presence and potentially secure government subsidies, it risks alienating key clients and diverting resources from crucial internal development. TSMC must carefully weigh the benefits of this collaboration against the potential disruption to its existing business and long-term strategic goals.
Hacker News commenters discuss the potential TSMC-Intel collaboration with skepticism. Several doubt Intel's ability to successfully utilize TSMC's advanced nodes, citing Intel's past manufacturing struggles and the potential complexity of integrating different process technologies. Others question the strategic logic for both companies, suggesting that such a partnership could create conflicts of interest and potentially compromise TSMC's competitive advantage. Some commenters also point out the geopolitical implications, noting the US government's desire to strengthen domestic chip production and reduce reliance on Taiwan. A few express concerns about the potential impact on TSMC's capacity and the availability of advanced nodes for other clients. Overall, the sentiment leans towards cautious pessimism about the rumored collaboration.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) has started producing 4-nanometer chips at its Arizona facility. US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo announced the milestone, stating the chips will be ready for customers in 2025. This marks a significant step for US chip production, bringing advanced semiconductor manufacturing capabilities to American soil. While the Arizona plant initially focused on 5-nanometer chips, this shift to 4-nanometer production signifies an upgrade to a more advanced and efficient process.
Hacker News commenters discuss the geopolitical implications of TSMC's Arizona fab, expressing skepticism about its competitiveness with Taiwanese facilities. Some doubt the US can replicate the supporting infrastructure and skilled workforce that TSMC enjoys in Taiwan, potentially leading to higher costs and lower yields. Others highlight the strategic importance of domestic chip production for the US, even if it's less efficient, to reduce reliance on Taiwan amidst rising tensions with China. Several commenters also question the long-term viability of the project given the rapid pace of semiconductor technology advancement, speculating that the Arizona fab may be obsolete by the time it reaches full production. Finally, some express concern about the environmental impact of chip manufacturing, particularly water usage in Arizona's arid climate.
Summary of Comments ( 679 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43243580
HN commenters are skeptical of TSMC's purported $100B investment, questioning whether it will fully materialize and expressing concern over the high cost of US chip fabrication. Several point out that TSMC's Arizona fabs are smaller and less advanced than their Taiwanese counterparts, suggesting the investment figure may include long-term operational costs rather than solely construction. Others discuss the geopolitical motivations behind the move, viewing it as a US strategy to secure its chip supply chain amidst rising tensions with China. Some highlight the challenges TSMC faces in the US, including higher labor and operating expenses, and potential difficulties attracting and retaining skilled talent. Finally, a few commenters raise concerns about the environmental impact of these large-scale fabs and the potential strain on local resources.
The Hacker News post titled "TSMC expected to announce $100B investment in U.S." discussing the linked Wall Street Journal article generated a significant number of comments exploring various angles of the potential investment.
Several commenters discussed the geopolitical implications, with some suggesting this move is driven by U.S. efforts to secure its semiconductor supply chain and reduce reliance on Asian manufacturers, particularly in light of increasing tensions with China. Others expressed skepticism about the long-term viability of such a massive investment, citing the significantly higher operating costs in the U.S. compared to Taiwan, including labor, land, and utilities. The discussion also touched on potential subsidies and government incentives that might be involved in making the investment attractive to TSMC.
A recurring theme in the comments was the concern about the potential "brain drain" from Taiwan, with speculation about whether TSMC would be able to attract and retain the necessary talent in the U.S. Commenters debated the quality of U.S. engineering talent and the cultural differences that might impact TSMC's operations. Some argued that the U.S. education system needs to be strengthened to support such advanced manufacturing endeavors.
Some commenters questioned the WSJ's reporting, pointing out the lack of specific details and the use of phrases like "expected to announce." They highlighted previous instances where similar announcements had not materialized or had been scaled back. Others expressed concern about the potential for political influence on TSMC's decision-making and the possibility of this investment being used as a political tool.
There was also a discussion about the potential impact on the global semiconductor market, with some suggesting that this investment could lead to increased competition and innovation, while others worried about the fragmentation of the supply chain and the potential for higher prices. Some commenters raised concerns about the environmental impact of such a large-scale manufacturing facility.
Finally, a few commenters offered personal anecdotes and experiences related to the semiconductor industry, providing insights into the challenges and opportunities associated with such large-scale investments. These comments added a human dimension to the discussion, highlighting the real-world implications of these geopolitical and economic forces.