31 comments

[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 77.5 ms ] thread
Somewhere along the line people have to realise most of the cost in chip design goes to software. So while it is nice to have some competition to ASML, it wouldn't change the cost equation as much as people expect.

And yes, ASML also have their own version using X-Ray in the pipeline.

You mean the cost of EDA software directly (paying Synopsys/Cadence for the software used to design, verify, and synthesize your own chips)? Or the actual R&D cost to design the chip itself? Or paying for prepackaged IP blocks (major ones like CPU cores, or lesser ones like I/O)?
this has 0 to do with price and if they win the fact that the US will choose its local competitor over them wouldnt be because of price
This doesn’t seem plausible. Leading edge lithography requires you to be at (or beyond) the cutting edge in many realms - even with a breakthrough in one realm, I don’t understand how a startup could expect to catch up to ASML across the board in a few years.

Their website is light on technical details and heavy on nationalistic fluff, which does not lend much confidence.

(comment deleted)
Their website is that way because the goal is to attract the attention of the administration.
I don't know much about the technical details of lithography, but I do know that EUV lithography is very new tech that has been in production for less than 10 years and the current machines are basically rube goldberg devices. Given my lack of technical knowledge here, I can't say whether or nor this startup in particular is legit, but it does seem very much like the type of thing that could be disrupted by someone who comes up with a new and massively simplified design.
It is actually relatively easy to make a lithography machine that can etch features beyond what EUV can do. You simply use an electron scanning beam rather than photons.

It's what the industry uses to create the masks used in lithography machines, but it could just as easily be used to make the actual chip. The problem is that it doesn't scale, at all. A scanning process is way too slow to be useful in mass production.

Thus you should always be skeptical when someone says they've built a machine that beats ASML's machines, because that's actually the easy part. The hard part is scaling it up.

> investments from the Central Intelligence Agency-backed nonprofit firm In-Q-Tel

The CIA has stolen trade secrets in the past and the only thing that stopped them in recent history is their own policies. The CIA has a new director that has been violating international law more openly than ever.

> US startup Substrate announces chipmaking tool that it says will rival ASML

Typical investor bullshitting. They have some pictures. No process. Nothing

> If you show revenue, people will ask 'HOW MUCH?' and it will never be enough. The company that was the 100xer, the 1000xer is suddenly the 2x dog. But if you have NO revenue, you can say you're pre-revenue! You're a potential pure play... It's not about how much you earn, it's about how much you're worth. And who is worth the most? Companies that lose money!
Just a few days ago this company came up on HN as part of a substack post which pointed out the numerous warning signs that this company is likely a scam, so its crazy to see them given so much credulous reporting from mainstream media.

After persuasively demonstrating an inability to ship a fancy alarm clock even with 100MM in funding at his last startup, the founder has now decided to turn his attention to easily surmounting the decades of insane hard science and engineering that forms ASML's moat. Of course if this goes the way of the alarm clock startup there's also the fusion startup he's running that could form a fallback...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45767013

The issue with x-ray lithography has always been... the cost. Just the cost of making a mask for one of these systems makes it unusable in industry. Would be interested to hear what they did to get costs down.
Japan has also made some strides in this area, reported here a few months ago.

"Professor Shintake aligned two axis-symmetric mirrors in a straight line and used a total of only four mirrors instead of ten.

"Because highly absorbent EUV light weakens by 40% with each reflection, only about 1% of the energy from the light source reaches the wafer when bounced off ten mirrors while more than 10% does when only four mirrors are used."

https://asiatimes.com/2024/08/japan-on-edge-of-euv-lithograp...

Edit: "Substrate said that it has developed a version of lithography that uses X-ray light."

I can announce a warp drive and a picometer chip process, just give a dollar, pretty please.
They seem to have learned a lot from Theranos. I wonder if they will have the same fate.
I'll believe it when they ship.
When will production line be build and operational? When will the new chips ship? This or next quarter?
What chemistry would they use for the photoresist type resins?
Samsung has access to the same ASML tools but has much lower yield than TSMC. Chip making is hard.
So if I have no values at all VCs will give me millions? That must be what I’m doing wrong.
stratechery had an interview w the founder, an interesting Brit but also a Thiel acolyte/investee, for better or worse. Ben also has tended a little too ...uncritical of tech boosterism these days, but I suppose the interview is good data
More Silicon Valley fraud that will likely be rewarded by the current administration.
>"at a high rate of throughput"

will "high rate" or "high throughput" do or it is just me?

You know who is going to develop cutting edge EUV+ lithography to rival ASML? It's not this startup (most likely). It's China.

Chipmaking is in a very weird geopolitical state and it has national security interests for most of the world. A Dutch company produces the machines to make chips and sells them to Taiwanese companies. The US still has the power to dictate who ASML can sell to and China is restricted.

This system has a number of flaws:

1. With this administration torching US influence at a never-seen-before rate, the US may no longer be able to dictate terms to ASML. At some point, it's all going to be too much for the EU;

2. Taiwan is disputed territory. This statement tends to make people mad but it's true. China claims it as China but, more importantly, the One China policy is official policy of the US [1] and the EU. Yet the US also has a defence pact with Taiwan. Not that it matters because China simply doesn't have the military capability to invade Taiwan and I honestly don't think they would anyway; and

3. The US has basically lost the ability to fab chips. Yes, Intel exists but they are a shadow of their former selves. The CHIPS Act tried to rectify this but even if this administration hadn't basically abandoned it, I don't think the US can see this one through regardless of administration. It's too long term. Any US company now that gets government aid just uses it on more executive compensation and share buybacks. Everything is now so financialized that any ability to produce anything is really just inertia from a bygone era.

China has the exact same national security concerns except it has a proven track record of investing in and delivering long-term projects.

[1]: https://www.csis.org/analysis/what-us-one-china-policy-and-w...

Regular viewers of Asianometry channel will probably know that this is unlikely
(comment deleted)