14 comments

[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 35.5 ms ] thread
Most consumers would do fine with like .25 Apple M1's worth of compute.
The world is probably going to be split between EUV and non-EUV lithography for a long time. I'd like to see things like the Raspberry Pi stay on the older nodes and just wring out the performance. For reference the Zen1 CPUs were on 14/12nm from GF and I believe they are still faster than the pi, so there is room for improvement from them on old nodes.
Have you checked RAM prices lately ...
(comment deleted)
Looks like I’ll need to put that home server together sooner rather later
Yes. They should open a FabStore and make Apple pay 30% of their revenue.
This would make sense if Apple sells the chips
I have been interested in city planning for a while and the idea of an 'urban growth barrier' is a key concept with massive benefits. Basically, when you limit a resource, like available land, it simplifies thinking, forces inward development and and very often the 'impossible' problems go away because creative solutions come out. Maybe the chip industry will see something similar if a barrier of 'just wait till the new smaller process hits' gets put in place.
(comment deleted)
>post decides to use the most crusty GenAI image possible

Man, what a cancer. Straight up using the bare TSMC logo here would work just fine.

The Nvidia 3000 series were on Samsung's process since it was quite a bit cheaper than the TSMC process at the time. Samsung has already said it intends to undercut TSMC so assuming they are fairly equivalent it doesn't seem unreasonable for consumer CPUs and GPUs to be made on their process, it gives a price advantage to anyone that makes the move.
3% to 5% more expensive every year - that is similar to or less than inflation. Given their dominance, i'm genuinely curious why they don't raise it by 20% a year. Or 50%?