StugStig

Neoliberals will do anything to downplay or outright deny any historical incident where import substitution lead to industrialization. Creating captive markets for the dumping of manufactured products was one of the prime drivers of colonialism, which continued under neocolonialism. With sanctions, the US is unintentionally undermining their own hegemony. Businesses like having access to markets and moats. They are giving moats to one side and stripping access to the other.

Sanctions will do for Chinese chip makers what the great firewall did for Chinese internet giants.

Seeing /u/dylan522p acknowledge reality somewhat is refreshing although the conclusion is the predictable "Washington is just sanctioning wrong, if they followed my foolproof sanction regime it would magically work". Liberals attacking him for this article is quite hilarious. They're really intolerant of even the slightest deviation from US state department rhetoric.

Sanctions really are the biggest own goal.

It would be the LEAP not the PD-14 in the MC-21, if not for sanctions. In normal conditions, it's a winner takes all market no matter how tiny the difference is every cent counts to carriers. Only the single most efficient engine available would've made sense and it turns out sanctions did just that.

The sanctions are the largest boon to Chinese semi tool companies; they were snubbed by big name Chinese tech beforehand. Now, fear and uncertainty of supply weighs down the western competition. ASML in China has been brought down to SMEE's level; next year, ASML can't sell anything more advanced than what SMEE can make.

SMIC would have the same issues as Global Foundries did with justifying the investment in 7nm. The few fabless companies in China that use leading edge processes are wedded to TSMC. If Huawei wasn't there as a guaranteed customer, SMIC wouldn't have been able to get their investment to pay off. Huawei didn't even consider domestic alternatives outside of what they themselves make before the sanctions. The Mi 10 Ultra, with a QCOM SoC, had more domestic parts than the Huawei equivalent.

Even advanced engines can't redeem the F-35 though, it's still slower than the JF-17.

SMIC is the fab that Huawei contracts to make the Kirin 9000S. Huawei has the capability to make most other chips itself just not mobile phone SOCs.

AMD always having the process advantage over Intel and Nvidia but still ending up as the underdog is puzzling.

AMD Zen 2 on 7nm should've destroyed Comet lake on 14nm but it didn't. Rocket Lake faired a lot worse against Zen 3 but it was an iffy 10nm to 14nm port job.

AMD Navi GPUs on 7nm somehow were less efficient than Nvidia's Turing on 12nm(16nm+) while also not having ray tracing or tensor cores. Nvidia were left cocky enough to go for Samsung's discount 8nm the gen after instead of attaining process parity.

It's going to get worse because the gains from each succeeding node diminishes so AMD can no longer count on the gains to make them competitive.

The full chart contains most modern chips from the 6 major ARM mobile SOC vendors. I just cropped it because it would've way too long otherwise. I also cropped it like that so that the number on the chart can be read as performance relative to the 865 without needing context.

It doesn't help that Qualcomm's 888, and 8 Gen 1 were a disappointment. Even more so since they were the debut of ARM's Cortex-X series of performance cores. Those were supposed to be ARM's attempt at matching Apple's custom cores. Thermal throttling issues meant that they weren't even real upgrades from the 865 in terms of sustained performance.

The original Kirin 9000 was from 2020. Hard to improve performance, if the US government is doing everything to hinder your ability to make chips in the first place. Huawei matching the original TSMC 5nm EUV chip with just SMIC 7nm DUV is a miracle.

Well look at the other contract fabs that could buy EUV scanners if they wanted to.

GlobalFoundries gave up on 7nm so 14/12nm is the best they have. UMC barely makes any 14nm chips so they definitely aren't pursuing anything below 7nm. Getting to 7nm is an investment few can make and it won't pay off for most. The number of fabless chip companies that can afford to design for <7nm and need the leading edge in performance is tiny. A high price of entry to serve so few customers.

SMIC is only the third pure play contract fab to offer <=7nm and Samsung needed EUV to get to 7nm unlike SMIC and TSMC.

Judging by the performance and density of the Kirin 9000S, SMIC's 7nm DUV is at least as good as Samsung's 5nm EUV. The same A510 cores made with SMIC's 7nm are as efficient if not more so than those made with Samsung 4nm.

The previous top Huawei phone, the P60 Pro has the 4G variant of the 8+ Gen 1, which was made with TSMC 4nm. The Mate 60 Pro being technically a downgrade in process node is something few if any of its users will actually notice in practice. Huawei could've easily just made a 5G modem and paired it with an 8 Gen 2. It would've been a lot easier to make a tiny modem yield but they chose the harder option of making an entire SOC. They succeeded in matching if not surpassing the TSMC 5nm made original that stopped being made on September 15, 2020. All the sanctions could do was delay further production of the Kirin 9000 for 3 years.

I don't think the CPU performance is down to optimization. The 4 custom Taishan performance cores having hyper threading is probably why. The Kirin 9000S has 8 cores / 12 threads, which is why the multi-core score is so high.

The GPU drivers definitely aren't ready yet; it can't render Genshin Impact correctly. It's not an ARM Mali reference design; it's Huawei own Maleoon 910. The only things from ARM are the Cortex-A510 efficiency cores, and the instruction set.

The Kirin 9000S is only 2% larger than the original 9000, which was made using TSMC 5nm. It performs far better than any 7nm chip.

CPU Performance almost matches the 4nm Exynos 2200, which because the 2300 was a no show is the best chip Samsung has.

GPU Performance although not a match for the original 9000 still exceeds the 5nm Snapdragon 888.

Geek Bench 5 Multi/Single core Scores

Geekerwan Review of the Kirin 9000S, with English subtitles

Source of the SD 865 relative performance charts

Qualcomm being the only company allowed to sell 4G SOCs to Huawei was a bullshit move in the first place.

The only reason Qualcomm sold so many to Huawei was because the US blocked Mediatek and UNISOC. The US government never gave a legitimate reason why they never granted permission to the competition that applied to supply Huawei.

Starfield demonstrates a complete lack of any cohesive vision in story, themes, and gameplay.

The artstyle has that generic "hard" space sci-fi look. I could just as well be looking at Star Citizen, Interstellar, or The Expanse. The locations might sound interesting in theory but are executed in the most bland way possible. It's kind of hilarious to think that these tiny settlements are supposed to be interplanetary capital cities. I do understand that unrestricted player movement means that they can't really place a massive city in the background like in the Mass Effect Trilogy but explicitly calling the places you visit capitals is absurd.

Bethesda tries hard to ape Serenity-esque space westerns with Akila. An interplanetary capital without paved roads in its main thoroughfare. It really clashes with the rest of the game's attempts at being seen as a believable "hard" sci-fi. A vision of a car free future brought to you by the limitations of the Creation Engine. The game engine is no excuse for not having a space horse though. Traversing procedurally generated terrain on foot is a waste of time.

The vaguely utopian corporate solarpunk of New Atlantis is soulless and not in the satirical good way. Which is ironic because it seems to be inspired by Starship Troopers.

Neon, the cyberpunk offworld oilrig tries and fails to be a hip seedy dystopia. It looks more like the Outer World's Groundbreaker Promenade than Mass Effect 2's Omega. It doesn't illicit feelings of despair from the callous disregard of humanity as a consequence of greed without limits. It's just a shopping mall with boring corporate suits who try to sound edgy.

The same goes for the music. It doesn't convey any emotion and isn't uniquely identifiable. Inon Zur's work for the Bethesda Fallouts weren't this forgettable so it's probably down to Bethesda's lack of direction. The music doesn't build into the atmosphere of any location or any story moment. I don't think Jeremy Soule would've made a difference, and it's good that Bethesda doesn't associate with an accused rapist. That said I'd still say his work with Oblivion was one the best soundtracks of any game.

Ship combat has controls like Freelancer except it plays terrible. The ships feel heavy and are unresponsive to control so it doesn't really work as an arcade space combat game. The mouse first controls with no flight stick support, fast travel, and the inability to actually dock/land manually make it an automatic fail as a spaceflight sim. The ability to fast travel instantly to any previously visited location is good though. With its quest design, it would be painful to play Starfield if they went the sim route.

The gun play is identical to Fallout 4 but plays worse due to procedurally placed enemies and levels. It has to rely on the AI, weapons and enemy design. None of those elements are able to make the fights interesting. It's still a lot better than any of the other spaceflight games with ground combat though.

The bar is being dropped so hard that Mass Effect Andromeda is retroactively becoming a great game. In the universe that Starfield is an 87, Andromeda is at least a 97.

I'll still play Starfield over Elite Dangerous, or No Man Sky since it has actual content. It isn't all procedurally generated and has an actual story with characters. I'll finish the main quest at least, the game isn't aggressively bad in anyway. It's just all around sterile and uninspiring. I still have the hope that somewhere out there I might find a branching side quest that is remotely as good as those in Oblivion, or New Vegas.

28nm is the nominal resolution of the scanner. The chips that can be made with a single exposure. In that measure no ASML DUV scanner is 7nm either. The physics of 193nm light makes it impossible for any DUV scanner to have a nominal resolution of 7nm. 7nm chips are made using DUV by exposing 4 times at a 28nm resolution. The same quad patterning techniques allows 22nm chips to be made with a 90nm machine.

The name is also misleading 7nm chips aren't sub 9nm. TSMC's 7nm chips are physically 10nm. The marketing names haven't matched for years. It all started when TSMC sold 20nm FinFET under 16nm branding as they believed the addition of FinFET gave it 16nm performance. Then the entire industry adjusted their naming conventions to match with TSMC.

SMIC, Huawei didn't get to where they are by compromising. They never would've bought the Chinese domestic alternatives if not for sanctions. Price doesn't matter in this industry, what they're looking for is the best in the market. This is not the type of capital equipment that subsidies can sell. Which is why when US scanner manufacturers couldn't compete with ASML, they completely failed as economically viable businesses and their assets were sold off.