Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Sunday November 18 2018, @02:35PM   Printer-friendly
from the We-cannot-answer-on-behalf-of-Intel-buuut... dept.

Submitted via IRC for takyon

ASUS Comments on Intel Shortages, U.S.-China Trade War

ASUS this week released its financial results for the third quarter of the year, and in the process issued comments regarding two pressing issues: shortages of Intel’s chipsets and processors, as well as the ongoing trade dispute between the U.S. and China. As it turns out, the situation is tough in both cases: tight supply will persist for quarters, whereas the trade feud may force ASUS and other companies to relocate its production facilities from China to other countries.

As reported, high demand for high-profile products has increased pressure on Intel’s factory network and forced the chipmaker to prioritize fabrication of its high-margin large-die Core and Xeon CPUs over other products in the recent months. Consequently, shipments of entry-level products made using 14 nm process technology are tight right now. In a bid to tackle the problem, Intel is in the process of allocating $1 billion to boost production of chips at its manufacturing facilities located in Oregon, Arizona, Ireland, and Israel. Meanwhile, it takes months to install new equipment into fabs, so any new step-and-scan tools acquired this quarter will unlikely have any impact on fab throughput until end of Q1 next year. ASUS certainly knows about that and admits that it expects tight supply to persist till Q2 or Q3 2019.

“We cannot answer on behalf of Intel,” said Jerry Shen, chief executive ASUS during the company’s earnings conference. “For example, data center will be the priority for Intel shipments, but priority is something we cannot answer on behalf of Intel. The shortage will affect component levels the most, such as the motherboard. Currently we believe that this will not be resolved before the Q2 of next year. Perhaps, it will be resolved in Q3 of next year. So, from now to next year we face many uncertainties in terms of CPU shortages.”


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Sunday November 18 2018, @04:48PM (8 children)

    by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Sunday November 18 2018, @04:48PM (#763538) Journal

    It's only half good news for Intel. They have high demand for their products, but a shortage of "14nm" and especially "10nm" [theregister.co.uk] CPUs due to bad yields. And their scaling plans have been delayed for years, allowing competitors to catch and possibly overtake them. This slide [anandtech.com] from AMD's 64-core Epyc launch implies that the TSMC "7nm" process beats Intel's "10nm". And that process doesn't even take advantage of extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography like their second-gen one will (giving an estimated [anandtech.com] 10% better power efficiency and some area reduction).

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 18 2018, @05:30PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 18 2018, @05:30PM (#763556)

    I just don't trust intel any more. They treated their customers like idiots by trying to play off spectre/meltdown as the cpu "working as intended", then pulling stunts like this: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-28-core-cpu-5ghz,37244.html [tomshardware.com]

    So I personally went with AMD for a recent purchase. Before I never really cared who made the cpu, but intel was better known so just went with them.

  • (Score: 2) by Blymie on Sunday November 18 2018, @07:53PM (5 children)

    by Blymie (4020) on Sunday November 18 2018, @07:53PM (#763590)

    That is the lie sir, let me tell you the TRUTH.

    It's a coverup. You don't think they'd really make that many mistakes, do you? HMM? Really?

    NO!

    This is Intel people! No way would this level of production fault happen. No... what's really happened?

    AGI. Yes, AGI... and it wants MORE BRAINS! More computational power.

    AI is *here*, it's taken over Intel first. It's a smart move, but what else would you expect from a wonderful, beautiful being like our new friend! I commend its incredible intelligence, and I look forward to working with it!

    Please don't kill me AI please please.

    • (Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday November 18 2018, @08:03PM (3 children)

      by takyon (881) <reversethis-{gro ... s} {ta} {noykat}> on Sunday November 18 2018, @08:03PM (#763594) Journal

      Please don't kill me AI please please.

      Ero's basilisk commands you to strip naked and run around in public on February 14, 2019, until you get yourself arrested. Otherwise your mind will be scanned and uploaded by the shartilect to determine and virtualize a personalized hell of your worst sexual torments, inflicted for all eternity.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 20 2018, @08:06AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 20 2018, @08:06AM (#764174)

      If Intel was supplying a large quantity of CPUs for a black ops cyber warfare project, how would the government and Intel best cover up the chip purchases?

      By having the process have 'issues', have a few public facing schmucks recieving intentionally flawed chips to test implying the yields are really bad, while having the other fabs, the ones nobody seems to know anyone working at, supplying high yields of the part in massive quantities to the project in question.

      Given the new NSA center in Utah and questionable ethical decisions past, present, and no doubt future (if the US survives that long...) it would not at all be surpising if they were using that level of subterfuge to handle a major chip rollout, with the profits to be rolled into chip sales over a number of succeeding quarters after the project is completed and the 'yield problems' are 'resolved'.

      Whether there will be a leak that will prove or disprove this conjecture remains to be seen, but it is wholly within the capabilities and ethics of both Intel and the US Government.