China

China’s plan to leapfrog foreign chipmakers: Wave goodbye to silicon

Moore's Law could soon be a dead letter. That's fine by Beijing.

A chip in a hand

The idea that dominant chip makers — who are overwhelmingly foreign — face a near-certain obstacle has become a beacon of hope for Chinese firms, which analysts say lag at least one to two wafer generations behind their competitors.

Image: Niek Doup / Protocol

A new concept is on the lips of everyone in China's semiconductor industry: the "Post-Moore's Law Era." It's a term that conveys not frustration, but rather hope for China's ability to someday surpass the West's indigenous chip capacity.

Since its initial mention by Chinese Vice Premier Liu He at a meeting on innovation in digital electronics in May, it has been quoted with regularity by Chinese academics, municipal governments, industry journals, private companies and other observers concerned with China's lackluster standing in the global chip sector.

The idea is simple: By 2025, scientists believe, advances in chip technology will no longer keep up with Moore's Law. Coined by Intel co-founder Gordon Moore, the rule states that transistors per unit area double every one to two years. While Moore's prediction has so far proven accurate during an era of dramatic improvements in chip performance, in the future engineers expect to hit the physical limits of existing chip materials, such as silicon. That will result in a drop-off in chip technology advancements unless alternatives are devised.

The idea that dominant chip makers — who are overwhelmingly foreign — face a near-certain obstacle has become a beacon of hope for Chinese firms, which analysts say lag at least one to two wafer generations behind their competitors. For example, research conducted by the U.S.-based think tank Information Technology & Innovation Foundation (ITIF) suggests that, in logic chips, Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation (SMIC), China's largest chipmaker, manages scale production at the 14nm level, whereas South Korean Samsung and Taiwan-based TSMC are able to accomplish 5nm. On the memory chip side, U.S.-based Micron and Samsung lead with 10nm wafers, while China's best, Changxin Memory Technologies, only manages 19nm.

To pin down the next fundamental semiconductor material, whatever that may be, could give Chinese firms a shortcut to competitiveness or even allow them to leapfrog foreign competitors.

To this end, Beijing has announced it will research alternative substances to help its advanced chip technology drive.

In August, China's Ministry of Industry and Information Technology unveiled plans to include "carbon-based materials" in its plan to achieve "breakthrough" technologies. Namely, the ministry will incorporate carbon fiber, graphene, silicon carbide and other carbon-based composites into the country's 14th Five-Year Plan's raw materials development strategy as well as its 14th FYP's scientific innovation strategy.

It marks China's highest-level backing of this research to date, after various industry observers, including the MIIT's own affiliated technology journal, discussed the possibilities such materials presented in a series of articles exploring the "Post-Moore's Law Era."

"We need more breakthroughs in theoretical research, especially in the fields of compound semiconductor and material science, which are led by the U.S. and Japan," Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei said during a private speech at an August innovation summit.

"If we pursue only what's practical, we may forever lag behind," Ren said.

Not tried and true

Even with support from the central government, there's no guarantee China will pull ahead in semiconductors. For one, pursuing unproven technologies would mark a drastic new business model for China's wafer companies, for whom R&D has not traditionally been a priority.

For one, the country continues to throw money at manufacturing over design. During its first phase spanning 2014 to 2019, the giant, state-led National Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund, which raised a total of RMB 138.7 billion (USD $21.7 billion), spent two-thirds of its invested funds on fabrication companies. According to German think tank Stiftung Neue Verantwortung, as of mid-2020, less than 1% of the fund's investments were made in domestic electronic design automation (EDA), software tools used to draw up new chips.

Similarly, according to ITIF, R&D at Chinese semiconductor companies accounted for just over 8% of sales in 2018, in contrast with U.S. firms' 18%, EU companies' 14% and Taiwanese firms' 10%. Likewise, Chinese companies held just over 6% of the semiconductor patents granted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office in 2018, a fraction of those granted to firms based in the U.S., Japan, Taiwan and South Korea, with 29%, 23%, 17% and 14% respectively.

"If you're getting 40% of your revenues, as SMIC is, from the Chinese government, then you have a source of income that isn't as reliant or dependent upon you innovating the next generation of products," ITIF Vice President of Global Innovation Policy Stephen Ezell said during an online seminar in July.

Yangyang Cheng, a postdoctoral fellow at Yale Law School who researches the history of science in China, echoed this sentiment. "This kind of hardware development takes a very long time," she told Protocol.

Making reference to China's history of persecuting scientists and intellectuals, especially under Mao Zedong's rule, Cheng said that the country has hamstrung its own progress relative to those that never stopped chasing tech advancements.

"If there's a few decades being lost because of political campaigns or different kinds of strategies, then this is time that will be paid for later," she said.

What's more, Cheng said, the emphasis on speed disincentivizes unglamorous fundamental research in favor of sensational claims, such as in the case of a distinguished, young Chinese computer scientist who declared he had created one of the country's first microchips in 2003, later discovered to be based on a design by Motorola.

"These seem like isolated incidents, but … [they] speak to some systemic issues and play into the current state where China does lag behind," Cheng said.

Separation anxiety

To be sure, China continues to court foreign companies despite the decoupling rhetoric, export restrictions and scrutiny in merger and acquisition attempts from a growing number of Western governments, calling into question the vehemence of the new R&D push.

Data from the Chinese Ministry of Commerce shows that, in 2020, China's overseas tech investments jumped. According to its September report on last year's outbound foreign direct investments, spending on information transmission, software and IT service industries grew 67.7% year-over-year to $9.19 billion, while investments in overseas scientific research and technical service industries also grew 8.7% YOY, to $3.73 billion.

At home, meanwhile, the MOC is pressing foreign companies, including Intel, Germany's Infineon, French-Italian STMicroelectronics, U.S. chip industry association SEMI and others on cross-border collaboration. Items on its wishlist include core IP, tech transfers, EDA, packaging, production, training and more.

These kinds of partnerships, along with trends such as talent acquisition from foreign firms, universities and Silicon Valley remain gray areas where governments are slow to respond, according to Dylan Patel, chief analyst at SemiAnalysis, who characterized some of these efforts as "poaching."

However, given the high precision required of semiconductors, making disruption by carbon materials potentially "10 years away forever," the battle for the foreseeable future will remain in the realm of existing chip technologies that are not exclusive to the most advanced companies, he said.

"The majority of chips made are not bleeding edge, so you can eat that value chain and move up," Patel said, citing China's continued appetite for chip manufacturing. "For China it's very important to transition from the current [industrial society] to services, to an industrial powerhouse. This sort of transition needs to happen or the economy will stagnate, so these sorts of investments need to be made."

Policy

Musk’s texts reveal what tech’s most powerful people really want

From Jack Dorsey to Joe Rogan, Musk’s texts are chock-full of überpowerful people, bending a knee to Twitter’s once and (still maybe?) future king.

“Maybe Oprah would be interested in joining the Twitter board if my bid succeeds,” one text reads.

Photo illustration: Patrick Pleul/picture alliance via Getty Images; Protocol

Elon Musk’s text inbox is a rarefied space. It’s a place where tech’s wealthiest casually commit to spending billions of dollars with little more than a thumbs-up emoji and trade tips on how to rewrite the rules for how hundreds of millions of people around the world communicate.

Now, Musk’s ongoing legal battle with Twitter is giving the rest of us a fleeting glimpse into that world. The collection of Musk’s private texts that was made public this week is chock-full of tech power brokers. While the messages are meant to reveal something about Musk’s motivations — and they do — they also say a lot about how things get done and deals get made among some of the most powerful people in the world.

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.

Sponsored Content

Great products are built on strong patents

Experts say robust intellectual property protection is essential to ensure the long-term R&D required to innovate and maintain America's technology leadership.

Every great tech product that you rely on each day, from the smartphone in your pocket to your music streaming service and navigational system in the car, shares one important thing: part of its innovative design is protected by intellectual property (IP) laws.

From 5G to artificial intelligence, IP protection offers a powerful incentive for researchers to create ground-breaking products, and governmental leaders say its protection is an essential part of maintaining US technology leadership. To quote Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo: "intellectual property protection is vital for American innovation and entrepreneurship.”

Keep Reading Show less
James Daly
James Daly has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, including understanding various audiences and targeting messaging accordingly. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, particularly in launching new ventures and building passionate audiences. Daly has led teams large and small to multiple awards and quantifiable success through a strategy built on teamwork, passion, fact-checking, intelligence, analytics, and audience growth while meeting budget goals and production deadlines in fast-paced environments. Daly is the Editorial Director of 2030 Media and a contributor at Wired.
Fintech

Circle’s CEO: This is not the time to ‘go crazy’

Jeremy Allaire is leading the stablecoin powerhouse in a time of heightened regulation.

“It’s a complex environment. So every CEO and every board has to be a little bit cautious, because there’s a lot of uncertainty,” Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire told Protocol at Converge22.

Photo: Circle

Sitting solo on a San Francisco stage, Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire asked tennis superstar Serena Williams what it’s like to face “unrelenting skepticism.”

“What do you do when someone says you can’t do this?” Allaire asked the athlete turned VC, who was beaming into Circle’s Converge22 convention by video.

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at bpimentel@protocol.com or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.

Enterprise

Is Salesforce still a growth company? Investors are skeptical

Salesforce is betting that customer data platform Genie and new Slack features can push the company to $50 billion in revenue by 2026. But investors are skeptical about the company’s ability to deliver.

Photo: Marlena Sloss/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Salesforce has long been enterprise tech’s golden child. The company said everything customers wanted to hear and did everything investors wanted to see: It produced robust, consistent growth from groundbreaking products combined with an aggressive M&A strategy and a cherished culture, all operating under the helm of a bombastic, but respected, CEO and team of well-coiffed executives.

Dreamforce is the embodiment of that success. Every year, alongside frustrating San Francisco residents, the over-the-top celebration serves as a battle cry to the enterprise software industry, reminding everyone that Marc Benioff’s mighty fiefdom is poised to expand even deeper into your corporate IT stack.

Keep Reading Show less
Joe Williams

Joe Williams is a writer-at-large at Protocol. He previously covered enterprise software for Protocol, Bloomberg and Business Insider. Joe can be reached at JoeWilliams@Protocol.com. To share information confidentially, he can also be contacted on a non-work device via Signal (+1-309-265-6120) or JPW53189@protonmail.com.

Policy

The US and EU are splitting on tech policy. That’s putting the web at risk.

A conversation with Cédric O, the former French minister of state for digital.

“With the difficulty of the U.S. in finding political agreement or political basis to legislate more, we are facing a risk of decoupling in the long term between the EU and the U.S.”

Photo: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Cédric O, France’s former minister of state for digital, has been an advocate of Europe’s approach to tech and at the forefront of the continent’s relations with U.S. giants. Protocol caught up with O last week at a conference in New York focusing on social media’s negative effects on society and the possibilities of blockchain-based protocols for alternative networks.

O said watching the U.S. lag in tech policy — even as some states pass their own measures and federal bills gain momentum — has made him worry about the EU and U.S. decoupling. While not as drastic as a disentangling of economic fortunes between the West and China, such a divergence, as O describes it, could still make it functionally impossible for companies to serve users on both sides of the Atlantic with the same product.

Keep Reading Show less
Ben Brody

Ben Brody (@ BenBrodyDC) is a senior reporter at Protocol focusing on how Congress, courts and agencies affect the online world we live in. He formerly covered tech policy and lobbying (including antitrust, Section 230 and privacy) at Bloomberg News, where he previously reported on the influence industry, government ethics and the 2016 presidential election. Before that, Ben covered business news at CNNMoney and AdAge, and all manner of stories in and around New York. He still loves appearing on the New York news radio he grew up with.

Latest Stories
Bulletins