Closed

China Finds Zen: Begins Production Of x86 Processors Based On AMD's IP

Chinese-designed "Dryhana" x86 processors based on AMD's Zen microarchitecture are beginning to surface from Chinese chip producer Hygon.

China Finds Zen: Begins Production Of x86 Processors Based On AMD's IP : Read more
62 answers Last reply
More about china finds zen begins production x86 processors based amd
  1. This is becoming dangerously interesting.
  2. PaulAlcorn said:
    In fact, the Obama administration blocked Intel from selling Xeon processors to China in 2015 over concerns the chips were fueling the country's nuclear programs

    No, I don't think that was the reason. I poked around, a couple years ago, and signs seemed to point towards hacking as the activity triggering the sanctions. I believe the reason (and even the sanction) was never publicly disclosed.

    If you have a good source on this, please cite it.
  3. bit_user said:
    PaulAlcorn said:
    In fact, the Obama administration blocked Intel from selling Xeon processors to China in 2015 over concerns the chips were fueling the country's nuclear programs

    No, I don't think that was the reason. I poked around, a couple years ago, and signs seemed to point towards hacking as the activity triggering the sanctions. I believe the reason (and even the sanction) was never publicly disclosed.

    If you have a good source on this, please cite it.


    https://www.pcworld.com/article/2908692/us-blocks-intel-from-selling-xeon-chips-to-chinese-supercomputer-projects.html

    https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-32247532

    https://bis.doc.gov/index.php/forms-documents/regulations-docs/federal-register-notices/federal-register-2015/1196-80-fr-8524/file

    Source link added to the article.
  4. This is... interesting. Many US companies who have done business with the Chinese have come to find their IPs deliberately stolen and their tech replicated by Chinese companies without compensation while having next to no legal recourse. That's not to say that'll happen here, but I wouldn't say it goes without chance.
  5. What China really needed was an x86 chip without an NSA backdoor in it. Whether or not cpu's actually have a backdoor is not the issue. China wanted to make sure and the ONLY way was for them to "roll their own".

    But I wonder if Spectre can exploit it? Likely Meltdown does not.
  6. PaulAlcorn said:
    bit_user said:
    PaulAlcorn said:
    In fact, the Obama administration blocked Intel from selling Xeon processors to China in 2015 over concerns the chips were fueling the country's nuclear programs

    No, I don't think that was the reason. I poked around, a couple years ago, and signs seemed to point towards hacking as the activity triggering the sanctions. I believe the reason (and even the sanction) was never publicly disclosed.

    If you have a good source on this, please cite it.


    https://www.pcworld.com/article/2908692/us-blocks-intel-from-selling-xeon-chips-to-chinese-supercomputer-projects.html

    https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-32247532

    https://bis.doc.gov/index.php/forms-documents/regulations-docs/federal-register-notices/federal-register-2015/1196-80-fr-8524/file

    Source link added to the article.



    Blocking Intel was pointless. The top two Supercomputers are Chinese and they use Chinese designed silicon.

    From Wiki: "The Sunway TaihuLight uses a total of 40,960 Chinese-designed SW26010 manycore 64-bit RISC processors based on the Sunway architecture. Each processor chip contains 256 processing cores, and an additional four auxiliary cores for system management (also RISC cores, just more fully featured) for a total of 10,649,600 CPU cores across the entire system."

    What IS interesting is China will be paying royalties!! Now that is a first: China actually paying for intellectual property rather than just stealing it.
  7. sounds like amd sold out the us to china for money to not steadily decline overtime. china has been trying to get into thesemiconducter industry for years
  8. they prolly took the info first worked on it then told amd look we know what you got you help us and it helps you or we get it for free in the end anyways. lol they might not have the tools just the designs wich you obviosly cant have someone elses designs printed
  9. akamateau said:
    PaulAlcorn said:
    bit_user said:
    PaulAlcorn said:
    In fact, the Obama administration blocked Intel from selling Xeon processors to China in 2015 over concerns the chips were fueling the country's nuclear programs

    No, I don't think that was the reason. I poked around, a couple years ago, and signs seemed to point towards hacking as the activity triggering the sanctions. I believe the reason (and even the sanction) was never publicly disclosed.

    If you have a good source on this, please cite it.


    https://www.pcworld.com/article/2908692/us-blocks-intel-from-selling-xeon-chips-to-chinese-supercomputer-projects.html

    https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-32247532

    https://bis.doc.gov/index.php/forms-documents/regulations-docs/federal-register-notices/federal-register-2015/1196-80-fr-8524/file

    Source link added to the article.



    Blocking Intel was pointless. The top two Supercomputers are Chinese and they use Chinese designed silicon.

    From Wiki: "The Sunway TaihuLight uses a total of 40,960 Chinese-designed SW26010 manycore 64-bit RISC processors based on the Sunway architecture. Each processor chip contains 256 processing cores, and an additional four auxiliary cores for system management (also RISC cores, just more fully featured) for a total of 10,649,600 CPU cores across the entire system."

    What IS interesting is China will be paying royalties!! Now that is a first: China actually paying for intellectual property rather than just stealing it.


    Good point. That one might've backfired a bit.
    Many point to the US attempts at blocking China as the reason the country plowed ahead so quickly with its own chips for TaihuLight. Backed them into a corner, they came out fighting.
  10. akamateau said:

    Blocking Intel was pointless. The top two Supercomputers are Chinese and they use Chinese designed silicon.

    From Wiki: "The Sunway TaihuLight uses a total of 40,960 Chinese-designed SW26010 manycore 64-bit RISC processors based on the Sunway architecture. Each processor chip contains 256 processing cores, and an additional four auxiliary cores for system management (also RISC cores, just more fully featured) for a total of 10,649,600 CPU cores across the entire system."

    What IS interesting is China will be paying royalties!! Now that is a first: China actually paying for intellectual property rather than just stealing it.


    That's a bit out of date seeing the US has reclaimed the top spot:

    https://www.zdnet.com/article/us-once-again-boasts-the-worlds-fastest-supercomputer/

    The part about paying royalties is interesting and somewhat comical. Well played.
  11. If true, not good!
  12. That's is surprising that this story leak today. Think about it, Intel must be pissed off. This is huge... and it burst the bubble of many people.

    I am glad for AMD, but I am worried about China.
  13. Just given me enough info to now root against AMD. I won't be buying an AMD chip anytime soon. China is our greatest strategic rival and AMDs gotten into bed with them. Don't be surprised when it burns to pee AMD!
  14. This is bad for China.. China should stay away from X86 and focus on ARM or RISC CPU ... I dont really see a future for X86 in the 20 years to come. ARM will take over soon.
  15. akamateau said:
    Blocking Intel was pointless. The top two Supercomputers are Chinese and they use Chinese designed silicon.

    Your timeline is backwards and you're only partly correct.

    The first of those supercomputers (Tianhe-2) went online in 2013 and used Xeons. The sanction apparently happened in early 2015. Then, in 2016, the Sunway TaihuLight went online using Chinese silicon.

    Now, for that to happen, they obviously had designs for the chips well underway, even if they hadn't originally planned to use them for this machine.
  16. redgarl said:
    That's is surprising that this story leak today.

    Was any of this newly revealed, or is this just something Paul has been researching, in the background?

    The partnership was reported when it first happened. That was a major boost for AMD, when it badly needed it to finish off Ryzen and Vega. I don't know what would've happened to AMD without it, but I can't imagine Ryzen would've been quite such a success.

    dudmont said:
    Just given me enough info to now root against AMD. I won't be buying an AMD chip anytime soon. China is our greatest strategic rival and AMDs gotten into bed with them. Don't be surprised when it burns to pee AMD!


    As for the Chinese aspect, I actually think it's probably somewhat neutral. Sure, it helps them develop their domestic industry, but I think it actually delays a true, homegrown competitor to Intel & AMD. At least AMD is still in the driver's seat (and financially benefiting), this way. Plus, it starves Intel out of much of the Chinese datacenter/cloud market.
  17. So much for all that "being civil" and such. The ad honinems are flying along with a load of other logical fallacies. How disappointing. :(
  18. emeraldsmines1990 said:
    This is bad for China.. China should stay away from X86 and focus on ARM or RISC CPU ... I dont really see a future for X86 in the 20 years to come. ARM will take over soon.

    Yes and no. I think x86 will always be at a disadvantage, due to the complexity of its instruction decoder and certain things like its memory consistency guarantees. But I don't think ARM is exactly headed for the pinnacle of computing performance or efficiency, either.

    In 20 years, the next dominant conventional (i.e. non-quantum) architecture will simplify the hardware and move some of the complexity into compilers and certain OS-level support services. An extreme version has been tried in the form of VLIW (and slightly less extreme, in the form of Intel's IA64/EPIC). But, I think we're about to see another push in this direction, as x86 and even ARM converge on certain efficiency and performance limits.
  19. SkyBill40 said:
    So much for all that "being civil" and such. The ad honinems are flying along with a load of other logical fallacies. How disappointing. :(

    Wut? Wrong thread?
  20. Oops. You're right. It was. :/
  21. dudmont said:
    Just given me enough info to now root against AMD. I won't be buying an AMD chip anytime soon. China is our greatest strategic rival and AMDs gotten into bed with them. Don't be surprised when it burns to pee AMD!


    So you will be buying Intel, the company that payed DELL and others in EU, Japan, Korea, not to buy AMD chips, and brought AMD into this mess in the first place. China may be your greatest strategic rival but Intel is the greatest anti-consumer chip company anywhere on the planet.
  22. I can't imagine how this can go horribly wrong.
  23. PaulAlcorn said:
    Many point to the US attempts at blocking China as the reason the country plowed ahead so quickly with its own chips for TaihuLight. Backed them into a corner, they came out fighting.


    Well history has shown China doesn't ground up R&D their own technology. They either buy it from Russia or steal it from the West either through espionage (hacking, insider espionage selling info) or reverse engineering. Just 30 years ago they were nothing but a large populous nation with little globally traded industry.

    That said, speaking of backing them into a corner, we (the US and allied forces Australia/New Zealand and Great Britain), backed Imperial Japan into a corner starting in the late 1930s by blocking oil, rubber, and other commodity shipments to them. We validated doing so due to their increased aggression in the region and Chinese atrocities*. That didn't turn out so well for the coalition nation forces and we spent the next four years fighting them into submission.

    * Side note: I find it interesting how China and the US worked together against Japan and we saved a lot of Chinese lives, but then five years later China returned the favor allied with North Korea by fighting against us and killing our troops. I have deep animosity towards China for that alone, let alone a host of other reasons. It seems as though so many, especially US corporations, have forgotten history or just care more about the bottom line sending business there (<-- yes that's it).

    dudmont said:
    Just given me enough info to now root against AMD. I won't be buying an AMD chip anytime soon. China is our greatest strategic rival and AMDs gotten into bed with them. Don't be surprised when it burns to pee AMD!


    They are not just a strategic threat to the US in the area. More importantly, they are a growing threat to the entire Pacific Rim area and surrounding Asian nations. They are not shy about provoking Japan militarily and South Korea economically by boycotting their goods (their excuse was the South Korea's military accepting a US defense missile system...something South Korea has every right to have in defense from North Korea)).
  24. 10tacle, I agree with your points, but we have to keep in mind the importance of saving face in the Asian civilization(Samuel Huntington, Clash of Civilizations classifies Japan as a separate culture from the rest of Asia, but saving face is huge there too). The thought of "backing down" wasn't possible to Japan(yes, there were a few like Yamamoto, who knew, or last had an idea, of how bad it would get for Japan), and I doubt it will be to China either. They'd rather bleed their people white than back down and lose face.
    As a conservatarian, I firmly believe companies first responsibility is to profits/shareholders, I don't blame companies for this. I think this is one of those rare instances, where the national security interests of country, have to be asserted by the Government, and they(legislative branch) have to come up with a policy and pass some laws that clearly lay out what is and is not permissible, in regards to IP sharing rights. I detest all governments, but National security is the feds biggest prerogative.
  25. ^^Absolutely. I don't want to stereotype, but in general, Asian culture is pride/face saving first. This can be seen in all aspects of life in those nations down to airliner accidents like the Asiana Air Boeing 777 crash four years ago where the South Korean crew, all four of them in the cockpit mind you, did not question the captain's failure to control the decent profile with manual hand flying. He was used to using autopilot to land with a simple flare once over the numbers. History is rife with Asian based airline crashes where seniority was unchallenged if the first officer PM (pilot monitoring) crew member saw something wrong but culture preventing him from challenging his superior PF captain (pilot flying) for protecting his abilities/character (saving his face).

    But regarding corporations vs. government, bear in mind the two are not mutually exclusive when it comes to lobbying for politicians. Every major corporation has a record of donating to a certain US presidential candidate's campaign in the hopes they'll get a "favor" return should their favorite candidate/party win. Hillary for example indirectly got tens of millions (yeah that's with an M) worth of donations from corporations and their employees through PACs and Super PACS for example, even though she ran largely speaking out against corporate America and "the crony capitalist rich elite" who run them. They used that money in campaign ads and funding her rallies. Federal law states corporations cannot donate directly to her campaign of course unlike individuals.
  26. 10tacle said:
    Well history has shown China doesn't ground up R&D their own technology. They either buy it from Russia or steal it from the West either through espionage (hacking, insider espionage selling info) or reverse engineering. Just 30 years ago they were nothing but a large populous nation with little globally traded industry.

    Starting 10-15 years ago, lots of major tech companies started outsourcing engineering jobs there. Partly to take advantage of a young, cheap, and educated labor force, and partly due to pressure by the Chinese government. I wouldn't underestimate how much that's done to bring them up to speed in modern design practices and development methodologies.

    Also, I'm sure a number of successful Chinese nationals working in the US tech industry have been lured back home with big paychecks and senior positions at major companies and universities. In some cases, patriotism - or, at least a desire to help their fellow countrymen - surely played a role. Can't fault them for that.

    Finally, China has been dumping funding into their universities like the US hasn't done since the 1950's or 1960's. You know, when China sets its sights on a goal, like developing their technology industry, they go all-in.

    10tacle said:
    * Side note: I find it interesting how China and the US worked together against Japan and we saved a lot of Chinese lives, but then five years later China returned the favor allied with North Korea by fighting against us and killing our troops. I have deep animosity towards China for that alone,

    Dude, they also cooperated with Chiang Kai-shek, and you surely know what happened there.

    I think the main lesson the Chinese have learned from the latter half of the 20th century (i.e. the cold war, in particular), is that the path to dominance in the modern world lies not through the gun, but rather via commerce and diplomacy. To this end, their One Belt / One Road initiative is a masterstroke to sew up resources and distribution networks all over Asia, Africa, and even reaching into eastern Europe and South America. Between that and the Asian Infrastructure bank (debt -> submission), they will have unparalleled leverage over most of the developing countries (which means the majority of world population). This is really happening.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Infrastructure_Investment_Bank

    Compared to that, our bickering over trade deficits (not that we shouldn't care) is small potatoes. Sadly, instead of engaging it tariff spats with Canada, Western Europe, Japan, and South Korea, we should be working together to counter this threat. To its credit, China excels at playing the long game.

    dudmont said:
    I think this is one of those rare instances, where the national security interests of country, have to be asserted by the Government, and they(legislative branch) have to come up with a policy and pass some laws that clearly lay out what is and is not permissible, in regards to IP sharing rights.

    This.

    If we'd tax companies on what IP they export to China or elsewhere (and prevent them from exporting it, in more critical cases), it would've helped counter the pressure mounted by China & others for companies to share their IP.

    The problem is that corporations are driven by quarterly and annual profits, while the Chinese government is looking 5 years out & beyond. CEOs don't care about that timescale, because their average tenure is well below that (I think I recall hearing a figure of something like 18 months). Investors don't care, because they can unwind even a large position in a matter of days.
  27. I love it. Capitalism finds a way despite government attempts to strangle the market. Go AMD!!!
  28. bit_user said:
    To its credit, China excels at playing the long game.


    With that short sentence, you just summed up not only this thread, but the entire story! They do just that, and they know it. They are more than willing to wait a generation or even two before fulfilling their long term goals.

    Japan was similar prior to and during WWII, but that was on a shorter time scale for obvious reasons. We had a lot of Japanese nationals attending our colleges and universities, and simply vacationing here. That of course is what set up the internment camps for Japanese Americans who were US citizens.

    An unfortunate side effect for them in hindsight, but we weren't around at that time so I can't judge if it was good or bad for the time at the time. Historians worth their salt always judge social decisions in history based on attitudes of the time. We and our allies South Korea and Japan are headed for a conflict with China. It's not a matter of if, but when. History will judge our actions just as well when the pot boils over.

    bit_user said:
    CEOs don't care about that timescale, because their average tenure is well below that (I think I recall hearing a figure of something like 18 months).


    Sounds about right. I worked for Lucent/Alcatel-Lucent for eight years. We had four CEOs/acting CEOs in that period.
  29. 10tacle, you must love all these modern historical illiterates then who want to judge everything in history through "modern" sentiments about justice and morality. As though there was never slavery in Africa before the Portuguese and that all Middle Eastern history treats woman and outsiders as heroes, rather than as things to be used and exploited. Teach kids to be morons and amazingly enough, a good percentage turn out to be just that. Sadly the rest of us have to endure their next batch of years, in which they have to unlearn/relearn what reality really is, rather that just having honest history taught in our "treasured" schools.
  30. ^^Yep. Our public education has been failing us for decades now, and it is showing. I speak as the grandson of a former school superintendent and son of a former high school English teacher; from the 1940s-1960s to the 1960s-1970s respectively. Every year we throw more money at it, people complain we aren't spending enough on teacher salaries (union teachers at that), and then we continue to get diminished returns in product quality output. Then you have politicians wondering why families who truly care about their children's quality of education send their kids to private schools and urban public schools are dead last in quality.

    You can't fix stupid.
  31. The Question I Have: What AMD will get other than Money ?

    I mean, current AMD-Intel license includes a cross-license part where any company that improves on x86 (called x86 extension), the other can implement it without any further license needed. it's like how AMD took SSE's and Intel implemented part of 3D Now !!, then took x86-64 also.

    If AMD had this license with HMC, and they developed some new extension, can AMD have it without extra license ? and if yes, can Intel then have it also ?
  32. mikewinddale said:
    I love it. Capitalism finds a way despite government attempts to strangle the market.

    ...um, more like:
    Quote:
    The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.
    --Vladimir Ilich Lenin


    Except the issue with modern China isn't that they're not capitalist enough, but that they're too authoritarian.
  33. Plus for this manufacturer, the Hygon Dhyana CPUs should work under GNU/Linux:

    http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1806.1/00730.html
  34. chrisbryant said:
    Plus for this manufacturer, the Hygon Dhyana CPUs should work under GNU/Linux:

    http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1806.1/00730.html


    Sadly you wont be able to find it on aliexpress, and even if somehow you could see it on ebay, which motherboard you'll have to use ?
  35. The Future is ARM . X86 will die in the next 20 years.
  36. SkyBill40 said:
    akamateau said:

    Blocking Intel was pointless. The top two Supercomputers are Chinese and they use Chinese designed silicon.

    From Wiki: "The Sunway TaihuLight uses a total of 40,960 Chinese-designed SW26010 manycore 64-bit RISC processors based on the Sunway architecture. Each processor chip contains 256 processing cores, and an additional four auxiliary cores for system management (also RISC cores, just more fully featured) for a total of 10,649,600 CPU cores across the entire system."

    What IS interesting is China will be paying royalties!! Now that is a first: China actually paying for intellectual property rather than just stealing it.


    That's a bit out of date seeing the US has reclaimed the top spot:

    https://www.zdnet.com/article/us-once-again-boasts-the-worlds-fastest-supercomputer/

    The part about paying royalties is interesting and somewhat comical. Well played.




    The point that I was making was NOT who had the top supercomputer but rather China is most certainly a player in CPU design. And for a time did have the top spot using homegrown cpu's.
  37. emeraldsmines1990 said:
    The Future is ARM . X86 will die in the next 20 years.


    20 years?? Seriously? 20 years is a lifetime. Likely Quantum computing will end both, but I personally believe that some idiot will loose an AI trojan that bricks everything. Maybe not Skynet but close enough.

    x86 will end when the need for legacy software ends. We have all seen just how lazy software developers actually are. This is nowhere more evident than in game coding.

    ARM may become a contender for high performance desktop and laptop computing when developers begin porting such software to Android. Until then ARM will remain useful for snippets of software called APPS. I do not see Catia or Autodesk writing an ARM version of their professional design suites anytime soon.

    I am sure you will disagree however how many ARM servers are there despite the expectation that ARM would be taking over the server market.
  38. bit_user said:
    akamateau said:
    Blocking Intel was pointless. The top two Supercomputers are Chinese and they use Chinese designed silicon.

    Your timeline is backwards and you're only partly correct.

    The first of those supercomputers (Tianhe-2) went online in 2013 and used Xeons. The sanction apparently happened in early 2015. Then, in 2016, the Sunway TaihuLight went online using Chinese silicon.

    Now, for that to happen, they obviously had designs for the chips well underway, even if they hadn't originally planned to use them for this machine.


    You are crediting me with more information than I actually submitted.

    1. I presented NO timeline. Unless your definition of timeline is not the same as mine.
    2. I used the Sunway machine as an example to make the point that China is quite capable of designing their own silicon and from that silicon assembling their OWN supercomputer. I also cited Wiki as the source. I was not attempting to list all of the Chinese supercomputers.

    I was making the point that the embargo on Intel processors was pointless as China is certainly a capable designer of CPU's. Having to explain the punchline takes something from the joke don't you agree?

    Up until mid 2018 China did have the two top supercomputers but so what? That like everything else is subject to change.
  39. Xajel said:
    chrisbryant said:
    Plus for this manufacturer, the Hygon Dhyana CPUs should work under GNU/Linux:

    http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1806.1/00730.html


    Sadly you wont be able to find it on aliexpress, and even if somehow you could see it on ebay, which motherboard you'll have to use ?


    All of the Hygon x86 Dhyana cpu's will be for sale and use within China. The cpu is also SOC; it is not socketed so you will not be able to purchase ANY motherboard for the cpu. However if you really wanted one you could probably go to Hong Kong.

    I don't know why you'd want one as the performance of the CPU will not exceed that of EPYC. Later versions might but the early releases will not.
  40. redgarl said:
    That's is surprising that this story leak today. Think about it, Intel must be pissed off. This is huge... and it burst the bubble of many people.

    I am glad for AMD, but I am worried about China.


    This story did not leak just today it has been in the press since April 2016. In fact AMD's initial run up in 2016 was mostly because of the announcement of the THATIC Joint Venture. The Hygon x86 Dhyana has been discussed since it appeared this past April or so for Linux validation. So the question is, where have you been?

    Intel really can't do anything about it as they agreed as a part of the 2009 Order and Settlement Agreement from the FTC to allow both Via and AMD the right to form Joint Venture's to produce x86 silicon. This is summarized quite nicely in the Federal Register.

    Why should you be worried about China? UMC and TSMC are already have ties to China and they both fab a huge amount of the worlds processing IP. You don't think that they already have the litho masks?

    The more people who have computers in China and access to information from the west, the better off we'll all be.
  41. Xajel said:
    chrisbryant said:
    Plus for this manufacturer, the Hygon Dhyana CPUs should work under GNU/Linux:

    http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1806.1/00730.html


    Sadly you wont be able to find it on aliexpress, and even if somehow you could see it on ebay, which motherboard you'll have to use ?


    While I think it would be great for the U.S.A. or others outside China to take advantage of this, my comment was more joy for Chinese users who will find penguin compatibility, assuming the final product also includes GNU/Linux-friendly hardware. You ask the right, question, though: Which motherboard?
  42. Xajel said:
    Sadly you wont be able to find it on aliexpress, and even if somehow you could see it on ebay, which motherboard you'll have to use ?

    I read somewhere it was supposed to be soldered down. So, you just buy the board and the CPU will be on it.

    I wouldn't do it, though. For any case where you actually need a server CPU, the price difference probably won't be enough to justify the lack of support or warranty coverage.
  43. akamateau said:
    bit_user said:
    akamateau said:
    Blocking Intel was pointless. The top two Supercomputers are Chinese and they use Chinese designed silicon.

    Your timeline is backwards and you're only partly correct.

    The first of those supercomputers (Tianhe-2) went online in 2013 and used Xeons. The sanction apparently happened in early 2015. Then, in 2016, the Sunway TaihuLight went online using Chinese silicon.

    Now, for that to happen, they obviously had designs for the chips well underway, even if they hadn't originally planned to use them for this machine.


    You are crediting me with more information than I actually submitted.

    Are we really doing this? Okay, if you want to litigate the matter, let's go.

    akamateau said:
    1. I presented NO timeline. Unless your definition of timeline is not the same as mine.

    No, but your causality was wrong, which was my point. That, in combination with the fact that not 2 but only the latter of those machines uses Chinese-designed processors invalidates your assertion that it was a pointless move. In fact, it was not pointless. It delayed their plans to bring the second machine online, and sent a strong message of disapproval regarding proliferation of nuclear technology.

    akamateau said:
    2. I used the Sunway machine as an example to make the point that China is quite capable of designing their own silicon and from that silicon assembling their OWN supercomputer.

    This was not a capability they had yet demonstrated, as of the sanction. Probably nobody doubted they would eventually get there, but I think it was generally surprising how quickly they managed it. That said, it's less general and not as easily programmable as Xeons and Nvidia GPUs. So, while they were able to send a strong message, it's not as if the embargo didn't still hurt.
  44. bit_user said:

    10tacle said:
    * Side note: I find it interesting how China and the US worked together against Japan and we saved a lot of Chinese lives, but then five years later China returned the favor allied with North Korea by fighting against us and killing our troops. I have deep animosity towards China for that alone,

    Dude, they also cooperated with Chiang Kai-shek, and you surely know what happened there.

    I think the main lesson the Chinese have learned from the latter half of the 20th century (i.e. the cold war, in particular), is that the path to dominance in the modern world lies not through the gun, but rather via commerce and diplomacy. To this end, their One Belt / One Road initiative is a masterstroke to sew up resources and distribution networks all over Asia, Africa, and even reaching into eastern Europe and South America. Between that and the Asian Infrastructure bank (debt -> submission), they will have unparalleled leverage over most of the developing countries (which means the majority of world population). This is really happening.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_Infrastructure_Investment_Bank

    Compared to that, our bickering over trade deficits (not that we shouldn't care) is small potatoes. Sadly, instead of engaging it tariff spats with Canada, Western Europe, Japan, and South Korea, we should be working together to counter this threat. To its credit, China excels at playing the long game.

    dudmont said:
    I think this is one of those rare instances, where the national security interests of country, have to be asserted by the Government, and they(legislative branch) have to come up with a policy and pass some laws that clearly lay out what is and is not permissible, in regards to IP sharing rights.

    This.

    If we'd tax companies on what IP they export to China or elsewhere (and prevent them from exporting it, in more critical cases), it would've helped counter the pressure mounted by China & others for companies to share their IP.

    The problem is that corporations are driven by quarterly and annual profits, while the Chinese government is looking 5 years out & beyond. CEOs don't care about that timescale, because their average tenure is well below that (I think I recall hearing a figure of something like 18 months). Investors don't care, because they can unwind even a large position in a matter of days.


    There is an old old proverb: The debtor is enslaved to the lender.

    There is truth to that on both the smaller individual scale and the global scale.


    Most businesses now days aren't doing what China is doing: going for the long game. They are going for the biggest bang now, as in immediately. It's shortsighted really, and because of this we get things like Enron, and banks than need bailing out (it didn't help being pressured into bad loans, but to put bonuses back in executive's pocket immediately after being bailed out?)
  45. akamateau said:

    The more people who have computers in China and access to information from the west, the better off we'll all be.



    With only one issue: China censors its internet access. If they feel something is a threat to their control over their people, they will ensure that not a single Chinese citizen/subject will be able to see it within their borders.
  46. licensing agreements and Chinese manufacturers................... good luck with that
  47. bit_user said:
    akamateau said:
    bit_user said:
    akamateau said:
    Blocking Intel was pointless. The top two Supercomputers are Chinese and they use Chinese designed silicon.

    Your timeline is backwards and you're only partly correct.

    The first of those supercomputers (Tianhe-2) went online in 2013 and used Xeons. The sanction apparently happened in early 2015. Then, in 2016, the Sunway TaihuLight went online using Chinese silicon.

    Now, for that to happen, they obviously had designs for the chips well underway, even if they hadn't originally planned to use them for this machine.


    You are crediting me with more information than I actually submitted.

    Are we really doing this? Okay, if you want to litigate the matter, let's go.

    akamateau said:
    1. I presented NO timeline. Unless your definition of timeline is not the same as mine.

    No, but your causality was wrong, which was my point. That, in combination with the fact that not 2 but only the latter of those machines uses Chinese-designed processors invalidates your assertion that it was a pointless move. In fact, it was not pointless. It delayed their plans to bring the second machine online, and sent a strong message of disapproval regarding proliferation of nuclear technology.

    akamateau said:
    2. I used the Sunway machine as an example to make the point that China is quite capable of designing their own silicon and from that silicon assembling their OWN supercomputer.

    This was not a capability they had yet demonstrated, as of the sanction. Probably nobody doubted they would eventually get there, but I think it was generally surprising how quickly they managed it. That said, it's less general and not as easily programmable as Xeons and Nvidia GPUs. So, while they were able to send a strong message, it's not as if the embargo didn't still hurt.



    "No, but your causality was wrong, which was my point." I was not demonstrating causality. I was exhibiting an EXAMPLE. ONE EXAMPLE. THAT EXAMPLE was for the benefit of a singular POINT. CHINA WAS QUITE CAPABLE OF ROLLING IT'S OWN DESPITE THE "POINTLESS EMBARGO".

    Both of China's Supercomputers were in design by 2015 and the silicon was certainly being taped out by then. Since both of China's two top Supercomputers were on-line by November 2017 it is IMPOSSIBLE that China completely switched gears, created a new processor, boards and assembled 40,000+ processors ALL in 18 months. The assembly ALONE would have taken a year!!

    If you want to believe that then be my guest. That argument is a non-sequitur.

    It did not delay any plans to bring a second machine on-line as they were both on-line by November 2017. THEY WERE ALREADY IN THE PIPELINE WHEN PRESIDENT OBAMA EMBARGOED INTEL, AMD and nVidia.

    China's response was a joint venture with VIA and AMD in April 2016. The Joint Venture had to be negotiated almost immediately with both AMD and Via as the business entities created were completely organized by April 2016. Intel was not selected as it does not FAB outside of it's own house. Odd though that nVidia is not making accelerator GPU's though or maybe NOT!!

    President Eisenhower made an excellent point to the National Security Council back in the 50's... 'We should sell the Russians anything they can't shoot back."

    Your analysis is all supposition. Stick with facts and leave the geopolitical analysis to those who actually know what they are talking about. You have absolutely NO CLUE what the message being sent to China was you just THINK you know.

    As is usually the case with government analysis, they thought China was not capable of bringing a top tier supercomputer on-line and a simple embargo would set them back.

    Clearly they were wrong. They were just as wrong when it was commonly thought Russian and China would not have a bomb for 20 years. Ooops.
  48. Likely all this computing power will get put to use running Facial Recognition software to track Chinese folks everywhere they go. Something right out of the TV show "Person of Interest". New York Times has been running some pretty good stories on China's surveillance capability.

    Soon to arrive at an NSA office near you! Of course it will all be done for your own safety and National Security.

    Evidently China has more per capita CCTV surveillance than the UK. Cannot have that many servers and sheer computing power without a home built Linux validated CPU. There has been no word on Microsoft validation.
  49. akamateau said:

    As is usually the case with government analysis, they thought China was not capable of bringing a top tier supercomputer on-line and a simple embargo would set them back.

    Clearly they were wrong. They were just as wrong when it was commonly thought Russian and China would not have a bomb for 20 years. Ooops.


    Espionage, be it corporate or otherwise, has a way of upsetting any type of analysis and time frames based upon it or would you not agree? This is specifically why the Russians got the bomb as quickly as the did and very likely the same reason as to why the Chinese got theirs. The infiltration of the Manhattan Project was a major game breaker for that program. Now... as for the computing end of things, it's less likely to be a case of espionage and more a matter of reverse engineering and/or being sold the equipment prior to being embargoed.

    akamateau said:

    Your analysis is all supposition. Stick with facts and leave the geopolitical analysis to those who actually know what they are talking about. You have absolutely NO CLUE what the message being sent to China was you just THINK you know.


    And who, precisely, would that be? You're analyzing his analysis and calling it flawed; so, that said, are you a SME in geopolitical analysis? What are your credentials or experience to validate your claim or are you just committing a logical fallacy in kind to the one you're accusing him of making? I'm just curious here as I don't have a dog in this fight.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs