程導绅 personal page - To The Moon

程導绅

程導绅

No personal profile

102Follow

0Followers

0Topic

0Badge

2021-07-29

Oh

Intel Drops Amy Bomb: It's Time for TSMC's Exaggerated Propaganda to End

2021-07-29

Hi

Taper is asymptotic, so it's hard to panic

2021-06-28

??

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-06-27

??

24-hour 3.2 billion yuan explosion warehouse, virtual currency collapse across the board, mining machine 50% discount sale

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3586587763605977","uuid":"3586587763605977","gmtCreate":1623506514802,"gmtModify":1623508437751,"name":"程導绅","pinyin":"c導scheng導shen","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/17e557db7a706e6821394c3f5dc700d2","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":0,"headSize":102,"tweetSize":13,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":3,"level":{"id":0,"name":"","nameTw":"","represent":"","factor":"","iconColor":"","bgColor":""},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[],"userBadgeCount":0,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":808060065,"gmtCreate":1627544752157,"gmtModify":1703492038287,"author":{"id":"3586587763605977","authorId":"3586587763605977","name":"程導绅","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/17e557db7a706e6821394c3f5dc700d2","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586587763605977","idStr":"3586587763605977"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Oh","listText":"Oh","text":"Oh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/808060065","repostId":"1187897781","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1187897781","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"有视角的商业资讯交流平台","home_visible":1,"media_name":"虎嗅APP","id":"101","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/98669fe7974e42f3976b3db47528792d"},"pubTimestamp":1627544195,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1187897781?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-29 15:36","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Intel Drops Amy Bomb: It's Time for TSMC's Exaggerated Propaganda to End","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1187897781","media":"虎嗅APP","summary":"自从去年英特尔被100%确凿证据证实了在10nm制程上的延期，以及在7nm制程上全面落后于台积电，丧失全球制程领导地位后，大众舆论对这家美国唯一从设计、制造到封测全覆盖的半导体企业的态度，呈现出惊人的","content":"<p>Since Intel's delay in 10nm process was confirmed by 100% conclusive evidence last year, and it lagged behind TSMC in 7nm process in an all-round way, losing its global process leadership position, the attitude of public opinion towards this only semiconductor company in the United States, which covers all aspects from design, manufacturing to packaging and testing, has shown a surprising consistent change:</p><p>This \"critical trend\" seems to have evolved into- -<b>The top semiconductor giant's days remaining seem numbered.</b></p><p>The crisis encountered by technological innovation has also spread to their financial data. From Q1 of 2020 to Q3 of 2021, Intel's net profit declined for three consecutive quarters; And historically as<b>The absolute king of the data center market</b>Intel's revenue from this business segment also continued to decline in three quarters.</p><p>In May 2021, IC Insights, an authoritative market research organization, released the \"Performance and Ranking of Global Top15 Semiconductor Companies in Q1 2021\", pointing out that although Intel ranked first, it was the only one among all manufacturers with a decline in revenue.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ddcac03ab5d13481ff896474f8ff1274\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"277\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Image from IC Insights</p><p>Intel is certainly anxious. This anxiety may manifest itself in:</p><p><ul><li>Under intense pressure from the capital market, a sudden coaching change occurred at the beginning of 2021, and Pat Gelsinger, who has 40 years of manufacturing technology experience, was re-appointed as the new CEO.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Quickly accepted ASMA's more advanced EUV manufacturing process than its own, and it took about two quarters to fix the 7nm technology.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Invest heavily in the manufacturing process. In March this year, Pat Kissinger officially announced the very critical \"IDM 2.0\" strategy and announced his return to the foundry market.<b>At the same time, it announced a $20 billion investment in two new fabs in Arizona, USA</b>； It was announced again in May,<b>Investing $3.5 billion to upgrade the New Mexico factory, investing $10 billion to build a chip factory in Israel, and planning to build a factory in the European Union.</b></p><p></li></ul><ul><li>More and more Intel semiconductor technology experts have appeared to justify their manufacturing technology, emphasizing that \"the process data of each fab has differences in external publicity\".</p><p></li></ul>Of course, according to the observation and media response of Tiger Sniff Platform, you can see Intel more and more times in domestic artificial intelligence, Internet of Things and data center market activities.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4bfc85ebc4b88c6abf9345706cd0d652\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"601\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Intel CEO Pat Kissinger</p><p>Intel, which aims to recapture the \"process node\", released its \"IDM2.0 strategy\" in March this year, although it attracted the attention of the industry with its generous and \"never give up manufacturing\" attitude, it continued to be controversial because of its poor financial report;</p><p>Yesterday, four Intel senior manufacturing technology experts, including CEO Kissinger, once again disclosed Intel's process technology and implementation path on a wide scale,<b>Dropped a \"new bomb\" on the semiconductor industry:</b></p><p><ul><li>Intel does have a delay at 10nm and 7nm (if you are interested, you can read my article \"Intel abdicates, TSMC is king\"), but at the 5nm node, Intel thinks that instead of having a delay, it will surpass.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>In order to deal with the \"false propaganda of manufacturing process\" of TSMC and other rivals, and to correct everyone's misunderstanding of manufacturing process, Intel directly abandoned the statement of \"10nm, 7nm, 5nm, 3nm\", which is essentially determined by Moore's Law, and directly adopted a new naming system from 100% Intel's subjective perspective-Intel7, Intel4, Intel3, Intel20A and Intel18A.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Intel20A disclosed this time essentially corresponds to the 5nm process.<b>This is a process node that Intel has been silent about for nearly two years, and the relevant time plan basically ended abruptly at 7nm. Intel</b>It was first announced that it will enter the \"Amy Era\" through Intel20A.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>The two key technologies behind Intel20A are very noteworthy. Among them, this process will adopt a brand-new transistor structure Gate-All-Around, which is not a FinFET structure that has made great contributions to the commercialization of processes below 22nm.</p><p></li></ul>In other words, this new structure chip with new materials will make a major change to the traditional process concept. As a semiconductor technology expert told Tiger Sniff: \"This new material structure, the process of these few nanometers and so on does not matter so much.\"</p><p><b>Intel's New Process Naming System: Wake Up, Customers</b></p><p>The naming of the process has been criticized by the industry for a long time.</p><p>For example, we once mentioned in the article \"Intel abdicates, TSMC is king\" that many engineers in the industry believe that Intel's attitude towards \"nano\" process figures is more realistic, and even said that \"Intel's 10nm chip is actually TSMC's 7nm, even better than the latter's 7nm\".</p><p>This is also why Kissinger has repeatedly called on everyone to correctly understand \"process figures\" in public after taking office:</p><p>\"Including Intel, different process node naming and numbering schemes are used, which neither refer to any specific measurement method nor fully show how to achieve the best balance between chip energy efficiency and performance.\" It's like the cars at the auto show that claim to have chips reaching hundreds or thousands of Tops, and it's like California's annual Autonomous Driving Takeover Report-without uniform testing conditions and enough corporate integrity, it's absolutely unworthy to say the conclusion of \"who performs better than who\".</p><p>Therefore, Intel changed the naming system this time, with a good name: \"Let customers have a more accurate understanding of the evolution of process nodes in the whole industry, and then make more informed decisions\".<b>In fact, the main purpose is to deal with the less reliable 5nm and 3nm process names of TSMC and Samsung.</b></p><p><ul><li>Intel 7, which will be launched in the second half of 2021 (does it at least look like 7nm?), is actually Intel's previously released 10nm Enhanced SuperFin;</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>The Intel 4 released in the first half of 2023 (at least it looks like 4nm?), is actually the 7nm of Intel's previous PPT;</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Intel3, released in the second half of 2023, is actually the 7nm + on Intel's previous PPT;</p><p></li></ul><ul><li><b>The Intel20A released in the first half of 2024 (does it look like 2nm?), is actually 5nm under Intel standards;</b></p><p></li></ul><ul><li>The release of Intel18A in the first half of 2025 is actually 5nm + under Intel standards.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1ce380fc9b07caca9a43fa165a2e90a8\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"471\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Image via Intel</p><p>In fact, as the structure of transistors becomes more and more complex, as early as the early 21st century, the industry began to have a \"differentiation trend\" in the naming of nano-processes of chips.</p><p>As we all know, microprocessors are made up of billions of transistors connected in a specific way. These transistors act as \"switches\" and are responsible for processing the 1s and 0s of electronic data.</p><p>Kissinger explained that there is an area at the top of the transistor called the \"gate\", which determines whether the transistor is on or off. The \"process node\" refers to the complex scheme of thousands of manufacturing steps required for a transistor.</p><p>And all the top semiconductor companies have almost the same goal-to make these chips smaller, faster, cheaper and more energy-efficient-the best example is Apple's 5nm process chip M1 (there are too many reviews of M1 to read, and I also bought a Macbook Air with M1 and couldn't put it down).</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ae99fc8b1663fb184dc959320da5b5a1\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"384\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Initially, the name of the process \"node\" corresponds to the gate length of the transistor and is measured in \"microns\".<b>As transistors became smaller and the gate length became more and more miniaturized, the industry began to measure in nanometers.</b></p><p>The key node about the change of process naming appeared in 1997.</p><p>\"With technological advancements and the advent of other innovations such as strained silicon, faster, cheaper and more energy efficient becomes just as important in addition to shrinking transistors.\" Kissinger believes that from this point on,<b>Traditional naming methods no longer match the actual transistor gate length.</b></p><p><b>In other words, transistor size is not the only determinant to some extent, and factors such as \"interconnections\" between them cannot be ignored.</b></p><p>In 2011, after Intel introduced FinFET transistor structure technology, the industry further diverged. It is an entirely new way to build transistors with unique shapes and structures.</p><p>This structure is the key technology to continue to retract the stagnant 22nm downward.<b>But obviously, starting from 22nm, not to mention the public, even the industry's understanding of process figures and its actual \"coordinates\" have begun to gradually separate.</b></p><p><b>This is also the fundamental reason why Intel has established a new naming system today.</b></p><p>As Tiger Sniff got the answer when interviewing engineers before: \"Intel is relatively more radical in setting manufacturing process standards and has higher requirements. But it is true that the process has been delayed for 1~2 years. Saying that they are behind does not mean that they have no possibility of catching up.\" But Intel's drastic process this time<b>rename</b>，<b>Perhaps it is not that you don't believe in yourself, but that you smell the cruel reality that the market and capital have been confused by \"naming\" for a long time (for example, the beginning), and even make business judgments based on it.</b></p><p>However, we thought of a question-even if a newly named product is launched, customers have no reason not to ask, \"How many nanometers is your intel7? How many nanometers are you targeting TSMC?\"</p><p>To be honest, we'd rather know how Intel answers this question when it comes to it.</p><p>Defend Moore's Law to the death?</p><p>At this extremely detailed \"Process Technology Popularization Conference\", Kissinger mentioned at least three times the determination that \"Moore's Law will not die, and Intel will continue to continue Moore's Law through various methods, such as changing materials, transistor structures and packaging\".</p><p>To be honest, in addition to this meaningful new naming system,<b>Intel's most interesting and deserving product is undoubtedly Intel20A after Intel3.</b></p><p>(Of course, the Intel4 will also attract much attention as the first processor to apply ASML High-NA extreme ultraviolet radiation lithography (EUV), but the symbolic significance is not as good as the Intel20A.)</p><p>Intel 20A (5nm) is called the next watershed in the development of process technology in history by Intel because it is the first chip to apply Intel's two \"pioneering technologies\":</p><p><ul><li><b>Gate-All-Around, a new transistor architecture that replaces FinFET (Intel named it RibbonFET)</b></p><p></li><li><b>PowerVia, an electrical energy transmission system that can solve the \"interconnection bottleneck\".</b></p><p></li></ul>The importance of FinFET technology needs no further explanation.</p><p>It is a 3D transistor technology (fin transistor) developed by Hu Zhengming, a professor of electronic engineering and computer science at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1999. FinFET contributed to the reason why Intel was able to take the lead in mass production of 22nm transistors 12 years later, and TSMC and Samsung successfully transitioned to 16/14nm process nodes.</p><p>It was this \"invention\" that Moore's Law was able to \"extend life\" for decades.</p><p>However, as the process continues to retract from 5nm to 3nm, semiconductor manufacturing experts have found that further reduction of FinFET size is increasingly limited by driving current and electrostatic control.</p><p>The Gate All Around, which will replace it, is commonly known as GAAFET (Full Gate Field Effect Transistor), which uses a strip channel surrounded by a Gate, thus enabling faster transistor switching speed and better control. Therefore, higher performance can be achieved in a smaller footprint. Samsung announced in 2020 that it would apply this architecture on 3nm process chips.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6a6fca1343877c136cbeef1a4caedada\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"255\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Image via Panlin Semiconductor</p><p>Unlike FinFETs, where higher currents require multiple fins side by side; The current-carrying capacity of a GAA transistor is mainly improved by stacking several nanosheets vertically (above), while the gate material is mainly wrapped around the channel. The size of the nanosheet can be scaled so that the transistor can be adjusted to the specific performance required.</p><p>It sounds like the concept of \"nanosheets\" is actually not so difficult to understand; And in fact, this technology has been developed for years. However, the reason why it is not \"reused\" by the industry is<b>The main bottleneck lies in \"materials\"</b>。</p><p>According to the explanation given by Panlin Semiconductor, GAA transistors are made by superlattices of \"alternating silicon\" and \"silicon-germanium epitaxial layer\", which is the basis of nanosheets. In addition, the fabrication process is relatively complicated, and various new alloy materials such as ruthenium, molybdenum and nickel may be required for deposition, etching and filling.</p><p>A semiconductor expert summed it up to Huxiu: \"It (GAA) will change the base material of semiconductors, and the materials of semiconductor connections will also be changed. At the same time, the physical structure of the whole transistor will also change.\" Therefore, Dr. Sanjay Natarajan, who led the team to develop this technology, is not false when he called Intel's GAA-RibbonFET a \"major leap in transistor performance\".</p><p>According to the test chip results, they expect that the performance and density improvement brought by RibbonFET transistors will exceed that of current FinFET transistors. Intel 20A will be the first chip to apply RibbonFET.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e0a40c6ececaec4fa8741e6781f30b32\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"487\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>The power transmission system PowerVia is a unique technology developed by Intel engineers. Dr. Sanjay Natarajan, as the development leader of this technology, pointed out that one of the biggest traditional problems in semiconductor transistor structures is \"inefficient wiring\".</p><p>\"Traditional interconnection technology is interconnected at the top of the transistor layer, which often produces intermixing of power lines and signal lines, resulting in low wiring efficiency, which in turn affects performance and power consumption.\"</p><p>Their solution is to place the power cord under the transistor layer (that is, the back of the wafer). By reducing the power routing on the front of the wafer, more \"empty space\" is freed up for optimizing signal routing, and delay is reduced to achieve better power transmission.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/711724a13d34832717d6e33d027d163f\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"603\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>It is worth noting that these two key technologies that will be used in Intel20A, although they are inevitably criticized as \"still in PPT state\" (after all, they are still PPT), Intel experts showed the SEM images of these test chips, which obviously went through a series of tests.</p><p>As mentioned above, their successful application will determine whether Intel can overtake the key node of 5nm.</p><p>From the time point of view, it is obvious that there is not much gap between the \"realization of 7nm + + in 2023\" planned on PPT in 2019 and the \"realization of Intel20A in 2024\" planned this time. In other words, there is still a chance to turn over at the 5nm node.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9858abda999ad2b18407fdde87b7e61c\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"561\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Intel Process Product Plan for October 2019</p><p>As Kissinger said, the advent of Intel20A in 2024 and the real application of two key technologies will mark the beginning of the \"Emmi era\" of semiconductors (1 Emmi =0.1 nm).</p><p>Now, it is actually more like Intel shouting to the outside world: Do you think I still want to compete for leadership in the \"nano age\"? No, we're going to go into a unit smaller than the nanometer to compete for the right to speak.</p><p><b>Written at the end…hopefully not PPT</b></p><p>But then again, since the naming system in nanometers has been completely changed, and the transistor structure and materials are undergoing the next round of dramatic changes. In addition, Intel is also improving the bandwidth density and energy efficiency of chips from the packaging technology level...</p><p>Doesn't all this mean that the so-called numeric unit of nanometer or emmeter is becoming less and less meaningful?</p><p><b>Intel says it is defending Moore's Law, but in fact it has realized that it can no longer rely on Moore's Law.</b></p><p>Today, although the manufacturing process of Intel20A officially said that it won the big order of Qualcomm, it is still a long way from 2024. Although we think that Intel's conference is of great significance, and there is no objection to the product planning, PPT can be changed to call the real product, but it still needs to speak in physical terms.</p><p>After all, the 14nm product that was delayed for 4 years in that year, PPT did quite well at that time.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Intel Drops Amy Bomb: It's Time for TSMC's Exaggerated Propaganda to End</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nIntel Drops Amy Bomb: It's Time for TSMC's Exaggerated Propaganda to End\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/101\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/98669fe7974e42f3976b3db47528792d);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">虎嗅APP </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-07-29 15:36</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Since Intel's delay in 10nm process was confirmed by 100% conclusive evidence last year, and it lagged behind TSMC in 7nm process in an all-round way, losing its global process leadership position, the attitude of public opinion towards this only semiconductor company in the United States, which covers all aspects from design, manufacturing to packaging and testing, has shown a surprising consistent change:</p><p>This \"critical trend\" seems to have evolved into- -<b>The top semiconductor giant's days remaining seem numbered.</b></p><p>The crisis encountered by technological innovation has also spread to their financial data. From Q1 of 2020 to Q3 of 2021, Intel's net profit declined for three consecutive quarters; And historically as<b>The absolute king of the data center market</b>Intel's revenue from this business segment also continued to decline in three quarters.</p><p>In May 2021, IC Insights, an authoritative market research organization, released the \"Performance and Ranking of Global Top15 Semiconductor Companies in Q1 2021\", pointing out that although Intel ranked first, it was the only one among all manufacturers with a decline in revenue.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ddcac03ab5d13481ff896474f8ff1274\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"277\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Image from IC Insights</p><p>Intel is certainly anxious. This anxiety may manifest itself in:</p><p><ul><li>Under intense pressure from the capital market, a sudden coaching change occurred at the beginning of 2021, and Pat Gelsinger, who has 40 years of manufacturing technology experience, was re-appointed as the new CEO.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Quickly accepted ASMA's more advanced EUV manufacturing process than its own, and it took about two quarters to fix the 7nm technology.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Invest heavily in the manufacturing process. In March this year, Pat Kissinger officially announced the very critical \"IDM 2.0\" strategy and announced his return to the foundry market.<b>At the same time, it announced a $20 billion investment in two new fabs in Arizona, USA</b>； It was announced again in May,<b>Investing $3.5 billion to upgrade the New Mexico factory, investing $10 billion to build a chip factory in Israel, and planning to build a factory in the European Union.</b></p><p></li></ul><ul><li>More and more Intel semiconductor technology experts have appeared to justify their manufacturing technology, emphasizing that \"the process data of each fab has differences in external publicity\".</p><p></li></ul>Of course, according to the observation and media response of Tiger Sniff Platform, you can see Intel more and more times in domestic artificial intelligence, Internet of Things and data center market activities.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4bfc85ebc4b88c6abf9345706cd0d652\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"601\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Intel CEO Pat Kissinger</p><p>Intel, which aims to recapture the \"process node\", released its \"IDM2.0 strategy\" in March this year, although it attracted the attention of the industry with its generous and \"never give up manufacturing\" attitude, it continued to be controversial because of its poor financial report;</p><p>Yesterday, four Intel senior manufacturing technology experts, including CEO Kissinger, once again disclosed Intel's process technology and implementation path on a wide scale,<b>Dropped a \"new bomb\" on the semiconductor industry:</b></p><p><ul><li>Intel does have a delay at 10nm and 7nm (if you are interested, you can read my article \"Intel abdicates, TSMC is king\"), but at the 5nm node, Intel thinks that instead of having a delay, it will surpass.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>In order to deal with the \"false propaganda of manufacturing process\" of TSMC and other rivals, and to correct everyone's misunderstanding of manufacturing process, Intel directly abandoned the statement of \"10nm, 7nm, 5nm, 3nm\", which is essentially determined by Moore's Law, and directly adopted a new naming system from 100% Intel's subjective perspective-Intel7, Intel4, Intel3, Intel20A and Intel18A.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Intel20A disclosed this time essentially corresponds to the 5nm process.<b>This is a process node that Intel has been silent about for nearly two years, and the relevant time plan basically ended abruptly at 7nm. Intel</b>It was first announced that it will enter the \"Amy Era\" through Intel20A.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>The two key technologies behind Intel20A are very noteworthy. Among them, this process will adopt a brand-new transistor structure Gate-All-Around, which is not a FinFET structure that has made great contributions to the commercialization of processes below 22nm.</p><p></li></ul>In other words, this new structure chip with new materials will make a major change to the traditional process concept. As a semiconductor technology expert told Tiger Sniff: \"This new material structure, the process of these few nanometers and so on does not matter so much.\"</p><p><b>Intel's New Process Naming System: Wake Up, Customers</b></p><p>The naming of the process has been criticized by the industry for a long time.</p><p>For example, we once mentioned in the article \"Intel abdicates, TSMC is king\" that many engineers in the industry believe that Intel's attitude towards \"nano\" process figures is more realistic, and even said that \"Intel's 10nm chip is actually TSMC's 7nm, even better than the latter's 7nm\".</p><p>This is also why Kissinger has repeatedly called on everyone to correctly understand \"process figures\" in public after taking office:</p><p>\"Including Intel, different process node naming and numbering schemes are used, which neither refer to any specific measurement method nor fully show how to achieve the best balance between chip energy efficiency and performance.\" It's like the cars at the auto show that claim to have chips reaching hundreds or thousands of Tops, and it's like California's annual Autonomous Driving Takeover Report-without uniform testing conditions and enough corporate integrity, it's absolutely unworthy to say the conclusion of \"who performs better than who\".</p><p>Therefore, Intel changed the naming system this time, with a good name: \"Let customers have a more accurate understanding of the evolution of process nodes in the whole industry, and then make more informed decisions\".<b>In fact, the main purpose is to deal with the less reliable 5nm and 3nm process names of TSMC and Samsung.</b></p><p><ul><li>Intel 7, which will be launched in the second half of 2021 (does it at least look like 7nm?), is actually Intel's previously released 10nm Enhanced SuperFin;</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>The Intel 4 released in the first half of 2023 (at least it looks like 4nm?), is actually the 7nm of Intel's previous PPT;</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Intel3, released in the second half of 2023, is actually the 7nm + on Intel's previous PPT;</p><p></li></ul><ul><li><b>The Intel20A released in the first half of 2024 (does it look like 2nm?), is actually 5nm under Intel standards;</b></p><p></li></ul><ul><li>The release of Intel18A in the first half of 2025 is actually 5nm + under Intel standards.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1ce380fc9b07caca9a43fa165a2e90a8\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"471\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Image via Intel</p><p>In fact, as the structure of transistors becomes more and more complex, as early as the early 21st century, the industry began to have a \"differentiation trend\" in the naming of nano-processes of chips.</p><p>As we all know, microprocessors are made up of billions of transistors connected in a specific way. These transistors act as \"switches\" and are responsible for processing the 1s and 0s of electronic data.</p><p>Kissinger explained that there is an area at the top of the transistor called the \"gate\", which determines whether the transistor is on or off. The \"process node\" refers to the complex scheme of thousands of manufacturing steps required for a transistor.</p><p>And all the top semiconductor companies have almost the same goal-to make these chips smaller, faster, cheaper and more energy-efficient-the best example is Apple's 5nm process chip M1 (there are too many reviews of M1 to read, and I also bought a Macbook Air with M1 and couldn't put it down).</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ae99fc8b1663fb184dc959320da5b5a1\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"384\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Initially, the name of the process \"node\" corresponds to the gate length of the transistor and is measured in \"microns\".<b>As transistors became smaller and the gate length became more and more miniaturized, the industry began to measure in nanometers.</b></p><p>The key node about the change of process naming appeared in 1997.</p><p>\"With technological advancements and the advent of other innovations such as strained silicon, faster, cheaper and more energy efficient becomes just as important in addition to shrinking transistors.\" Kissinger believes that from this point on,<b>Traditional naming methods no longer match the actual transistor gate length.</b></p><p><b>In other words, transistor size is not the only determinant to some extent, and factors such as \"interconnections\" between them cannot be ignored.</b></p><p>In 2011, after Intel introduced FinFET transistor structure technology, the industry further diverged. It is an entirely new way to build transistors with unique shapes and structures.</p><p>This structure is the key technology to continue to retract the stagnant 22nm downward.<b>But obviously, starting from 22nm, not to mention the public, even the industry's understanding of process figures and its actual \"coordinates\" have begun to gradually separate.</b></p><p><b>This is also the fundamental reason why Intel has established a new naming system today.</b></p><p>As Tiger Sniff got the answer when interviewing engineers before: \"Intel is relatively more radical in setting manufacturing process standards and has higher requirements. But it is true that the process has been delayed for 1~2 years. Saying that they are behind does not mean that they have no possibility of catching up.\" But Intel's drastic process this time<b>rename</b>，<b>Perhaps it is not that you don't believe in yourself, but that you smell the cruel reality that the market and capital have been confused by \"naming\" for a long time (for example, the beginning), and even make business judgments based on it.</b></p><p>However, we thought of a question-even if a newly named product is launched, customers have no reason not to ask, \"How many nanometers is your intel7? How many nanometers are you targeting TSMC?\"</p><p>To be honest, we'd rather know how Intel answers this question when it comes to it.</p><p>Defend Moore's Law to the death?</p><p>At this extremely detailed \"Process Technology Popularization Conference\", Kissinger mentioned at least three times the determination that \"Moore's Law will not die, and Intel will continue to continue Moore's Law through various methods, such as changing materials, transistor structures and packaging\".</p><p>To be honest, in addition to this meaningful new naming system,<b>Intel's most interesting and deserving product is undoubtedly Intel20A after Intel3.</b></p><p>(Of course, the Intel4 will also attract much attention as the first processor to apply ASML High-NA extreme ultraviolet radiation lithography (EUV), but the symbolic significance is not as good as the Intel20A.)</p><p>Intel 20A (5nm) is called the next watershed in the development of process technology in history by Intel because it is the first chip to apply Intel's two \"pioneering technologies\":</p><p><ul><li><b>Gate-All-Around, a new transistor architecture that replaces FinFET (Intel named it RibbonFET)</b></p><p></li><li><b>PowerVia, an electrical energy transmission system that can solve the \"interconnection bottleneck\".</b></p><p></li></ul>The importance of FinFET technology needs no further explanation.</p><p>It is a 3D transistor technology (fin transistor) developed by Hu Zhengming, a professor of electronic engineering and computer science at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1999. FinFET contributed to the reason why Intel was able to take the lead in mass production of 22nm transistors 12 years later, and TSMC and Samsung successfully transitioned to 16/14nm process nodes.</p><p>It was this \"invention\" that Moore's Law was able to \"extend life\" for decades.</p><p>However, as the process continues to retract from 5nm to 3nm, semiconductor manufacturing experts have found that further reduction of FinFET size is increasingly limited by driving current and electrostatic control.</p><p>The Gate All Around, which will replace it, is commonly known as GAAFET (Full Gate Field Effect Transistor), which uses a strip channel surrounded by a Gate, thus enabling faster transistor switching speed and better control. Therefore, higher performance can be achieved in a smaller footprint. Samsung announced in 2020 that it would apply this architecture on 3nm process chips.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6a6fca1343877c136cbeef1a4caedada\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"255\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Image via Panlin Semiconductor</p><p>Unlike FinFETs, where higher currents require multiple fins side by side; The current-carrying capacity of a GAA transistor is mainly improved by stacking several nanosheets vertically (above), while the gate material is mainly wrapped around the channel. The size of the nanosheet can be scaled so that the transistor can be adjusted to the specific performance required.</p><p>It sounds like the concept of \"nanosheets\" is actually not so difficult to understand; And in fact, this technology has been developed for years. However, the reason why it is not \"reused\" by the industry is<b>The main bottleneck lies in \"materials\"</b>。</p><p>According to the explanation given by Panlin Semiconductor, GAA transistors are made by superlattices of \"alternating silicon\" and \"silicon-germanium epitaxial layer\", which is the basis of nanosheets. In addition, the fabrication process is relatively complicated, and various new alloy materials such as ruthenium, molybdenum and nickel may be required for deposition, etching and filling.</p><p>A semiconductor expert summed it up to Huxiu: \"It (GAA) will change the base material of semiconductors, and the materials of semiconductor connections will also be changed. At the same time, the physical structure of the whole transistor will also change.\" Therefore, Dr. Sanjay Natarajan, who led the team to develop this technology, is not false when he called Intel's GAA-RibbonFET a \"major leap in transistor performance\".</p><p>According to the test chip results, they expect that the performance and density improvement brought by RibbonFET transistors will exceed that of current FinFET transistors. Intel 20A will be the first chip to apply RibbonFET.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e0a40c6ececaec4fa8741e6781f30b32\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"487\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>The power transmission system PowerVia is a unique technology developed by Intel engineers. Dr. Sanjay Natarajan, as the development leader of this technology, pointed out that one of the biggest traditional problems in semiconductor transistor structures is \"inefficient wiring\".</p><p>\"Traditional interconnection technology is interconnected at the top of the transistor layer, which often produces intermixing of power lines and signal lines, resulting in low wiring efficiency, which in turn affects performance and power consumption.\"</p><p>Their solution is to place the power cord under the transistor layer (that is, the back of the wafer). By reducing the power routing on the front of the wafer, more \"empty space\" is freed up for optimizing signal routing, and delay is reduced to achieve better power transmission.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/711724a13d34832717d6e33d027d163f\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"603\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>It is worth noting that these two key technologies that will be used in Intel20A, although they are inevitably criticized as \"still in PPT state\" (after all, they are still PPT), Intel experts showed the SEM images of these test chips, which obviously went through a series of tests.</p><p>As mentioned above, their successful application will determine whether Intel can overtake the key node of 5nm.</p><p>From the time point of view, it is obvious that there is not much gap between the \"realization of 7nm + + in 2023\" planned on PPT in 2019 and the \"realization of Intel20A in 2024\" planned this time. In other words, there is still a chance to turn over at the 5nm node.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9858abda999ad2b18407fdde87b7e61c\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"561\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Intel Process Product Plan for October 2019</p><p>As Kissinger said, the advent of Intel20A in 2024 and the real application of two key technologies will mark the beginning of the \"Emmi era\" of semiconductors (1 Emmi =0.1 nm).</p><p>Now, it is actually more like Intel shouting to the outside world: Do you think I still want to compete for leadership in the \"nano age\"? No, we're going to go into a unit smaller than the nanometer to compete for the right to speak.</p><p><b>Written at the end…hopefully not PPT</b></p><p>But then again, since the naming system in nanometers has been completely changed, and the transistor structure and materials are undergoing the next round of dramatic changes. In addition, Intel is also improving the bandwidth density and energy efficiency of chips from the packaging technology level...</p><p>Doesn't all this mean that the so-called numeric unit of nanometer or emmeter is becoming less and less meaningful?</p><p><b>Intel says it is defending Moore's Law, but in fact it has realized that it can no longer rely on Moore's Law.</b></p><p>Today, although the manufacturing process of Intel20A officially said that it won the big order of Qualcomm, it is still a long way from 2024. Although we think that Intel's conference is of great significance, and there is no objection to the product planning, PPT can be changed to call the real product, but it still needs to speak in physical terms.</p><p>After all, the 14nm product that was delayed for 4 years in that year, PPT did quite well at that time.</p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c74be4c2a08964ef2daf32217f693b44","relate_stocks":{"09086":"华夏纳指-U","03145":"华夏亚洲高息股","03086":"华夏纳指","EWT":"台湾ETF-iShares MSCI","INTC":"英特尔","TSM":"台积电"},"is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1187897781","content_text":"自从去年英特尔被100%确凿证据证实了在10nm制程上的延期，以及在7nm制程上全面落后于台积电，丧失全球制程领导地位后，大众舆论对这家美国唯一从设计、制造到封测全覆盖的半导体企业的态度，呈现出惊人的一致变化：\n除了竞争对手和看热闹不嫌事大一样的顺便踩一脚，这种“批判趋势”到最后似乎演变成——这家半导体顶级巨头剩下的日子似乎屈指可数了。\n技术创新层面遭遇的危机也蔓延至他们的财务数据上，从2020年Q1到2021年Q3，英特尔净利润连续3个季度下滑；而历来作为数据中心市场的绝对王者，英特尔这一业务板块的收入也在三个季度内持续下降。\n2021年5月，权威市场调研机构 IC Insights发布的《2021年Q1全球Top15半导体公司业绩与排名》指出，英特尔虽然位列第一，但却是所有厂商中唯一一家营收下滑的企业。\n\n图片来自IC Insights\n英特尔当然焦虑。这种焦虑可能体现在：\n\n受到资本市场巨大压力，2021年年初突然换帅，重新启用有40年制造技术履历的帕特·基辛格(Pat Gelsinger)为新任CEO。\n\n\n迅速接受了阿斯麦比自己更为先进的EUV制造工艺，用了大约两个季度的时间修复了7nm技术。\n\n\n在制造环节投入巨资。今年3月，帕特·基辛格正式公布十分关键的“IDM 2.0”战略，宣布重返晶圆代工市场，同时宣布投资200亿美元在美国亚利桑那州新建两座晶圆厂；5月再次宣布，投资35亿美元升级新墨西哥州工厂，投资100亿美元在以色列兴建的芯片厂，还计划在欧盟建厂。\n\n\n越来越多的英特尔半导体技术专家现身说法，为自己的制造技术正名，强调“每家晶圆厂的制程数据有对外宣传的差异”。\n\n当然，根据虎嗅平台的观察和媒体反应，在国内大大小小的人工智能、物联网以及数据中心市场活动上，你能越来越多次看到英特尔出现的身影。\n\n英特尔 CEO 帕特·基辛格\n以重新夺回“制程节点”为目标的英特尔，今年3月发布的“IDM2.0战略”就以大手笔和”绝不放弃制造”的态度虽然引起产业重视，但因为表现不佳的财报状况持续受到争议；\n而昨天，包括CEO基辛格在内的4位英特尔高级制造技术专家，再次通过大范围公开英特尔的制程技术和实现路径，向半导体产业投掷了一枚“新炸弹”：\n\n英特尔的确在10nm和7nm有所延迟（如果感兴趣，可以看我的这篇文章《英特尔退位，台积电称王》），但在5nm节点上，英特尔自认为非但没有延迟，反而会完成超越。\n\n\n为了应对台积电等对手的“制程虚假宣传”，以及纠正大家对制程的认知误区，英特尔直接舍弃了“10nm，7nm，5nm，3nm”这一本质上由摩尔定律决定的说法，而是直接采用100%英特尔主观视角的新命名体系——Intel7，Intel4，Intel3，Intel20A，Intel18A。\n\n\n这一次公开的Intel20A，本质对应的就是5nm制程。这是一个英特尔近2年来闭口不谈的制程节点，相关时间计划基本到7nm就戛然截止了。英特尔首次宣布将通过Intel20A，进入“埃米时代”。\n\n\nIntel20A背后两大关键技术非常值得注意。其中，这个制程将会采用全新的晶体管结构Gate-All-Around，并非是为22nm以下制程产品化立下汗马功劳的FinFET结构。\n\n换言之，这种应用了新材料的新结构芯片，将会对传统制程概念，产生重大改变。就如一位半导体技术专家告诉虎嗅：“这种新的材料结构，制程这些几纳米啥的就没那么大的关系了。”\n英特尔新制程命名体系：快醒醒，客户们\n关于制程的命名问题，被产业诟病已久。\n譬如我们曾在《英特尔退位，台积电称王》这篇文章里提及，业内不少工程师认为，英特尔在对待“纳米”制程数字的态度更实在，甚至表示“英特尔的10nm芯片对标的其实是台积电的7nm，甚至比后者的7nm都好”。\n这也是基辛格上任后，多次在公开场合呼吁大家正确理解“制程数字”：\n\n “包括英特尔在内，使用着各不相同的制程节点命名和编号方案，这些方案既不指代任何具体的度量方法，也无法全面展现如何实现芯片能效和性能的最佳平衡。”\n\n这就像是车展上那些号称自己芯片达到几百几千Tops的汽车，也像是加州每年发布的《自动驾驶接管报告》——没有统一测试条件和足够的企业诚信度，就绝对不配说出“谁比谁性能好”的结论。\n所以，英特尔这次兴师动众地更换了命名体系，美名曰：“让客户对整个行业的制程节点演进有一个更准确认知，进而做出更明智的决策”，其实主要目的就是对付台积电和三星不那么太靠谱的5nm和3nm制程名字。\n\n2021年下半年将推出的Intel 7 （是不是至少看起来像是7nm？），其实就是英特尔之前发布的10nm Enhanced SuperFin；\n\n\n2023年上半年发布的Intel 4（至少看起来像4nm？），其实就是英特尔之前PPT的7nm；\n\n\n2023年下半年发布的Intel3，其实就是英特尔之前PPT上的7nm+；\n\n\n2024年上半年发布的Intel20A（看起来像不像2nm？），其实就是英特尔标准下的5nm；\n\n\n2025年上半年发布Intel18A，其实就是英特尔标准下的5nm+。\n\n\n图片来自英特尔\n实际上，随着晶体管结构的愈加复杂，早在21世纪初，产业内就开始对芯片的纳米制程命名有了“分化趋势”。\n我们都清楚，微处理器是由以特定方式连接起来的数十亿晶体管组成。这些晶体管充当了“开关”的角色，负责处理电子数据的1和0。\n基辛格解释，在晶体管顶部有一个区域叫“栅极”，它决定了晶体管是开启还是关闭。而“制程节点”指代的是晶体管所需的数千个制造步骤组成的复杂方案。\n而所有最顶级半导体公司几乎都有同一个目标——让这些芯片变得更小、更快、更便宜、更高能效——最好的例子莫过于苹果的5nm制程芯片M1（有太多关于M1的测评可以去看，我也买了一台M1的Macbook Air，爱不释手）。\n\n最初，制程工艺“节点”的名称与晶体管的栅极长度相对应，并以“微米”为度量单位。随着晶体管越变越小，栅极的长度越来越微缩，产业开始以纳米为度量单位。\n而关于制程命名改变的关键节点出现在1997年。\n“随着技术进步和应变硅（strained silicon）等其他创新技术的出现，除了缩小晶体管，更快、更便宜和更高能效也变得同样重要。” 基辛格认为，从这时开始，传统命名方法不再与实际的晶体管栅极长度相匹配。\n换言之，晶体管尺寸在某种程度上不是唯一的决定因素，它们之间的“互连”等因素也不能忽略。\n2011年，在英特尔推出FinFET晶体管结构技术后，行业进一步分化。这是一种构建晶体管的全新方式，具有独特的形状和结构。\n这个结构就是将停滞不前的22nm继续往下缩进的关键技术。但要很显然，从22nm开始，不要说大众，就连产业内对制程数字的理解与它的实际“坐标”也开始逐渐脱离。\n这也是英特尔如今建立新命名体系的根本缘由。\n\n 正如虎嗅之前在采访工程师时得到的答案：“英特尔在制造工艺标准制定上相对更激进，要求也更高。但的确制程延迟了1~2年，说落后并不意味着他们没有追赶的可能性。”\n\n但英特尔这次大刀阔斧的制程更名，也许不是不相信自己，而是嗅到了市场和资本已经被“命名”困惑已久（譬如开头），甚至依此来做出商务判断的残酷现实。\n不过我们想到了一个问题——即便推出了新命名产品，客户没有理由不问一句：“你这intel7到底几纳米？对标的是台积电的几纳米？”\n说实话，我们更想知道英特尔在遇到这个问题时怎么回答。\n誓死捍卫摩尔定律？\n基辛格在这次可谓是极为详尽的“制程技术科普会”上，至少提了三次关于“摩尔定律不会消亡，英特尔会通过各种方法，如改材料、晶体管结构，以及封装等角度，继续来延续摩尔定律”的决心。\n实话讲，除了这个意味深长的新命名体系，英特尔最有趣且最应该受到关注的产品，毫无疑问是Intel3之后的Intel20A。\n（当然，Intel4 将作为第一批应用阿斯麦高数值孔径（High-NA）极紫外辐射光刻技术(EUV)的处理器也倍受瞩目，但象征意义不如Intel20A。）\nIntel 20A（5nm）之所以被英特尔称为历史上制程技术发展的下一个分水岭，是因为它是第一块应用英特尔两大“开创性技术”的芯片：\n\n替代FinFET的全新晶体管架构 Gate-All-Around（英特尔把它命名为RibbonFET）\n能够解决“互联瓶颈”的电能传输系统PowerVia。\n\nFinFET技术的重要性已经无须赘述。\n它是加州伯克利大学电子工程与计算机专业教授胡正明在1999年研发出的 3D 晶体管技术（鳍型晶体管）。英特尔之所以能在 12 年后率先量产出 22nm 晶体管，台积电与三星顺利过渡至 16/14nm 制程节点，FinFET功不可没。\n正是这项“发明”，摩尔定律才得以“延寿”数十年。\n但是，随着制程从5nm持续缩进至3nm，半导体制造专家们发现，进一步减少 FinFET 尺寸，就越来越受到驱动电流和静电控制的限制。\n而将要替代它的Gate All Around的常用名为GAAFET（全栅场效应管），它使用栅极包围的带状通道，从而能实现更快的晶体管切换速度和更好的控制。因此，在更小的占用空间内，可具备更高的性能。三星在2020年曾宣布将在3nm制程芯片上应用这一架构。\n\n图片来自泛林半导体\n与 FinFET不同的是，在 FinFET 中，较高电流需要多个并排的鳍片；GAA 晶体管的载流能力主要是通过垂直堆叠几个纳米片（上图），而栅极材料主要是包裹在沟道周围来提高的。纳米片的尺寸可以按比例缩放，以便晶体管可以按照要求的特定性能进行调整。\n听起来，“纳米片”的概念其实理解起来并不是那么困难；而且实际上，这项技术已经被研发多年。但其之所以不受业内“重用”，主要瓶颈就在于“材料”。\n根据泛林半导体给出的解释，GAA晶体管是通过“交替硅”和“硅锗外延层”的超晶格来制作的，这是构成纳米片的基础，此外制作工艺相对复杂，可能需要钌、钼、镍等各种合金新材料进行沉积、蚀刻、填充。\n\n 一位半导体专家这样给虎嗅总结：“它（GAA）将对半导体的基底材料进行更改，半导体连接的材料也要进行更改。同时整个晶体管的物理结构也要变化。”\n\n因此，带领团队开发这项技术的Sanjay Natarajan博士将英特尔的GAA——RibbonFET称为一次“晶体管性能上的重大飞跃”，并非虚话。\n根据测试芯片结果，他们预计RibbonFET晶体管带来的性能和密度提升，将超过当下的FinFET晶体管。而Intel 20A将是应用RibbonFET的第一枚芯片。\n\n而电能传输系统PowerVia则是英特尔工程师开发的一项独特技术。Sanjay Natarajan博士作为这项技术的开发负责人，指出半导体晶体管结构中存在的最大传统问题之一便是“布线效率低下”。\n“传统互连技术是在晶体管层的顶部进行互联，经常产生电源线和信号线的互混，导致了布线效率低下，进而影响性能和功耗。”\n他们的解决方法，便是把电源线置于晶体管层的下面（也就是晶圆的背面）。通过减少晶圆正面的电源布线，腾出更多的“空地儿”用于优化信号布线，并减少时延，实现更好的电能传输。\n\n值得注意的是，这两项将用于Intel20A的关键技术，虽然不可避免被人诟病为“仍然处于PPT状态”（毕竟还都是PPT），但英特尔的专家们展示了这些测试芯片的扫描电镜图像，显然经过了一系列测试。\n就像上面所说，它们的成功应用，将决定着英特尔是否能在5nm这个关键节点上进行反超。\n从时间来看，很明显，2019年时PPT上规划的“2023年实现7nm++”，与这次规划的“2024年实现Intel20A”没有多少间隔。也就是说，依然有机会在5nm这个节点上翻盘。\n\n英特尔2019年10月的制程产品规划图\n如基辛格所说，英特尔Intel20A在2024年的问世与两大关键技术的真正应用，将标志着半导体“埃米时代”（1埃米=0.1纳米）的启幕。\n现在来听，其实更像是英特尔在向外界喊话：你们以为我还想在“纳米时代”争夺领导权？不，我们要进入一个比纳米更小的单位去争夺话语权了。\n写在最后…希望不是PPT\n但话说回来，既然完全改变了以纳米为单位的命名体系，而且晶体管结构和材料正在发生下一轮巨大变化。此外，英特尔也在从封装技术层面提高芯片的带宽密度和能效……\n这一切难道不是意味着，所谓的纳米还是埃米的数字单位，已经越来越没意义了吗？\n英特尔嘴上说在捍卫摩尔定律，其实已经认识到不能再依靠摩尔定律。\n如今，Intel20A的制造工艺虽然官方说拿下了高通这个大订单，但距离2024年变数还有很大。我们虽然觉得英特尔这场发布会的意义重大，并且产品规划让人没有异议，但是PPT能够转变称真正的产品，还是需要实物说话。\n毕竟，当年延迟了4年的14nm产品，当时PPT做的也挺不错的。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"EWT":0.9,"03086":0.9,"TWmain":0.9,"09086":0.9,"INTC":0.9,"TSM":0.9,"03145":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2908,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":808087297,"gmtCreate":1627544729719,"gmtModify":1703492037799,"author":{"id":"3586587763605977","authorId":"3586587763605977","name":"程導绅","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/17e557db7a706e6821394c3f5dc700d2","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586587763605977","idStr":"3586587763605977"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/808087297","repostId":"2155908504","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2155908504","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1627544101,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2155908504?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-29 15:35","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Taper is asymptotic, so it's hard to panic","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2155908504","media":"覃汉投资笔记","summary":"美联储7月FOMC会议要点总结：①经济已经朝削减QE取得一些进展并将在未来的会议上继续评估，与“进一步重大进展”（“substantial further progress”）的门槛仍有距离但也更近了","content":"<p>Summary of the key points of the Fed's July FOMC meeting: ① The economy has made some progress towards reducing QE and will continue to evaluate it at future meetings. It is still far from the threshold of \"substantial further progress\" but also closer; ② downplayed the market's concern that the Delta mutant virus dragged down the economic prospects; ③ Reiterate that inflation is temporary and there is no need to panic; ④ In the future, the high probability of reducing QE will be that Treasury Bond and MBS will reduce it together; ⑤ Emphasize again that it is too early to talk about rate hike; ⑥ Set up a standing repurchase facility tool (SRF), which is divided into domestic primary dealers in the United States and overseas central banks.</p><p>The most important signal of this meeting is undoubtedly that the Federal Reserve has begun to warm up to cut QE purchases (Taper). Policy communication is an art. If it is too abrupt and blunt, market expectations will often overshoot, causing drastic fluctuations in asset prices, similar to the \"cutting panic\" in May 2013. Therefore, in this round of policy cycle, the Fed's policy withdrawal and communication mode is gradual, smooth and transparent.</p><p>The most important change in the wording of the statement at this meeting is that \"some progress has been made on the economic objectives and will continue to be evaluated at future meetings\". The Delta variant virus that the market is worried about has not shaken the Fed's overall optimistic expectation of the economic outlook. Powell believes that the impact of the epidemic on the economy \"may be weaker and weaker\".</p><p>Considering that Taper's threshold is \"further significant progress\" in the economy, we recommend focusing on the extent to which the employment gap is filled. As of June, the employment gap caused by this epidemic was still unfilled by 6.76 million people, and the recovery rate was 70%. When the Federal Reserve announced Taper in December 2013, the recovery rate of the employment gap caused by the financial crisis was 88%. If the average monthly new jobs are about 690,000 in the second half of the year, it will not be difficult to achieve a similar gap recovery rate by the end of December.</p><p>The market is always concerned about the rhythm of Taper, and at present, the expectation is gradually consistent. It is not surprising that the Federal Reserve will hold on at this meeting. The market generally expects that the annual meeting of the central bank in Jackson Hole in August or the FOMC meeting in September will be the time when the Federal Reserve begins to suggest that it will consider Taper, and it may officially announce Taper at the end of 2021 or early 2022. We maintain our previous judgment that the December FOMC meeting was announced and implemented in 2022.</p><p>According to Powell, the July FOMC meeting is the first time that Fed officials have conducted in-depth internal discussions on the possible timing and varieties involved in Taper in the future. Although there is no internal consensus on when to start Taper, it is inclined to cut US Treasury Bond and MBS at the same time once Taper.</p><p>Looking back at the last round of Taper, in 2014 the Fed reduced the monthly purchase quota (US Treasury Bond + MBS) by $10 billion at each meeting, and officially stopped QE at the October meeting, which took 10 months to complete. At present, the Fed's monthly purchase amount (US Treasury Bond + MBS) is USD 120 billion. If the monthly purchase amount is reduced by USD 15 billion, it will take roughly 8 months to stop QE. If Taper is announced in December, it will end roughly in 2022Q3.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6292deabf5669e43200af797b2a273c6\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"417\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>In terms of inflation, this meeting once again confirmed that the Federal Reserve basically gave up its prediction of when inflation will peak, but its bottom line is that the long-term inflation expectation can't get out of control, which is why the inflation data continues to exceed expectations, but the Federal Reserve still firmly believes that \"inflation is temporary\". Powell also emphasized that \"if short-term price level increases do not affect long-term inflation expectations, then it is likely not to affect the future inflation path\".</p><p>The Fed's most concerned inflation expectation indicator-the Common Inflation Expectations Index (CIE), which combines professional forecasters, household surveys and market implied inflation expectation indicators, and professional forecasters and businesses tend to predict inflation more accurately than household surveys or market pricing. CIE moved up from 1.94% in 2020Q3 to 2.05% in 2021Q2 and is not currently surging following the inflation data.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/44dbded41058141db61cdcc3c83bff66\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"415\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>The reason why the US Treasury yields declined in the past month was mainly due to the economic worries caused by the raging mutant virus and the deadlock of fiscal stimulus. The reason why it once fell below 1.2% was mainly due to technical factors at the transaction level (short covering, rebalancing of pension stocks and bonds, strong overseas demand, etc.).</p><p>When the 10-year U.S. bond interest rate falls below 1.20%, what we need to think about is whether the current pricing of the U.S. economic outlook in US Treasury yields is too pessimistic, especially considering that the previous 1.20% level from the end of January to the beginning of February corresponds to the background that the U.S. fiscal stimulus and mass vaccination have not yet landed.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d6a7a8ca1c0e4573b2e48caa2fd25614\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"428\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>Considering the current pessimistic pricing of the economic outlook in US Treasury yields, the unsustainable driving force of technical factors, and the rule that the bear market rebound space of U.S. bonds is about 50bp, the downside of U.S. bond interest rate in the second half of the year is limited.</p><p>Looking back at 2013-2014, the slowdown of employment recovery in 2013Q3 led the Federal Reserve to stand still at the September-October interest rate meeting, and the 10-year US bond interest rate rose by 38bp from a low of 10.23 of 2.51% to 2.89% before the December interest rate meeting. The Federal Reserve officially announced it on December 18 and implemented it in early 2014. The 10-year U.S. bond interest rate rose again by 15bp to a peak of 3.04% during the year, and then returned to the downward channel in 2014 (global economic worries).</p><p>Referring to historical experience, we believe that as the Federal Reserve begins to release the Taper signal in the third quarter, the 10-year US bond interest rate may rise again and gradually peak after the Taper official announcement, but it is difficult to break through the previous high of 1.70-1.80%.</p><p>Therefore, even if the US Treasury yields returns to the upward channel next, the slope is difficult to be too steep, and there is a high probability that it will be in a wide range of fluctuations. In addition, the market's expectation for the Fed's withdrawal from easing is very sufficient, so there will be no more situation in February-March at the beginning of the year that the upward trend of the US Treasury yields will have a serious impact on the equity market. (End)</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4eedbbd7ea3f91182f1395c52927f0f6\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"417\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>","source":"lsy1620296573452","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Taper is asymptotic, so it's hard to panic</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTaper is asymptotic, so it's hard to panic\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">覃汉投资笔记</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-07-29 15:35</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Summary of the key points of the Fed's July FOMC meeting: ① The economy has made some progress towards reducing QE and will continue to evaluate it at future meetings. It is still far from the threshold of \"substantial further progress\" but also closer; ② downplayed the market's concern that the Delta mutant virus dragged down the economic prospects; ③ Reiterate that inflation is temporary and there is no need to panic; ④ In the future, the high probability of reducing QE will be that Treasury Bond and MBS will reduce it together; ⑤ Emphasize again that it is too early to talk about rate hike; ⑥ Set up a standing repurchase facility tool (SRF), which is divided into domestic primary dealers in the United States and overseas central banks.</p><p>The most important signal of this meeting is undoubtedly that the Federal Reserve has begun to warm up to cut QE purchases (Taper). Policy communication is an art. If it is too abrupt and blunt, market expectations will often overshoot, causing drastic fluctuations in asset prices, similar to the \"cutting panic\" in May 2013. Therefore, in this round of policy cycle, the Fed's policy withdrawal and communication mode is gradual, smooth and transparent.</p><p>The most important change in the wording of the statement at this meeting is that \"some progress has been made on the economic objectives and will continue to be evaluated at future meetings\". The Delta variant virus that the market is worried about has not shaken the Fed's overall optimistic expectation of the economic outlook. Powell believes that the impact of the epidemic on the economy \"may be weaker and weaker\".</p><p>Considering that Taper's threshold is \"further significant progress\" in the economy, we recommend focusing on the extent to which the employment gap is filled. As of June, the employment gap caused by this epidemic was still unfilled by 6.76 million people, and the recovery rate was 70%. When the Federal Reserve announced Taper in December 2013, the recovery rate of the employment gap caused by the financial crisis was 88%. If the average monthly new jobs are about 690,000 in the second half of the year, it will not be difficult to achieve a similar gap recovery rate by the end of December.</p><p>The market is always concerned about the rhythm of Taper, and at present, the expectation is gradually consistent. It is not surprising that the Federal Reserve will hold on at this meeting. The market generally expects that the annual meeting of the central bank in Jackson Hole in August or the FOMC meeting in September will be the time when the Federal Reserve begins to suggest that it will consider Taper, and it may officially announce Taper at the end of 2021 or early 2022. We maintain our previous judgment that the December FOMC meeting was announced and implemented in 2022.</p><p>According to Powell, the July FOMC meeting is the first time that Fed officials have conducted in-depth internal discussions on the possible timing and varieties involved in Taper in the future. Although there is no internal consensus on when to start Taper, it is inclined to cut US Treasury Bond and MBS at the same time once Taper.</p><p>Looking back at the last round of Taper, in 2014 the Fed reduced the monthly purchase quota (US Treasury Bond + MBS) by $10 billion at each meeting, and officially stopped QE at the October meeting, which took 10 months to complete. At present, the Fed's monthly purchase amount (US Treasury Bond + MBS) is USD 120 billion. If the monthly purchase amount is reduced by USD 15 billion, it will take roughly 8 months to stop QE. If Taper is announced in December, it will end roughly in 2022Q3.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6292deabf5669e43200af797b2a273c6\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"417\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>In terms of inflation, this meeting once again confirmed that the Federal Reserve basically gave up its prediction of when inflation will peak, but its bottom line is that the long-term inflation expectation can't get out of control, which is why the inflation data continues to exceed expectations, but the Federal Reserve still firmly believes that \"inflation is temporary\". Powell also emphasized that \"if short-term price level increases do not affect long-term inflation expectations, then it is likely not to affect the future inflation path\".</p><p>The Fed's most concerned inflation expectation indicator-the Common Inflation Expectations Index (CIE), which combines professional forecasters, household surveys and market implied inflation expectation indicators, and professional forecasters and businesses tend to predict inflation more accurately than household surveys or market pricing. CIE moved up from 1.94% in 2020Q3 to 2.05% in 2021Q2 and is not currently surging following the inflation data.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/44dbded41058141db61cdcc3c83bff66\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"415\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>The reason why the US Treasury yields declined in the past month was mainly due to the economic worries caused by the raging mutant virus and the deadlock of fiscal stimulus. The reason why it once fell below 1.2% was mainly due to technical factors at the transaction level (short covering, rebalancing of pension stocks and bonds, strong overseas demand, etc.).</p><p>When the 10-year U.S. bond interest rate falls below 1.20%, what we need to think about is whether the current pricing of the U.S. economic outlook in US Treasury yields is too pessimistic, especially considering that the previous 1.20% level from the end of January to the beginning of February corresponds to the background that the U.S. fiscal stimulus and mass vaccination have not yet landed.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d6a7a8ca1c0e4573b2e48caa2fd25614\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"428\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>Considering the current pessimistic pricing of the economic outlook in US Treasury yields, the unsustainable driving force of technical factors, and the rule that the bear market rebound space of U.S. bonds is about 50bp, the downside of U.S. bond interest rate in the second half of the year is limited.</p><p>Looking back at 2013-2014, the slowdown of employment recovery in 2013Q3 led the Federal Reserve to stand still at the September-October interest rate meeting, and the 10-year US bond interest rate rose by 38bp from a low of 10.23 of 2.51% to 2.89% before the December interest rate meeting. The Federal Reserve officially announced it on December 18 and implemented it in early 2014. The 10-year U.S. bond interest rate rose again by 15bp to a peak of 3.04% during the year, and then returned to the downward channel in 2014 (global economic worries).</p><p>Referring to historical experience, we believe that as the Federal Reserve begins to release the Taper signal in the third quarter, the 10-year US bond interest rate may rise again and gradually peak after the Taper official announcement, but it is difficult to break through the previous high of 1.70-1.80%.</p><p>Therefore, even if the US Treasury yields returns to the upward channel next, the slope is difficult to be too steep, and there is a high probability that it will be in a wide range of fluctuations. In addition, the market's expectation for the Fed's withdrawal from easing is very sufficient, so there will be no more situation in February-March at the beginning of the year that the upward trend of the US Treasury yields will have a serious impact on the equity market. (End)</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4eedbbd7ea3f91182f1395c52927f0f6\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"417\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"https://cj.sina.cn/article/normal_detail?url=https://finance.sina.com.cn/money/bond/market/2021-07-29/doc-ikqciyzk8314250.shtml\">覃汉投资笔记</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a106188796ec9abb78b8a3cfbae334a5","relate_stocks":{"161125":"标普500","513500":"标普500ETF博时","UPRO":"三倍做多标普500ETF-ProShares","IVV":"标普500ETF-iShares","GOVT":"iShares安硕核心美国国债ETF","SDS":"两倍做空标普500 ETF-ProShares","TQQQ":"纳指三倍做多ETF","DJX":"1/100道琼斯","TLT":"20+年以上美国国债ETF-iShares","OEF":"标普100指数ETF-iShares","IEF":"债券指数ETF-iShares Barclays 7-10年","SQQQ":"纳指三倍做空ETF","QQQ":"纳指100ETF","SPXU":"三倍做空标普500ETF-ProShares","SHY":"债券指数ETF-iShares Barclays 1-3年国债",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","DOG":"道指ETF-ProShares做空","OEX":"标普100","BND":"债券指数ETF-Vanguard美国","IEI":"iShares Barclays 3-7 Year Trea","DXD":"两倍做空道琼30指数ETF-ProShares","QLD":"2倍做多纳斯达克100指数ETF-ProShares","SSO":"2倍做多标普500ETF-ProShares","DDM":"2倍做多道指ETF-ProShares","SPY":"标普500ETF","PSQ":"做空纳斯达克100指数ETF-ProShares","UDOW":"三倍做多道指30ETF-ProShares","SH":"做空标普500-Proshares",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","QID":"两倍做空纳斯达克指数ETF-ProShares","SDOW":"三倍做空道指30ETF-ProShares"},"source_url":"https://cj.sina.cn/article/normal_detail?url=https://finance.sina.com.cn/money/bond/market/2021-07-29/doc-ikqciyzk8314250.shtml","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2155908504","content_text":"美联储7月FOMC会议要点总结：①经济已经朝削减QE取得一些进展并将在未来的会议上继续评估，与“进一步重大进展”（“substantial further progress”）的门槛仍有距离但也更近了；②淡化了市场对Delta变异病毒拖累经济前景的担忧；③重申通胀是暂时的，无需感到恐慌；④未来削减QE大概率会是国债和MBS一起减；⑤再次强调谈论加息过早；⑥设立常备回购便利工具（SRF），分为面向美国国内一级交易商和海外央行。\n本次会议最重要的信号，无疑就是美联储开始为削减QE购买（Taper）进行预热。政策沟通是门艺术，过于突兀与生硬，市场预期往往就会超调，引发资产价格剧烈波动，类似2013年5月的“削减恐慌”。所以，在本轮政策周期中，美联储政策退出和沟通的模式都是力求渐进、平滑和透明。\n本次会议声明措辞中，最重要的变化就是“经济目标已经取得一些进展并将在未来的会议上继续评估”。市场担忧的Delta变异病毒，并没有动摇美联储对经济前景整体乐观的预期，鲍威尔认为疫情对经济的冲击“可能一波比一波弱”。\n考虑到Taper的门槛是经济取得“进一步重大进展”，我们建议关注就业缺口的填补程度。本轮疫情造成的就业缺口截止6月仍差676万人未填补，恢复率为70%，而2013年12月美联储宣布Taper时，金融危机造成的就业缺口恢复率为88%，若下半年平均每月新增就业约69万人，年底12月实现类似的缺口恢复率难度不大。\n市场关心的始终是Taper的节奏，目前来看预期也逐渐走向一致。本次会议美联储按兵不动并不意外，市场普遍预期是8月Jackson Hole的央行年会或者9月FOMC会议将会是美联储开始暗示考虑Taper的时点，并且可能在2021年底或2022年初正式宣布Taper。我们则维持此前的判断，即12月FOMC会议宣布并在2022年开始执行。\n根据鲍威尔所言，7月FOMC会议是美联储官员首次针对未来Taper可能的时点和涉及品种进行深度内部讨论，虽然内部尚未对何时开始Taper形成共识，但倾向于一旦Taper就同时削减美国国债和MBS。\n回顾上一轮Taper，2014年美联储在每次会议上将每月购买额度（美国国债+MBS）减少100亿美元，并在10月会议上正式停止QE，历时10个月完成。对比当下，美联储每月购买额度（美国国债+MBS）为1200亿美元，若按照每月减少额度150亿美元，则大致需要8个月实现停止QE，如果12月宣布Taper，那么大致2022Q3结束。\n\n通胀方面，本次会议再次确认了美联储基本放弃对通胀何时见顶的预测，但它的底线是守住长期通胀预期不能失控，这也是为何通胀数据连续超预期，美联储却依然坚信“通胀是暂时性”的原因。鲍威尔也强调“如果短期的物价水平上涨不会影响长期的通胀预期，那么它就很可能不会影响未来的通胀路径”。\n美联储最关注的通胀预期指标——共同通胀预期指数（CIE），该指数综合了专业预测者、家庭调查和市场隐含的通胀预期指标，而专业预测者和企业对通胀的预测往往比家庭调查或市场定价更准确。CIE从2020Q3的1.94%上行到2021Q2的2.05%，目前并没有跟随通胀数据而飙升。\n\n过去一个月美债利率之所以下行，主要来自于变异病毒肆虐叠加财政刺激僵局所引发的经济担忧，而之所以一度跌破1.2%，主要来自交易层面的技术因素（空头回补、养老金股债再平衡、海外需求较强等）。\n在10年美债利率跌破1.20%之际，我们需要思考的是当前美债利率对美国经济前景的定价是否过于悲观，尤其是考虑到此前1月底-2月初1.20%的水平对应的背景是美国财政刺激和疫苗大规模接种都还没有落地。\n\n考虑到当前美债利率对经济前景的定价过于悲观、技术性因素的驱动力量难以持续、以及美债熊市反弹空间约50bp的规律，下半年10年美债利率下行空间有限。\n回顾2013-2014年，2013Q3就业复苏放缓导致美联储在9-10月议息会议上按兵不动，10年美债利率从10.23低点2.51%累计上行38bp至12月议息会议前的2.89%。美联储在12.18正式官宣并在2014年初执行，10年美债利率再次上行15bp至年内高点3.04%见顶，随后在2014年重回下降通道（全球经济担忧）。\n参考历史经验，我们认为，随着美联储在三季度开始释放Taper信号，10年美债利率可能会再次上行，并在Taper官宣落地后逐步见顶，但很难突破前期高点1.70-1.80%。\n所以，接下来即使美债利率重回上行通道，但是斜率很难太陡，大概率处于宽幅区间震荡格局，再加上市场对联储退出宽松预期非常充分，所以不会再出现年初2-3月份那种因为美债利率上行对权益市场造成严重冲击的情况。（完）","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"161125":0.9,"513500":0.9,"SSO":0.9,"UBmain":0.9,"IVV":0.9,"ZFmain":0.9,"NQmain":0.9,"QID":0.9,"ZNmain":0.9,"SH":0.9,"DJX":0.9,"IEI":0.9,".DJI":0.9,"BND":0.9,"SPXU":0.9,"SDOW":0.9,"DDM":0.9,"UPRO":0.9,"MNQmain":0.9,"TNmain":0.9,".SPX":0.9,"DOG":0.9,"ESmain":0.9,"PSQ":0.9,"SHY":0.9,"GOVT":0.9,"TLT":0.9,"SQQQ":0.9,"OEF":0.9,"IEF":0.9,"UDOW":0.9,"OEX":0.9,"QQQ":0.9,"ZTmain":0.9,"DXD":0.9,"SPY":0.9,"SDS":0.9,"QLD":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,"TQQQ":0.9,"ZBmain":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2395,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127346059,"gmtCreate":1624837541771,"gmtModify":1703845682609,"author":{"id":"3586587763605977","authorId":"3586587763605977","name":"程導绅","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/17e557db7a706e6821394c3f5dc700d2","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586587763605977","idStr":"3586587763605977"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"??","listText":"??","text":"??","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127346059","repostId":"2146121007","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2127,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":124650528,"gmtCreate":1624763473364,"gmtModify":1703844687981,"author":{"id":"3586587763605977","authorId":"3586587763605977","name":"程導绅","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/17e557db7a706e6821394c3f5dc700d2","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586587763605977","idStr":"3586587763605977"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"??","listText":"??","text":"??","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/124650528","repostId":"1165215748","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1165215748","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624762603,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1165215748?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-27 10:56","market":"other","language":"zh","title":"24-hour 3.2 billion yuan explosion warehouse, virtual currency collapse across the board, mining machine 50% discount sale","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1165215748","media":"中国证券报","summary":"北京时间6月26日晚间，比特币再度暴跌，一度下探30000美元，将这半年积累的涨幅悉数跌去。\n这也是比特币本月第二次跌至30000美元，彻底粉碎了炒币者的信心。\n仅仅两个月，虚拟货币市场的风向就出现了","content":"<p><div>On the evening of June 26th, Beijing time, the Bitcoin plummeted again, once falling to $30,000, which dropped all the gains accumulated in the past six months. This is also the second time this month that Bitcoin has fallen to $30,000, completely shattering the confidence of speculators. In just two months, the wind has reversed in the virtual currency market. Virtual currency collapsed across the board On the evening of June 26th, Beijing time, after three days of pulling at the front line of $30,000, the price in Bitcoin took a sharp turn, falling by more than 53.5% compared with the highest price of $64,900 on April 14th. At present, the price has returned to the beginning of this year Tesla CEO Elon...</p><p><a href=\"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/FhLRf65HJ8EHrcKXMRJu1Q\">Web link</a></div></p>","source":"zgzqb","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>24-hour 3.2 billion yuan explosion warehouse, virtual currency collapse across the board, mining machine 50% discount sale</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\n24-hour 3.2 billion yuan explosion warehouse, virtual currency collapse across the board, mining machine 50% discount sale\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">中国证券报</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-27 10:56</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><div>On the evening of June 26th, Beijing time, the Bitcoin plummeted again, once falling to $30,000, which dropped all the gains accumulated in the past six months. This is also the second time this month that Bitcoin has fallen to $30,000, completely shattering the confidence of speculators. In just two months, the wind has reversed in the virtual currency market. Virtual currency collapsed across the board On the evening of June 26th, Beijing time, after three days of pulling at the front line of $30,000, the price in Bitcoin took a sharp turn, falling by more than 53.5% compared with the highest price of $64,900 on April 14th. At present, the price has returned to the beginning of this year Tesla CEO Elon...</p><p><a href=\"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/FhLRf65HJ8EHrcKXMRJu1Q\">Web link</a></div></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/FhLRf65HJ8EHrcKXMRJu1Q\">中国证券报</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f76545b6ea7eb27730ee55d40b45ce15","relate_stocks":{"EBON":"亿邦国际"},"source_url":"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/FhLRf65HJ8EHrcKXMRJu1Q","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1165215748","content_text":"北京时间6月26日晚间，比特币再度暴跌，一度下探30000美元，将这半年积累的涨幅悉数跌去。\n这也是比特币本月第二次跌至30000美元，彻底粉碎了炒币者的信心。\n仅仅两个月，虚拟货币市场的风向就出现了大逆转。\n虚拟货币全线崩溃\n北京时间6月26日晚间，在30000美元一线拉扯3天之后，比特币价格急转直下，较4月14日的年内最高价64900美元，跌超53.5%。目前价格已回归至今年初特斯拉CEO埃隆·马斯克力推比特币之前的水平。\n\n图片来源：欧易\nUAlCoin数据显示，虚拟货币合约一日内共爆仓超32亿元人民币，超3万多头遭血洗。\n\n图片来源：UAlCoin\nglassnode数据显示，比特币交易活跃地址数量已创下今年以来新低，比特币的交易活跃度回落至今年的底部区间，关注的人数逐渐减少。\n\n图片来源：alternative.me\nalternative.me显示，6月27日，虚拟货币交易情绪指数降至20，处于极度恐慌状态。最近一周，市场的恐慌情绪格外严重。\n百度搜索指数显示，比特币搜索量继续降低，市场关注度明显回落。\n虚拟货币投资者林海（化名）对中国证券报记者表示：“比特币刚开始跌的时候，炒币群里还一片谈笑风生，大家都在调侃什么时候加仓。自从这个月暴跌50%之后，群里都静悄悄的，大部分人不吭声了，群聊人数也开始减少，感觉快解散了。”\n有虚拟货币行情分析人士指出，比特币新增地址数近期持续下降，市场增量资金明显减少。从技术图上看，比特币上攻受阻，短线回落，考虑到上方抛压较大，短期走势逼近前期新低，反弹持续乏力，做空情绪浓厚，后续有深度回调的风险。\n特斯拉或抛售离场\n最近一周比特币价格徘徊在30000美元附近。分析师表示，很难预见比特币会出现转机。\n摩根大通团队分析师称，近期的市场是具有挑战性的。数据表明，虚拟货币的抛售是为了弥补损失，可能仍有大量低于实际价值的头寸需要通过市场清理。\n近日，摩根大通调查了来自1500多家机构的约3000名美国投资者。绝大多数参与者（占90%）表示他们的公司不会投资数字资产，80%的人声称他们永远不会进入加密货币市场。与此同时，五分之四的受访者表示，希望对虚拟货币采取更严格的限制。\n有市场人士猜测，近期比特币的下跌与马斯克对于比特币摇摆不定的态度有关，因为比特币挖矿消耗了大量能源与特斯拉的环保立场不符，特斯拉或将抛售比特币并拒绝比特币作为支付方式。目前相对脆弱的市场引发了散户的恐慌情绪。\n2月上旬，特斯拉宣布购入价值15亿美元的比特币，并透露将接受比特币作为付款方式。\n多位加密数字资产业内人士认为，这一消息是推动比特币价格从20000美元快速飙涨至60000美元的重要催化剂。然而，如今比特币的价格已经跌破当初特斯拉买入时的成本价，为特斯拉二季度的财报埋下隐患。\n根据市场预估，今年第一季度特斯拉开始投资比特币，并从中获得超过1亿美元的投资收益，占公司净利润将近四分之一。但比特币价格在二季度出现大幅调整，价格直接腰斩，若特斯拉未出售所持比特币，或造成接近1亿美元的投资损失。\n矿机遭5折甩卖\n币价腰斩，虚拟“挖矿”活动也不再活跃。\n虚拟货币“挖矿”活动的“重镇”四川省全面清理整顿挖矿行为，已经有一周时间。bytetree矿工生产和抛售累积数据数据显示，最近一周，矿工生产量和抛售量均出现下跌，显示出矿工抛售情绪明显上升，这或意味着更多矿工选择关机。\n\n图片来源：bytetree\n抛售矿机成为很多矿工的选择。大量二手矿机涌入市场，导致价格暴跌，与几个月前“一机难求“的火爆场面已是天差地别。\n一位矿机卖家指出, 原来用来交流的矿工群，现在已经用来卖变压器和矿机了。比特大陆S19jPRO-100T型号的矿机售价由7万多元腰斩至3万元左右。“只要能卖出去，什么价格都能接受。”\n\n图片来源：矿机卖家\n由于大量二手现货涌向市场，全球最大的加密货币矿机厂商比特大陆日前宣布，二手市场出货压力很大，为了帮助行业平稳过渡，决定全球暂时停售现货。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"EBON":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2608,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":124650528,"gmtCreate":1624763473364,"gmtModify":1703844687981,"author":{"id":"3586587763605977","authorId":"3586587763605977","name":"程導绅","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/17e557db7a706e6821394c3f5dc700d2","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586587763605977","idStr":"3586587763605977"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"??","listText":"??","text":"??","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/124650528","repostId":"1165215748","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1165215748","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624762603,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1165215748?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-27 10:56","market":"other","language":"zh","title":"24-hour 3.2 billion yuan explosion warehouse, virtual currency collapse across the board, mining machine 50% discount sale","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1165215748","media":"中国证券报","summary":"北京时间6月26日晚间，比特币再度暴跌，一度下探30000美元，将这半年积累的涨幅悉数跌去。\n这也是比特币本月第二次跌至30000美元，彻底粉碎了炒币者的信心。\n仅仅两个月，虚拟货币市场的风向就出现了","content":"<p><div>On the evening of June 26th, Beijing time, the Bitcoin plummeted again, once falling to $30,000, which dropped all the gains accumulated in the past six months. This is also the second time this month that Bitcoin has fallen to $30,000, completely shattering the confidence of speculators. In just two months, the wind has reversed in the virtual currency market. Virtual currency collapsed across the board On the evening of June 26th, Beijing time, after three days of pulling at the front line of $30,000, the price in Bitcoin took a sharp turn, falling by more than 53.5% compared with the highest price of $64,900 on April 14th. At present, the price has returned to the beginning of this year Tesla CEO Elon...</p><p><a href=\"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/FhLRf65HJ8EHrcKXMRJu1Q\">Web link</a></div></p>","source":"zgzqb","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>24-hour 3.2 billion yuan explosion warehouse, virtual currency collapse across the board, mining machine 50% discount sale</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\n24-hour 3.2 billion yuan explosion warehouse, virtual currency collapse across the board, mining machine 50% discount sale\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">中国证券报</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-27 10:56</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><div>On the evening of June 26th, Beijing time, the Bitcoin plummeted again, once falling to $30,000, which dropped all the gains accumulated in the past six months. This is also the second time this month that Bitcoin has fallen to $30,000, completely shattering the confidence of speculators. In just two months, the wind has reversed in the virtual currency market. Virtual currency collapsed across the board On the evening of June 26th, Beijing time, after three days of pulling at the front line of $30,000, the price in Bitcoin took a sharp turn, falling by more than 53.5% compared with the highest price of $64,900 on April 14th. At present, the price has returned to the beginning of this year Tesla CEO Elon...</p><p><a href=\"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/FhLRf65HJ8EHrcKXMRJu1Q\">Web link</a></div></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/FhLRf65HJ8EHrcKXMRJu1Q\">中国证券报</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f76545b6ea7eb27730ee55d40b45ce15","relate_stocks":{"EBON":"亿邦国际"},"source_url":"https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/FhLRf65HJ8EHrcKXMRJu1Q","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1165215748","content_text":"北京时间6月26日晚间，比特币再度暴跌，一度下探30000美元，将这半年积累的涨幅悉数跌去。\n这也是比特币本月第二次跌至30000美元，彻底粉碎了炒币者的信心。\n仅仅两个月，虚拟货币市场的风向就出现了大逆转。\n虚拟货币全线崩溃\n北京时间6月26日晚间，在30000美元一线拉扯3天之后，比特币价格急转直下，较4月14日的年内最高价64900美元，跌超53.5%。目前价格已回归至今年初特斯拉CEO埃隆·马斯克力推比特币之前的水平。\n\n图片来源：欧易\nUAlCoin数据显示，虚拟货币合约一日内共爆仓超32亿元人民币，超3万多头遭血洗。\n\n图片来源：UAlCoin\nglassnode数据显示，比特币交易活跃地址数量已创下今年以来新低，比特币的交易活跃度回落至今年的底部区间，关注的人数逐渐减少。\n\n图片来源：alternative.me\nalternative.me显示，6月27日，虚拟货币交易情绪指数降至20，处于极度恐慌状态。最近一周，市场的恐慌情绪格外严重。\n百度搜索指数显示，比特币搜索量继续降低，市场关注度明显回落。\n虚拟货币投资者林海（化名）对中国证券报记者表示：“比特币刚开始跌的时候，炒币群里还一片谈笑风生，大家都在调侃什么时候加仓。自从这个月暴跌50%之后，群里都静悄悄的，大部分人不吭声了，群聊人数也开始减少，感觉快解散了。”\n有虚拟货币行情分析人士指出，比特币新增地址数近期持续下降，市场增量资金明显减少。从技术图上看，比特币上攻受阻，短线回落，考虑到上方抛压较大，短期走势逼近前期新低，反弹持续乏力，做空情绪浓厚，后续有深度回调的风险。\n特斯拉或抛售离场\n最近一周比特币价格徘徊在30000美元附近。分析师表示，很难预见比特币会出现转机。\n摩根大通团队分析师称，近期的市场是具有挑战性的。数据表明，虚拟货币的抛售是为了弥补损失，可能仍有大量低于实际价值的头寸需要通过市场清理。\n近日，摩根大通调查了来自1500多家机构的约3000名美国投资者。绝大多数参与者（占90%）表示他们的公司不会投资数字资产，80%的人声称他们永远不会进入加密货币市场。与此同时，五分之四的受访者表示，希望对虚拟货币采取更严格的限制。\n有市场人士猜测，近期比特币的下跌与马斯克对于比特币摇摆不定的态度有关，因为比特币挖矿消耗了大量能源与特斯拉的环保立场不符，特斯拉或将抛售比特币并拒绝比特币作为支付方式。目前相对脆弱的市场引发了散户的恐慌情绪。\n2月上旬，特斯拉宣布购入价值15亿美元的比特币，并透露将接受比特币作为付款方式。\n多位加密数字资产业内人士认为，这一消息是推动比特币价格从20000美元快速飙涨至60000美元的重要催化剂。然而，如今比特币的价格已经跌破当初特斯拉买入时的成本价，为特斯拉二季度的财报埋下隐患。\n根据市场预估，今年第一季度特斯拉开始投资比特币，并从中获得超过1亿美元的投资收益，占公司净利润将近四分之一。但比特币价格在二季度出现大幅调整，价格直接腰斩，若特斯拉未出售所持比特币，或造成接近1亿美元的投资损失。\n矿机遭5折甩卖\n币价腰斩，虚拟“挖矿”活动也不再活跃。\n虚拟货币“挖矿”活动的“重镇”四川省全面清理整顿挖矿行为，已经有一周时间。bytetree矿工生产和抛售累积数据数据显示，最近一周，矿工生产量和抛售量均出现下跌，显示出矿工抛售情绪明显上升，这或意味着更多矿工选择关机。\n\n图片来源：bytetree\n抛售矿机成为很多矿工的选择。大量二手矿机涌入市场，导致价格暴跌，与几个月前“一机难求“的火爆场面已是天差地别。\n一位矿机卖家指出, 原来用来交流的矿工群，现在已经用来卖变压器和矿机了。比特大陆S19jPRO-100T型号的矿机售价由7万多元腰斩至3万元左右。“只要能卖出去，什么价格都能接受。”\n\n图片来源：矿机卖家\n由于大量二手现货涌向市场，全球最大的加密货币矿机厂商比特大陆日前宣布，二手市场出货压力很大，为了帮助行业平稳过渡，决定全球暂时停售现货。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"EBON":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2608,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":808060065,"gmtCreate":1627544752157,"gmtModify":1703492038287,"author":{"id":"3586587763605977","authorId":"3586587763605977","name":"程導绅","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/17e557db7a706e6821394c3f5dc700d2","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586587763605977","idStr":"3586587763605977"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Oh","listText":"Oh","text":"Oh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/808060065","repostId":"1187897781","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1187897781","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"有视角的商业资讯交流平台","home_visible":1,"media_name":"虎嗅APP","id":"101","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/98669fe7974e42f3976b3db47528792d"},"pubTimestamp":1627544195,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1187897781?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-29 15:36","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Intel Drops Amy Bomb: It's Time for TSMC's Exaggerated Propaganda to End","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1187897781","media":"虎嗅APP","summary":"自从去年英特尔被100%确凿证据证实了在10nm制程上的延期，以及在7nm制程上全面落后于台积电，丧失全球制程领导地位后，大众舆论对这家美国唯一从设计、制造到封测全覆盖的半导体企业的态度，呈现出惊人的","content":"<p>Since Intel's delay in 10nm process was confirmed by 100% conclusive evidence last year, and it lagged behind TSMC in 7nm process in an all-round way, losing its global process leadership position, the attitude of public opinion towards this only semiconductor company in the United States, which covers all aspects from design, manufacturing to packaging and testing, has shown a surprising consistent change:</p><p>This \"critical trend\" seems to have evolved into- -<b>The top semiconductor giant's days remaining seem numbered.</b></p><p>The crisis encountered by technological innovation has also spread to their financial data. From Q1 of 2020 to Q3 of 2021, Intel's net profit declined for three consecutive quarters; And historically as<b>The absolute king of the data center market</b>Intel's revenue from this business segment also continued to decline in three quarters.</p><p>In May 2021, IC Insights, an authoritative market research organization, released the \"Performance and Ranking of Global Top15 Semiconductor Companies in Q1 2021\", pointing out that although Intel ranked first, it was the only one among all manufacturers with a decline in revenue.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ddcac03ab5d13481ff896474f8ff1274\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"277\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Image from IC Insights</p><p>Intel is certainly anxious. This anxiety may manifest itself in:</p><p><ul><li>Under intense pressure from the capital market, a sudden coaching change occurred at the beginning of 2021, and Pat Gelsinger, who has 40 years of manufacturing technology experience, was re-appointed as the new CEO.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Quickly accepted ASMA's more advanced EUV manufacturing process than its own, and it took about two quarters to fix the 7nm technology.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Invest heavily in the manufacturing process. In March this year, Pat Kissinger officially announced the very critical \"IDM 2.0\" strategy and announced his return to the foundry market.<b>At the same time, it announced a $20 billion investment in two new fabs in Arizona, USA</b>； It was announced again in May,<b>Investing $3.5 billion to upgrade the New Mexico factory, investing $10 billion to build a chip factory in Israel, and planning to build a factory in the European Union.</b></p><p></li></ul><ul><li>More and more Intel semiconductor technology experts have appeared to justify their manufacturing technology, emphasizing that \"the process data of each fab has differences in external publicity\".</p><p></li></ul>Of course, according to the observation and media response of Tiger Sniff Platform, you can see Intel more and more times in domestic artificial intelligence, Internet of Things and data center market activities.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4bfc85ebc4b88c6abf9345706cd0d652\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"601\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Intel CEO Pat Kissinger</p><p>Intel, which aims to recapture the \"process node\", released its \"IDM2.0 strategy\" in March this year, although it attracted the attention of the industry with its generous and \"never give up manufacturing\" attitude, it continued to be controversial because of its poor financial report;</p><p>Yesterday, four Intel senior manufacturing technology experts, including CEO Kissinger, once again disclosed Intel's process technology and implementation path on a wide scale,<b>Dropped a \"new bomb\" on the semiconductor industry:</b></p><p><ul><li>Intel does have a delay at 10nm and 7nm (if you are interested, you can read my article \"Intel abdicates, TSMC is king\"), but at the 5nm node, Intel thinks that instead of having a delay, it will surpass.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>In order to deal with the \"false propaganda of manufacturing process\" of TSMC and other rivals, and to correct everyone's misunderstanding of manufacturing process, Intel directly abandoned the statement of \"10nm, 7nm, 5nm, 3nm\", which is essentially determined by Moore's Law, and directly adopted a new naming system from 100% Intel's subjective perspective-Intel7, Intel4, Intel3, Intel20A and Intel18A.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Intel20A disclosed this time essentially corresponds to the 5nm process.<b>This is a process node that Intel has been silent about for nearly two years, and the relevant time plan basically ended abruptly at 7nm. Intel</b>It was first announced that it will enter the \"Amy Era\" through Intel20A.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>The two key technologies behind Intel20A are very noteworthy. Among them, this process will adopt a brand-new transistor structure Gate-All-Around, which is not a FinFET structure that has made great contributions to the commercialization of processes below 22nm.</p><p></li></ul>In other words, this new structure chip with new materials will make a major change to the traditional process concept. As a semiconductor technology expert told Tiger Sniff: \"This new material structure, the process of these few nanometers and so on does not matter so much.\"</p><p><b>Intel's New Process Naming System: Wake Up, Customers</b></p><p>The naming of the process has been criticized by the industry for a long time.</p><p>For example, we once mentioned in the article \"Intel abdicates, TSMC is king\" that many engineers in the industry believe that Intel's attitude towards \"nano\" process figures is more realistic, and even said that \"Intel's 10nm chip is actually TSMC's 7nm, even better than the latter's 7nm\".</p><p>This is also why Kissinger has repeatedly called on everyone to correctly understand \"process figures\" in public after taking office:</p><p>\"Including Intel, different process node naming and numbering schemes are used, which neither refer to any specific measurement method nor fully show how to achieve the best balance between chip energy efficiency and performance.\" It's like the cars at the auto show that claim to have chips reaching hundreds or thousands of Tops, and it's like California's annual Autonomous Driving Takeover Report-without uniform testing conditions and enough corporate integrity, it's absolutely unworthy to say the conclusion of \"who performs better than who\".</p><p>Therefore, Intel changed the naming system this time, with a good name: \"Let customers have a more accurate understanding of the evolution of process nodes in the whole industry, and then make more informed decisions\".<b>In fact, the main purpose is to deal with the less reliable 5nm and 3nm process names of TSMC and Samsung.</b></p><p><ul><li>Intel 7, which will be launched in the second half of 2021 (does it at least look like 7nm?), is actually Intel's previously released 10nm Enhanced SuperFin;</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>The Intel 4 released in the first half of 2023 (at least it looks like 4nm?), is actually the 7nm of Intel's previous PPT;</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Intel3, released in the second half of 2023, is actually the 7nm + on Intel's previous PPT;</p><p></li></ul><ul><li><b>The Intel20A released in the first half of 2024 (does it look like 2nm?), is actually 5nm under Intel standards;</b></p><p></li></ul><ul><li>The release of Intel18A in the first half of 2025 is actually 5nm + under Intel standards.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1ce380fc9b07caca9a43fa165a2e90a8\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"471\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Image via Intel</p><p>In fact, as the structure of transistors becomes more and more complex, as early as the early 21st century, the industry began to have a \"differentiation trend\" in the naming of nano-processes of chips.</p><p>As we all know, microprocessors are made up of billions of transistors connected in a specific way. These transistors act as \"switches\" and are responsible for processing the 1s and 0s of electronic data.</p><p>Kissinger explained that there is an area at the top of the transistor called the \"gate\", which determines whether the transistor is on or off. The \"process node\" refers to the complex scheme of thousands of manufacturing steps required for a transistor.</p><p>And all the top semiconductor companies have almost the same goal-to make these chips smaller, faster, cheaper and more energy-efficient-the best example is Apple's 5nm process chip M1 (there are too many reviews of M1 to read, and I also bought a Macbook Air with M1 and couldn't put it down).</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ae99fc8b1663fb184dc959320da5b5a1\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"384\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Initially, the name of the process \"node\" corresponds to the gate length of the transistor and is measured in \"microns\".<b>As transistors became smaller and the gate length became more and more miniaturized, the industry began to measure in nanometers.</b></p><p>The key node about the change of process naming appeared in 1997.</p><p>\"With technological advancements and the advent of other innovations such as strained silicon, faster, cheaper and more energy efficient becomes just as important in addition to shrinking transistors.\" Kissinger believes that from this point on,<b>Traditional naming methods no longer match the actual transistor gate length.</b></p><p><b>In other words, transistor size is not the only determinant to some extent, and factors such as \"interconnections\" between them cannot be ignored.</b></p><p>In 2011, after Intel introduced FinFET transistor structure technology, the industry further diverged. It is an entirely new way to build transistors with unique shapes and structures.</p><p>This structure is the key technology to continue to retract the stagnant 22nm downward.<b>But obviously, starting from 22nm, not to mention the public, even the industry's understanding of process figures and its actual \"coordinates\" have begun to gradually separate.</b></p><p><b>This is also the fundamental reason why Intel has established a new naming system today.</b></p><p>As Tiger Sniff got the answer when interviewing engineers before: \"Intel is relatively more radical in setting manufacturing process standards and has higher requirements. But it is true that the process has been delayed for 1~2 years. Saying that they are behind does not mean that they have no possibility of catching up.\" But Intel's drastic process this time<b>rename</b>，<b>Perhaps it is not that you don't believe in yourself, but that you smell the cruel reality that the market and capital have been confused by \"naming\" for a long time (for example, the beginning), and even make business judgments based on it.</b></p><p>However, we thought of a question-even if a newly named product is launched, customers have no reason not to ask, \"How many nanometers is your intel7? How many nanometers are you targeting TSMC?\"</p><p>To be honest, we'd rather know how Intel answers this question when it comes to it.</p><p>Defend Moore's Law to the death?</p><p>At this extremely detailed \"Process Technology Popularization Conference\", Kissinger mentioned at least three times the determination that \"Moore's Law will not die, and Intel will continue to continue Moore's Law through various methods, such as changing materials, transistor structures and packaging\".</p><p>To be honest, in addition to this meaningful new naming system,<b>Intel's most interesting and deserving product is undoubtedly Intel20A after Intel3.</b></p><p>(Of course, the Intel4 will also attract much attention as the first processor to apply ASML High-NA extreme ultraviolet radiation lithography (EUV), but the symbolic significance is not as good as the Intel20A.)</p><p>Intel 20A (5nm) is called the next watershed in the development of process technology in history by Intel because it is the first chip to apply Intel's two \"pioneering technologies\":</p><p><ul><li><b>Gate-All-Around, a new transistor architecture that replaces FinFET (Intel named it RibbonFET)</b></p><p></li><li><b>PowerVia, an electrical energy transmission system that can solve the \"interconnection bottleneck\".</b></p><p></li></ul>The importance of FinFET technology needs no further explanation.</p><p>It is a 3D transistor technology (fin transistor) developed by Hu Zhengming, a professor of electronic engineering and computer science at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1999. FinFET contributed to the reason why Intel was able to take the lead in mass production of 22nm transistors 12 years later, and TSMC and Samsung successfully transitioned to 16/14nm process nodes.</p><p>It was this \"invention\" that Moore's Law was able to \"extend life\" for decades.</p><p>However, as the process continues to retract from 5nm to 3nm, semiconductor manufacturing experts have found that further reduction of FinFET size is increasingly limited by driving current and electrostatic control.</p><p>The Gate All Around, which will replace it, is commonly known as GAAFET (Full Gate Field Effect Transistor), which uses a strip channel surrounded by a Gate, thus enabling faster transistor switching speed and better control. Therefore, higher performance can be achieved in a smaller footprint. Samsung announced in 2020 that it would apply this architecture on 3nm process chips.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6a6fca1343877c136cbeef1a4caedada\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"255\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Image via Panlin Semiconductor</p><p>Unlike FinFETs, where higher currents require multiple fins side by side; The current-carrying capacity of a GAA transistor is mainly improved by stacking several nanosheets vertically (above), while the gate material is mainly wrapped around the channel. The size of the nanosheet can be scaled so that the transistor can be adjusted to the specific performance required.</p><p>It sounds like the concept of \"nanosheets\" is actually not so difficult to understand; And in fact, this technology has been developed for years. However, the reason why it is not \"reused\" by the industry is<b>The main bottleneck lies in \"materials\"</b>。</p><p>According to the explanation given by Panlin Semiconductor, GAA transistors are made by superlattices of \"alternating silicon\" and \"silicon-germanium epitaxial layer\", which is the basis of nanosheets. In addition, the fabrication process is relatively complicated, and various new alloy materials such as ruthenium, molybdenum and nickel may be required for deposition, etching and filling.</p><p>A semiconductor expert summed it up to Huxiu: \"It (GAA) will change the base material of semiconductors, and the materials of semiconductor connections will also be changed. At the same time, the physical structure of the whole transistor will also change.\" Therefore, Dr. Sanjay Natarajan, who led the team to develop this technology, is not false when he called Intel's GAA-RibbonFET a \"major leap in transistor performance\".</p><p>According to the test chip results, they expect that the performance and density improvement brought by RibbonFET transistors will exceed that of current FinFET transistors. Intel 20A will be the first chip to apply RibbonFET.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e0a40c6ececaec4fa8741e6781f30b32\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"487\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>The power transmission system PowerVia is a unique technology developed by Intel engineers. Dr. Sanjay Natarajan, as the development leader of this technology, pointed out that one of the biggest traditional problems in semiconductor transistor structures is \"inefficient wiring\".</p><p>\"Traditional interconnection technology is interconnected at the top of the transistor layer, which often produces intermixing of power lines and signal lines, resulting in low wiring efficiency, which in turn affects performance and power consumption.\"</p><p>Their solution is to place the power cord under the transistor layer (that is, the back of the wafer). By reducing the power routing on the front of the wafer, more \"empty space\" is freed up for optimizing signal routing, and delay is reduced to achieve better power transmission.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/711724a13d34832717d6e33d027d163f\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"603\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>It is worth noting that these two key technologies that will be used in Intel20A, although they are inevitably criticized as \"still in PPT state\" (after all, they are still PPT), Intel experts showed the SEM images of these test chips, which obviously went through a series of tests.</p><p>As mentioned above, their successful application will determine whether Intel can overtake the key node of 5nm.</p><p>From the time point of view, it is obvious that there is not much gap between the \"realization of 7nm + + in 2023\" planned on PPT in 2019 and the \"realization of Intel20A in 2024\" planned this time. In other words, there is still a chance to turn over at the 5nm node.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9858abda999ad2b18407fdde87b7e61c\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"561\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Intel Process Product Plan for October 2019</p><p>As Kissinger said, the advent of Intel20A in 2024 and the real application of two key technologies will mark the beginning of the \"Emmi era\" of semiconductors (1 Emmi =0.1 nm).</p><p>Now, it is actually more like Intel shouting to the outside world: Do you think I still want to compete for leadership in the \"nano age\"? No, we're going to go into a unit smaller than the nanometer to compete for the right to speak.</p><p><b>Written at the end…hopefully not PPT</b></p><p>But then again, since the naming system in nanometers has been completely changed, and the transistor structure and materials are undergoing the next round of dramatic changes. In addition, Intel is also improving the bandwidth density and energy efficiency of chips from the packaging technology level...</p><p>Doesn't all this mean that the so-called numeric unit of nanometer or emmeter is becoming less and less meaningful?</p><p><b>Intel says it is defending Moore's Law, but in fact it has realized that it can no longer rely on Moore's Law.</b></p><p>Today, although the manufacturing process of Intel20A officially said that it won the big order of Qualcomm, it is still a long way from 2024. Although we think that Intel's conference is of great significance, and there is no objection to the product planning, PPT can be changed to call the real product, but it still needs to speak in physical terms.</p><p>After all, the 14nm product that was delayed for 4 years in that year, PPT did quite well at that time.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Intel Drops Amy Bomb: It's Time for TSMC's Exaggerated Propaganda to End</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nIntel Drops Amy Bomb: It's Time for TSMC's Exaggerated Propaganda to End\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/101\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/98669fe7974e42f3976b3db47528792d);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">虎嗅APP </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-07-29 15:36</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Since Intel's delay in 10nm process was confirmed by 100% conclusive evidence last year, and it lagged behind TSMC in 7nm process in an all-round way, losing its global process leadership position, the attitude of public opinion towards this only semiconductor company in the United States, which covers all aspects from design, manufacturing to packaging and testing, has shown a surprising consistent change:</p><p>This \"critical trend\" seems to have evolved into- -<b>The top semiconductor giant's days remaining seem numbered.</b></p><p>The crisis encountered by technological innovation has also spread to their financial data. From Q1 of 2020 to Q3 of 2021, Intel's net profit declined for three consecutive quarters; And historically as<b>The absolute king of the data center market</b>Intel's revenue from this business segment also continued to decline in three quarters.</p><p>In May 2021, IC Insights, an authoritative market research organization, released the \"Performance and Ranking of Global Top15 Semiconductor Companies in Q1 2021\", pointing out that although Intel ranked first, it was the only one among all manufacturers with a decline in revenue.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ddcac03ab5d13481ff896474f8ff1274\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"277\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Image from IC Insights</p><p>Intel is certainly anxious. This anxiety may manifest itself in:</p><p><ul><li>Under intense pressure from the capital market, a sudden coaching change occurred at the beginning of 2021, and Pat Gelsinger, who has 40 years of manufacturing technology experience, was re-appointed as the new CEO.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Quickly accepted ASMA's more advanced EUV manufacturing process than its own, and it took about two quarters to fix the 7nm technology.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Invest heavily in the manufacturing process. In March this year, Pat Kissinger officially announced the very critical \"IDM 2.0\" strategy and announced his return to the foundry market.<b>At the same time, it announced a $20 billion investment in two new fabs in Arizona, USA</b>； It was announced again in May,<b>Investing $3.5 billion to upgrade the New Mexico factory, investing $10 billion to build a chip factory in Israel, and planning to build a factory in the European Union.</b></p><p></li></ul><ul><li>More and more Intel semiconductor technology experts have appeared to justify their manufacturing technology, emphasizing that \"the process data of each fab has differences in external publicity\".</p><p></li></ul>Of course, according to the observation and media response of Tiger Sniff Platform, you can see Intel more and more times in domestic artificial intelligence, Internet of Things and data center market activities.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4bfc85ebc4b88c6abf9345706cd0d652\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"601\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Intel CEO Pat Kissinger</p><p>Intel, which aims to recapture the \"process node\", released its \"IDM2.0 strategy\" in March this year, although it attracted the attention of the industry with its generous and \"never give up manufacturing\" attitude, it continued to be controversial because of its poor financial report;</p><p>Yesterday, four Intel senior manufacturing technology experts, including CEO Kissinger, once again disclosed Intel's process technology and implementation path on a wide scale,<b>Dropped a \"new bomb\" on the semiconductor industry:</b></p><p><ul><li>Intel does have a delay at 10nm and 7nm (if you are interested, you can read my article \"Intel abdicates, TSMC is king\"), but at the 5nm node, Intel thinks that instead of having a delay, it will surpass.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>In order to deal with the \"false propaganda of manufacturing process\" of TSMC and other rivals, and to correct everyone's misunderstanding of manufacturing process, Intel directly abandoned the statement of \"10nm, 7nm, 5nm, 3nm\", which is essentially determined by Moore's Law, and directly adopted a new naming system from 100% Intel's subjective perspective-Intel7, Intel4, Intel3, Intel20A and Intel18A.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Intel20A disclosed this time essentially corresponds to the 5nm process.<b>This is a process node that Intel has been silent about for nearly two years, and the relevant time plan basically ended abruptly at 7nm. Intel</b>It was first announced that it will enter the \"Amy Era\" through Intel20A.</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>The two key technologies behind Intel20A are very noteworthy. Among them, this process will adopt a brand-new transistor structure Gate-All-Around, which is not a FinFET structure that has made great contributions to the commercialization of processes below 22nm.</p><p></li></ul>In other words, this new structure chip with new materials will make a major change to the traditional process concept. As a semiconductor technology expert told Tiger Sniff: \"This new material structure, the process of these few nanometers and so on does not matter so much.\"</p><p><b>Intel's New Process Naming System: Wake Up, Customers</b></p><p>The naming of the process has been criticized by the industry for a long time.</p><p>For example, we once mentioned in the article \"Intel abdicates, TSMC is king\" that many engineers in the industry believe that Intel's attitude towards \"nano\" process figures is more realistic, and even said that \"Intel's 10nm chip is actually TSMC's 7nm, even better than the latter's 7nm\".</p><p>This is also why Kissinger has repeatedly called on everyone to correctly understand \"process figures\" in public after taking office:</p><p>\"Including Intel, different process node naming and numbering schemes are used, which neither refer to any specific measurement method nor fully show how to achieve the best balance between chip energy efficiency and performance.\" It's like the cars at the auto show that claim to have chips reaching hundreds or thousands of Tops, and it's like California's annual Autonomous Driving Takeover Report-without uniform testing conditions and enough corporate integrity, it's absolutely unworthy to say the conclusion of \"who performs better than who\".</p><p>Therefore, Intel changed the naming system this time, with a good name: \"Let customers have a more accurate understanding of the evolution of process nodes in the whole industry, and then make more informed decisions\".<b>In fact, the main purpose is to deal with the less reliable 5nm and 3nm process names of TSMC and Samsung.</b></p><p><ul><li>Intel 7, which will be launched in the second half of 2021 (does it at least look like 7nm?), is actually Intel's previously released 10nm Enhanced SuperFin;</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>The Intel 4 released in the first half of 2023 (at least it looks like 4nm?), is actually the 7nm of Intel's previous PPT;</p><p></li></ul><ul><li>Intel3, released in the second half of 2023, is actually the 7nm + on Intel's previous PPT;</p><p></li></ul><ul><li><b>The Intel20A released in the first half of 2024 (does it look like 2nm?), is actually 5nm under Intel standards;</b></p><p></li></ul><ul><li>The release of Intel18A in the first half of 2025 is actually 5nm + under Intel standards.</p><p></li></ul><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1ce380fc9b07caca9a43fa165a2e90a8\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"471\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Image via Intel</p><p>In fact, as the structure of transistors becomes more and more complex, as early as the early 21st century, the industry began to have a \"differentiation trend\" in the naming of nano-processes of chips.</p><p>As we all know, microprocessors are made up of billions of transistors connected in a specific way. These transistors act as \"switches\" and are responsible for processing the 1s and 0s of electronic data.</p><p>Kissinger explained that there is an area at the top of the transistor called the \"gate\", which determines whether the transistor is on or off. The \"process node\" refers to the complex scheme of thousands of manufacturing steps required for a transistor.</p><p>And all the top semiconductor companies have almost the same goal-to make these chips smaller, faster, cheaper and more energy-efficient-the best example is Apple's 5nm process chip M1 (there are too many reviews of M1 to read, and I also bought a Macbook Air with M1 and couldn't put it down).</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ae99fc8b1663fb184dc959320da5b5a1\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"384\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Initially, the name of the process \"node\" corresponds to the gate length of the transistor and is measured in \"microns\".<b>As transistors became smaller and the gate length became more and more miniaturized, the industry began to measure in nanometers.</b></p><p>The key node about the change of process naming appeared in 1997.</p><p>\"With technological advancements and the advent of other innovations such as strained silicon, faster, cheaper and more energy efficient becomes just as important in addition to shrinking transistors.\" Kissinger believes that from this point on,<b>Traditional naming methods no longer match the actual transistor gate length.</b></p><p><b>In other words, transistor size is not the only determinant to some extent, and factors such as \"interconnections\" between them cannot be ignored.</b></p><p>In 2011, after Intel introduced FinFET transistor structure technology, the industry further diverged. It is an entirely new way to build transistors with unique shapes and structures.</p><p>This structure is the key technology to continue to retract the stagnant 22nm downward.<b>But obviously, starting from 22nm, not to mention the public, even the industry's understanding of process figures and its actual \"coordinates\" have begun to gradually separate.</b></p><p><b>This is also the fundamental reason why Intel has established a new naming system today.</b></p><p>As Tiger Sniff got the answer when interviewing engineers before: \"Intel is relatively more radical in setting manufacturing process standards and has higher requirements. But it is true that the process has been delayed for 1~2 years. Saying that they are behind does not mean that they have no possibility of catching up.\" But Intel's drastic process this time<b>rename</b>，<b>Perhaps it is not that you don't believe in yourself, but that you smell the cruel reality that the market and capital have been confused by \"naming\" for a long time (for example, the beginning), and even make business judgments based on it.</b></p><p>However, we thought of a question-even if a newly named product is launched, customers have no reason not to ask, \"How many nanometers is your intel7? How many nanometers are you targeting TSMC?\"</p><p>To be honest, we'd rather know how Intel answers this question when it comes to it.</p><p>Defend Moore's Law to the death?</p><p>At this extremely detailed \"Process Technology Popularization Conference\", Kissinger mentioned at least three times the determination that \"Moore's Law will not die, and Intel will continue to continue Moore's Law through various methods, such as changing materials, transistor structures and packaging\".</p><p>To be honest, in addition to this meaningful new naming system,<b>Intel's most interesting and deserving product is undoubtedly Intel20A after Intel3.</b></p><p>(Of course, the Intel4 will also attract much attention as the first processor to apply ASML High-NA extreme ultraviolet radiation lithography (EUV), but the symbolic significance is not as good as the Intel20A.)</p><p>Intel 20A (5nm) is called the next watershed in the development of process technology in history by Intel because it is the first chip to apply Intel's two \"pioneering technologies\":</p><p><ul><li><b>Gate-All-Around, a new transistor architecture that replaces FinFET (Intel named it RibbonFET)</b></p><p></li><li><b>PowerVia, an electrical energy transmission system that can solve the \"interconnection bottleneck\".</b></p><p></li></ul>The importance of FinFET technology needs no further explanation.</p><p>It is a 3D transistor technology (fin transistor) developed by Hu Zhengming, a professor of electronic engineering and computer science at the University of California, Berkeley, in 1999. FinFET contributed to the reason why Intel was able to take the lead in mass production of 22nm transistors 12 years later, and TSMC and Samsung successfully transitioned to 16/14nm process nodes.</p><p>It was this \"invention\" that Moore's Law was able to \"extend life\" for decades.</p><p>However, as the process continues to retract from 5nm to 3nm, semiconductor manufacturing experts have found that further reduction of FinFET size is increasingly limited by driving current and electrostatic control.</p><p>The Gate All Around, which will replace it, is commonly known as GAAFET (Full Gate Field Effect Transistor), which uses a strip channel surrounded by a Gate, thus enabling faster transistor switching speed and better control. Therefore, higher performance can be achieved in a smaller footprint. Samsung announced in 2020 that it would apply this architecture on 3nm process chips.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6a6fca1343877c136cbeef1a4caedada\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"255\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Image via Panlin Semiconductor</p><p>Unlike FinFETs, where higher currents require multiple fins side by side; The current-carrying capacity of a GAA transistor is mainly improved by stacking several nanosheets vertically (above), while the gate material is mainly wrapped around the channel. The size of the nanosheet can be scaled so that the transistor can be adjusted to the specific performance required.</p><p>It sounds like the concept of \"nanosheets\" is actually not so difficult to understand; And in fact, this technology has been developed for years. However, the reason why it is not \"reused\" by the industry is<b>The main bottleneck lies in \"materials\"</b>。</p><p>According to the explanation given by Panlin Semiconductor, GAA transistors are made by superlattices of \"alternating silicon\" and \"silicon-germanium epitaxial layer\", which is the basis of nanosheets. In addition, the fabrication process is relatively complicated, and various new alloy materials such as ruthenium, molybdenum and nickel may be required for deposition, etching and filling.</p><p>A semiconductor expert summed it up to Huxiu: \"It (GAA) will change the base material of semiconductors, and the materials of semiconductor connections will also be changed. At the same time, the physical structure of the whole transistor will also change.\" Therefore, Dr. Sanjay Natarajan, who led the team to develop this technology, is not false when he called Intel's GAA-RibbonFET a \"major leap in transistor performance\".</p><p>According to the test chip results, they expect that the performance and density improvement brought by RibbonFET transistors will exceed that of current FinFET transistors. Intel 20A will be the first chip to apply RibbonFET.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e0a40c6ececaec4fa8741e6781f30b32\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"487\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>The power transmission system PowerVia is a unique technology developed by Intel engineers. Dr. Sanjay Natarajan, as the development leader of this technology, pointed out that one of the biggest traditional problems in semiconductor transistor structures is \"inefficient wiring\".</p><p>\"Traditional interconnection technology is interconnected at the top of the transistor layer, which often produces intermixing of power lines and signal lines, resulting in low wiring efficiency, which in turn affects performance and power consumption.\"</p><p>Their solution is to place the power cord under the transistor layer (that is, the back of the wafer). By reducing the power routing on the front of the wafer, more \"empty space\" is freed up for optimizing signal routing, and delay is reduced to achieve better power transmission.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/711724a13d34832717d6e33d027d163f\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"603\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>It is worth noting that these two key technologies that will be used in Intel20A, although they are inevitably criticized as \"still in PPT state\" (after all, they are still PPT), Intel experts showed the SEM images of these test chips, which obviously went through a series of tests.</p><p>As mentioned above, their successful application will determine whether Intel can overtake the key node of 5nm.</p><p>From the time point of view, it is obvious that there is not much gap between the \"realization of 7nm + + in 2023\" planned on PPT in 2019 and the \"realization of Intel20A in 2024\" planned this time. In other words, there is still a chance to turn over at the 5nm node.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9858abda999ad2b18407fdde87b7e61c\" tg-width=\"1000\" tg-height=\"561\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p>Intel Process Product Plan for October 2019</p><p>As Kissinger said, the advent of Intel20A in 2024 and the real application of two key technologies will mark the beginning of the \"Emmi era\" of semiconductors (1 Emmi =0.1 nm).</p><p>Now, it is actually more like Intel shouting to the outside world: Do you think I still want to compete for leadership in the \"nano age\"? No, we're going to go into a unit smaller than the nanometer to compete for the right to speak.</p><p><b>Written at the end…hopefully not PPT</b></p><p>But then again, since the naming system in nanometers has been completely changed, and the transistor structure and materials are undergoing the next round of dramatic changes. In addition, Intel is also improving the bandwidth density and energy efficiency of chips from the packaging technology level...</p><p>Doesn't all this mean that the so-called numeric unit of nanometer or emmeter is becoming less and less meaningful?</p><p><b>Intel says it is defending Moore's Law, but in fact it has realized that it can no longer rely on Moore's Law.</b></p><p>Today, although the manufacturing process of Intel20A officially said that it won the big order of Qualcomm, it is still a long way from 2024. Although we think that Intel's conference is of great significance, and there is no objection to the product planning, PPT can be changed to call the real product, but it still needs to speak in physical terms.</p><p>After all, the 14nm product that was delayed for 4 years in that year, PPT did quite well at that time.</p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c74be4c2a08964ef2daf32217f693b44","relate_stocks":{"09086":"华夏纳指-U","03145":"华夏亚洲高息股","03086":"华夏纳指","EWT":"台湾ETF-iShares MSCI","INTC":"英特尔","TSM":"台积电"},"is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1187897781","content_text":"自从去年英特尔被100%确凿证据证实了在10nm制程上的延期，以及在7nm制程上全面落后于台积电，丧失全球制程领导地位后，大众舆论对这家美国唯一从设计、制造到封测全覆盖的半导体企业的态度，呈现出惊人的一致变化：\n除了竞争对手和看热闹不嫌事大一样的顺便踩一脚，这种“批判趋势”到最后似乎演变成——这家半导体顶级巨头剩下的日子似乎屈指可数了。\n技术创新层面遭遇的危机也蔓延至他们的财务数据上，从2020年Q1到2021年Q3，英特尔净利润连续3个季度下滑；而历来作为数据中心市场的绝对王者，英特尔这一业务板块的收入也在三个季度内持续下降。\n2021年5月，权威市场调研机构 IC Insights发布的《2021年Q1全球Top15半导体公司业绩与排名》指出，英特尔虽然位列第一，但却是所有厂商中唯一一家营收下滑的企业。\n\n图片来自IC Insights\n英特尔当然焦虑。这种焦虑可能体现在：\n\n受到资本市场巨大压力，2021年年初突然换帅，重新启用有40年制造技术履历的帕特·基辛格(Pat Gelsinger)为新任CEO。\n\n\n迅速接受了阿斯麦比自己更为先进的EUV制造工艺，用了大约两个季度的时间修复了7nm技术。\n\n\n在制造环节投入巨资。今年3月，帕特·基辛格正式公布十分关键的“IDM 2.0”战略，宣布重返晶圆代工市场，同时宣布投资200亿美元在美国亚利桑那州新建两座晶圆厂；5月再次宣布，投资35亿美元升级新墨西哥州工厂，投资100亿美元在以色列兴建的芯片厂，还计划在欧盟建厂。\n\n\n越来越多的英特尔半导体技术专家现身说法，为自己的制造技术正名，强调“每家晶圆厂的制程数据有对外宣传的差异”。\n\n当然，根据虎嗅平台的观察和媒体反应，在国内大大小小的人工智能、物联网以及数据中心市场活动上，你能越来越多次看到英特尔出现的身影。\n\n英特尔 CEO 帕特·基辛格\n以重新夺回“制程节点”为目标的英特尔，今年3月发布的“IDM2.0战略”就以大手笔和”绝不放弃制造”的态度虽然引起产业重视，但因为表现不佳的财报状况持续受到争议；\n而昨天，包括CEO基辛格在内的4位英特尔高级制造技术专家，再次通过大范围公开英特尔的制程技术和实现路径，向半导体产业投掷了一枚“新炸弹”：\n\n英特尔的确在10nm和7nm有所延迟（如果感兴趣，可以看我的这篇文章《英特尔退位，台积电称王》），但在5nm节点上，英特尔自认为非但没有延迟，反而会完成超越。\n\n\n为了应对台积电等对手的“制程虚假宣传”，以及纠正大家对制程的认知误区，英特尔直接舍弃了“10nm，7nm，5nm，3nm”这一本质上由摩尔定律决定的说法，而是直接采用100%英特尔主观视角的新命名体系——Intel7，Intel4，Intel3，Intel20A，Intel18A。\n\n\n这一次公开的Intel20A，本质对应的就是5nm制程。这是一个英特尔近2年来闭口不谈的制程节点，相关时间计划基本到7nm就戛然截止了。英特尔首次宣布将通过Intel20A，进入“埃米时代”。\n\n\nIntel20A背后两大关键技术非常值得注意。其中，这个制程将会采用全新的晶体管结构Gate-All-Around，并非是为22nm以下制程产品化立下汗马功劳的FinFET结构。\n\n换言之，这种应用了新材料的新结构芯片，将会对传统制程概念，产生重大改变。就如一位半导体技术专家告诉虎嗅：“这种新的材料结构，制程这些几纳米啥的就没那么大的关系了。”\n英特尔新制程命名体系：快醒醒，客户们\n关于制程的命名问题，被产业诟病已久。\n譬如我们曾在《英特尔退位，台积电称王》这篇文章里提及，业内不少工程师认为，英特尔在对待“纳米”制程数字的态度更实在，甚至表示“英特尔的10nm芯片对标的其实是台积电的7nm，甚至比后者的7nm都好”。\n这也是基辛格上任后，多次在公开场合呼吁大家正确理解“制程数字”：\n\n “包括英特尔在内，使用着各不相同的制程节点命名和编号方案，这些方案既不指代任何具体的度量方法，也无法全面展现如何实现芯片能效和性能的最佳平衡。”\n\n这就像是车展上那些号称自己芯片达到几百几千Tops的汽车，也像是加州每年发布的《自动驾驶接管报告》——没有统一测试条件和足够的企业诚信度，就绝对不配说出“谁比谁性能好”的结论。\n所以，英特尔这次兴师动众地更换了命名体系，美名曰：“让客户对整个行业的制程节点演进有一个更准确认知，进而做出更明智的决策”，其实主要目的就是对付台积电和三星不那么太靠谱的5nm和3nm制程名字。\n\n2021年下半年将推出的Intel 7 （是不是至少看起来像是7nm？），其实就是英特尔之前发布的10nm Enhanced SuperFin；\n\n\n2023年上半年发布的Intel 4（至少看起来像4nm？），其实就是英特尔之前PPT的7nm；\n\n\n2023年下半年发布的Intel3，其实就是英特尔之前PPT上的7nm+；\n\n\n2024年上半年发布的Intel20A（看起来像不像2nm？），其实就是英特尔标准下的5nm；\n\n\n2025年上半年发布Intel18A，其实就是英特尔标准下的5nm+。\n\n\n图片来自英特尔\n实际上，随着晶体管结构的愈加复杂，早在21世纪初，产业内就开始对芯片的纳米制程命名有了“分化趋势”。\n我们都清楚，微处理器是由以特定方式连接起来的数十亿晶体管组成。这些晶体管充当了“开关”的角色，负责处理电子数据的1和0。\n基辛格解释，在晶体管顶部有一个区域叫“栅极”，它决定了晶体管是开启还是关闭。而“制程节点”指代的是晶体管所需的数千个制造步骤组成的复杂方案。\n而所有最顶级半导体公司几乎都有同一个目标——让这些芯片变得更小、更快、更便宜、更高能效——最好的例子莫过于苹果的5nm制程芯片M1（有太多关于M1的测评可以去看，我也买了一台M1的Macbook Air，爱不释手）。\n\n最初，制程工艺“节点”的名称与晶体管的栅极长度相对应，并以“微米”为度量单位。随着晶体管越变越小，栅极的长度越来越微缩，产业开始以纳米为度量单位。\n而关于制程命名改变的关键节点出现在1997年。\n“随着技术进步和应变硅（strained silicon）等其他创新技术的出现，除了缩小晶体管，更快、更便宜和更高能效也变得同样重要。” 基辛格认为，从这时开始，传统命名方法不再与实际的晶体管栅极长度相匹配。\n换言之，晶体管尺寸在某种程度上不是唯一的决定因素，它们之间的“互连”等因素也不能忽略。\n2011年，在英特尔推出FinFET晶体管结构技术后，行业进一步分化。这是一种构建晶体管的全新方式，具有独特的形状和结构。\n这个结构就是将停滞不前的22nm继续往下缩进的关键技术。但要很显然，从22nm开始，不要说大众，就连产业内对制程数字的理解与它的实际“坐标”也开始逐渐脱离。\n这也是英特尔如今建立新命名体系的根本缘由。\n\n 正如虎嗅之前在采访工程师时得到的答案：“英特尔在制造工艺标准制定上相对更激进，要求也更高。但的确制程延迟了1~2年，说落后并不意味着他们没有追赶的可能性。”\n\n但英特尔这次大刀阔斧的制程更名，也许不是不相信自己，而是嗅到了市场和资本已经被“命名”困惑已久（譬如开头），甚至依此来做出商务判断的残酷现实。\n不过我们想到了一个问题——即便推出了新命名产品，客户没有理由不问一句：“你这intel7到底几纳米？对标的是台积电的几纳米？”\n说实话，我们更想知道英特尔在遇到这个问题时怎么回答。\n誓死捍卫摩尔定律？\n基辛格在这次可谓是极为详尽的“制程技术科普会”上，至少提了三次关于“摩尔定律不会消亡，英特尔会通过各种方法，如改材料、晶体管结构，以及封装等角度，继续来延续摩尔定律”的决心。\n实话讲，除了这个意味深长的新命名体系，英特尔最有趣且最应该受到关注的产品，毫无疑问是Intel3之后的Intel20A。\n（当然，Intel4 将作为第一批应用阿斯麦高数值孔径（High-NA）极紫外辐射光刻技术(EUV)的处理器也倍受瞩目，但象征意义不如Intel20A。）\nIntel 20A（5nm）之所以被英特尔称为历史上制程技术发展的下一个分水岭，是因为它是第一块应用英特尔两大“开创性技术”的芯片：\n\n替代FinFET的全新晶体管架构 Gate-All-Around（英特尔把它命名为RibbonFET）\n能够解决“互联瓶颈”的电能传输系统PowerVia。\n\nFinFET技术的重要性已经无须赘述。\n它是加州伯克利大学电子工程与计算机专业教授胡正明在1999年研发出的 3D 晶体管技术（鳍型晶体管）。英特尔之所以能在 12 年后率先量产出 22nm 晶体管，台积电与三星顺利过渡至 16/14nm 制程节点，FinFET功不可没。\n正是这项“发明”，摩尔定律才得以“延寿”数十年。\n但是，随着制程从5nm持续缩进至3nm，半导体制造专家们发现，进一步减少 FinFET 尺寸，就越来越受到驱动电流和静电控制的限制。\n而将要替代它的Gate All Around的常用名为GAAFET（全栅场效应管），它使用栅极包围的带状通道，从而能实现更快的晶体管切换速度和更好的控制。因此，在更小的占用空间内，可具备更高的性能。三星在2020年曾宣布将在3nm制程芯片上应用这一架构。\n\n图片来自泛林半导体\n与 FinFET不同的是，在 FinFET 中，较高电流需要多个并排的鳍片；GAA 晶体管的载流能力主要是通过垂直堆叠几个纳米片（上图），而栅极材料主要是包裹在沟道周围来提高的。纳米片的尺寸可以按比例缩放，以便晶体管可以按照要求的特定性能进行调整。\n听起来，“纳米片”的概念其实理解起来并不是那么困难；而且实际上，这项技术已经被研发多年。但其之所以不受业内“重用”，主要瓶颈就在于“材料”。\n根据泛林半导体给出的解释，GAA晶体管是通过“交替硅”和“硅锗外延层”的超晶格来制作的，这是构成纳米片的基础，此外制作工艺相对复杂，可能需要钌、钼、镍等各种合金新材料进行沉积、蚀刻、填充。\n\n 一位半导体专家这样给虎嗅总结：“它（GAA）将对半导体的基底材料进行更改，半导体连接的材料也要进行更改。同时整个晶体管的物理结构也要变化。”\n\n因此，带领团队开发这项技术的Sanjay Natarajan博士将英特尔的GAA——RibbonFET称为一次“晶体管性能上的重大飞跃”，并非虚话。\n根据测试芯片结果，他们预计RibbonFET晶体管带来的性能和密度提升，将超过当下的FinFET晶体管。而Intel 20A将是应用RibbonFET的第一枚芯片。\n\n而电能传输系统PowerVia则是英特尔工程师开发的一项独特技术。Sanjay Natarajan博士作为这项技术的开发负责人，指出半导体晶体管结构中存在的最大传统问题之一便是“布线效率低下”。\n“传统互连技术是在晶体管层的顶部进行互联，经常产生电源线和信号线的互混，导致了布线效率低下，进而影响性能和功耗。”\n他们的解决方法，便是把电源线置于晶体管层的下面（也就是晶圆的背面）。通过减少晶圆正面的电源布线，腾出更多的“空地儿”用于优化信号布线，并减少时延，实现更好的电能传输。\n\n值得注意的是，这两项将用于Intel20A的关键技术，虽然不可避免被人诟病为“仍然处于PPT状态”（毕竟还都是PPT），但英特尔的专家们展示了这些测试芯片的扫描电镜图像，显然经过了一系列测试。\n就像上面所说，它们的成功应用，将决定着英特尔是否能在5nm这个关键节点上进行反超。\n从时间来看，很明显，2019年时PPT上规划的“2023年实现7nm++”，与这次规划的“2024年实现Intel20A”没有多少间隔。也就是说，依然有机会在5nm这个节点上翻盘。\n\n英特尔2019年10月的制程产品规划图\n如基辛格所说，英特尔Intel20A在2024年的问世与两大关键技术的真正应用，将标志着半导体“埃米时代”（1埃米=0.1纳米）的启幕。\n现在来听，其实更像是英特尔在向外界喊话：你们以为我还想在“纳米时代”争夺领导权？不，我们要进入一个比纳米更小的单位去争夺话语权了。\n写在最后…希望不是PPT\n但话说回来，既然完全改变了以纳米为单位的命名体系，而且晶体管结构和材料正在发生下一轮巨大变化。此外，英特尔也在从封装技术层面提高芯片的带宽密度和能效……\n这一切难道不是意味着，所谓的纳米还是埃米的数字单位，已经越来越没意义了吗？\n英特尔嘴上说在捍卫摩尔定律，其实已经认识到不能再依靠摩尔定律。\n如今，Intel20A的制造工艺虽然官方说拿下了高通这个大订单，但距离2024年变数还有很大。我们虽然觉得英特尔这场发布会的意义重大，并且产品规划让人没有异议，但是PPT能够转变称真正的产品，还是需要实物说话。\n毕竟，当年延迟了4年的14nm产品，当时PPT做的也挺不错的。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"EWT":0.9,"03086":0.9,"TWmain":0.9,"09086":0.9,"INTC":0.9,"TSM":0.9,"03145":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2908,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":808087297,"gmtCreate":1627544729719,"gmtModify":1703492037799,"author":{"id":"3586587763605977","authorId":"3586587763605977","name":"程導绅","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/17e557db7a706e6821394c3f5dc700d2","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586587763605977","idStr":"3586587763605977"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/808087297","repostId":"2155908504","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2155908504","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1627544101,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2155908504?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-29 15:35","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Taper is asymptotic, so it's hard to panic","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2155908504","media":"覃汉投资笔记","summary":"美联储7月FOMC会议要点总结：①经济已经朝削减QE取得一些进展并将在未来的会议上继续评估，与“进一步重大进展”（“substantial further progress”）的门槛仍有距离但也更近了","content":"<p>Summary of the key points of the Fed's July FOMC meeting: ① The economy has made some progress towards reducing QE and will continue to evaluate it at future meetings. It is still far from the threshold of \"substantial further progress\" but also closer; ② downplayed the market's concern that the Delta mutant virus dragged down the economic prospects; ③ Reiterate that inflation is temporary and there is no need to panic; ④ In the future, the high probability of reducing QE will be that Treasury Bond and MBS will reduce it together; ⑤ Emphasize again that it is too early to talk about rate hike; ⑥ Set up a standing repurchase facility tool (SRF), which is divided into domestic primary dealers in the United States and overseas central banks.</p><p>The most important signal of this meeting is undoubtedly that the Federal Reserve has begun to warm up to cut QE purchases (Taper). Policy communication is an art. If it is too abrupt and blunt, market expectations will often overshoot, causing drastic fluctuations in asset prices, similar to the \"cutting panic\" in May 2013. Therefore, in this round of policy cycle, the Fed's policy withdrawal and communication mode is gradual, smooth and transparent.</p><p>The most important change in the wording of the statement at this meeting is that \"some progress has been made on the economic objectives and will continue to be evaluated at future meetings\". The Delta variant virus that the market is worried about has not shaken the Fed's overall optimistic expectation of the economic outlook. Powell believes that the impact of the epidemic on the economy \"may be weaker and weaker\".</p><p>Considering that Taper's threshold is \"further significant progress\" in the economy, we recommend focusing on the extent to which the employment gap is filled. As of June, the employment gap caused by this epidemic was still unfilled by 6.76 million people, and the recovery rate was 70%. When the Federal Reserve announced Taper in December 2013, the recovery rate of the employment gap caused by the financial crisis was 88%. If the average monthly new jobs are about 690,000 in the second half of the year, it will not be difficult to achieve a similar gap recovery rate by the end of December.</p><p>The market is always concerned about the rhythm of Taper, and at present, the expectation is gradually consistent. It is not surprising that the Federal Reserve will hold on at this meeting. The market generally expects that the annual meeting of the central bank in Jackson Hole in August or the FOMC meeting in September will be the time when the Federal Reserve begins to suggest that it will consider Taper, and it may officially announce Taper at the end of 2021 or early 2022. We maintain our previous judgment that the December FOMC meeting was announced and implemented in 2022.</p><p>According to Powell, the July FOMC meeting is the first time that Fed officials have conducted in-depth internal discussions on the possible timing and varieties involved in Taper in the future. Although there is no internal consensus on when to start Taper, it is inclined to cut US Treasury Bond and MBS at the same time once Taper.</p><p>Looking back at the last round of Taper, in 2014 the Fed reduced the monthly purchase quota (US Treasury Bond + MBS) by $10 billion at each meeting, and officially stopped QE at the October meeting, which took 10 months to complete. At present, the Fed's monthly purchase amount (US Treasury Bond + MBS) is USD 120 billion. If the monthly purchase amount is reduced by USD 15 billion, it will take roughly 8 months to stop QE. If Taper is announced in December, it will end roughly in 2022Q3.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6292deabf5669e43200af797b2a273c6\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"417\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>In terms of inflation, this meeting once again confirmed that the Federal Reserve basically gave up its prediction of when inflation will peak, but its bottom line is that the long-term inflation expectation can't get out of control, which is why the inflation data continues to exceed expectations, but the Federal Reserve still firmly believes that \"inflation is temporary\". Powell also emphasized that \"if short-term price level increases do not affect long-term inflation expectations, then it is likely not to affect the future inflation path\".</p><p>The Fed's most concerned inflation expectation indicator-the Common Inflation Expectations Index (CIE), which combines professional forecasters, household surveys and market implied inflation expectation indicators, and professional forecasters and businesses tend to predict inflation more accurately than household surveys or market pricing. CIE moved up from 1.94% in 2020Q3 to 2.05% in 2021Q2 and is not currently surging following the inflation data.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/44dbded41058141db61cdcc3c83bff66\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"415\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>The reason why the US Treasury yields declined in the past month was mainly due to the economic worries caused by the raging mutant virus and the deadlock of fiscal stimulus. The reason why it once fell below 1.2% was mainly due to technical factors at the transaction level (short covering, rebalancing of pension stocks and bonds, strong overseas demand, etc.).</p><p>When the 10-year U.S. bond interest rate falls below 1.20%, what we need to think about is whether the current pricing of the U.S. economic outlook in US Treasury yields is too pessimistic, especially considering that the previous 1.20% level from the end of January to the beginning of February corresponds to the background that the U.S. fiscal stimulus and mass vaccination have not yet landed.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d6a7a8ca1c0e4573b2e48caa2fd25614\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"428\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>Considering the current pessimistic pricing of the economic outlook in US Treasury yields, the unsustainable driving force of technical factors, and the rule that the bear market rebound space of U.S. bonds is about 50bp, the downside of U.S. bond interest rate in the second half of the year is limited.</p><p>Looking back at 2013-2014, the slowdown of employment recovery in 2013Q3 led the Federal Reserve to stand still at the September-October interest rate meeting, and the 10-year US bond interest rate rose by 38bp from a low of 10.23 of 2.51% to 2.89% before the December interest rate meeting. The Federal Reserve officially announced it on December 18 and implemented it in early 2014. The 10-year U.S. bond interest rate rose again by 15bp to a peak of 3.04% during the year, and then returned to the downward channel in 2014 (global economic worries).</p><p>Referring to historical experience, we believe that as the Federal Reserve begins to release the Taper signal in the third quarter, the 10-year US bond interest rate may rise again and gradually peak after the Taper official announcement, but it is difficult to break through the previous high of 1.70-1.80%.</p><p>Therefore, even if the US Treasury yields returns to the upward channel next, the slope is difficult to be too steep, and there is a high probability that it will be in a wide range of fluctuations. In addition, the market's expectation for the Fed's withdrawal from easing is very sufficient, so there will be no more situation in February-March at the beginning of the year that the upward trend of the US Treasury yields will have a serious impact on the equity market. (End)</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4eedbbd7ea3f91182f1395c52927f0f6\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"417\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>","source":"lsy1620296573452","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Taper is asymptotic, so it's hard to panic</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTaper is asymptotic, so it's hard to panic\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">覃汉投资笔记</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-07-29 15:35</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Summary of the key points of the Fed's July FOMC meeting: ① The economy has made some progress towards reducing QE and will continue to evaluate it at future meetings. It is still far from the threshold of \"substantial further progress\" but also closer; ② downplayed the market's concern that the Delta mutant virus dragged down the economic prospects; ③ Reiterate that inflation is temporary and there is no need to panic; ④ In the future, the high probability of reducing QE will be that Treasury Bond and MBS will reduce it together; ⑤ Emphasize again that it is too early to talk about rate hike; ⑥ Set up a standing repurchase facility tool (SRF), which is divided into domestic primary dealers in the United States and overseas central banks.</p><p>The most important signal of this meeting is undoubtedly that the Federal Reserve has begun to warm up to cut QE purchases (Taper). Policy communication is an art. If it is too abrupt and blunt, market expectations will often overshoot, causing drastic fluctuations in asset prices, similar to the \"cutting panic\" in May 2013. Therefore, in this round of policy cycle, the Fed's policy withdrawal and communication mode is gradual, smooth and transparent.</p><p>The most important change in the wording of the statement at this meeting is that \"some progress has been made on the economic objectives and will continue to be evaluated at future meetings\". The Delta variant virus that the market is worried about has not shaken the Fed's overall optimistic expectation of the economic outlook. Powell believes that the impact of the epidemic on the economy \"may be weaker and weaker\".</p><p>Considering that Taper's threshold is \"further significant progress\" in the economy, we recommend focusing on the extent to which the employment gap is filled. As of June, the employment gap caused by this epidemic was still unfilled by 6.76 million people, and the recovery rate was 70%. When the Federal Reserve announced Taper in December 2013, the recovery rate of the employment gap caused by the financial crisis was 88%. If the average monthly new jobs are about 690,000 in the second half of the year, it will not be difficult to achieve a similar gap recovery rate by the end of December.</p><p>The market is always concerned about the rhythm of Taper, and at present, the expectation is gradually consistent. It is not surprising that the Federal Reserve will hold on at this meeting. The market generally expects that the annual meeting of the central bank in Jackson Hole in August or the FOMC meeting in September will be the time when the Federal Reserve begins to suggest that it will consider Taper, and it may officially announce Taper at the end of 2021 or early 2022. We maintain our previous judgment that the December FOMC meeting was announced and implemented in 2022.</p><p>According to Powell, the July FOMC meeting is the first time that Fed officials have conducted in-depth internal discussions on the possible timing and varieties involved in Taper in the future. Although there is no internal consensus on when to start Taper, it is inclined to cut US Treasury Bond and MBS at the same time once Taper.</p><p>Looking back at the last round of Taper, in 2014 the Fed reduced the monthly purchase quota (US Treasury Bond + MBS) by $10 billion at each meeting, and officially stopped QE at the October meeting, which took 10 months to complete. At present, the Fed's monthly purchase amount (US Treasury Bond + MBS) is USD 120 billion. If the monthly purchase amount is reduced by USD 15 billion, it will take roughly 8 months to stop QE. If Taper is announced in December, it will end roughly in 2022Q3.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6292deabf5669e43200af797b2a273c6\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"417\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>In terms of inflation, this meeting once again confirmed that the Federal Reserve basically gave up its prediction of when inflation will peak, but its bottom line is that the long-term inflation expectation can't get out of control, which is why the inflation data continues to exceed expectations, but the Federal Reserve still firmly believes that \"inflation is temporary\". Powell also emphasized that \"if short-term price level increases do not affect long-term inflation expectations, then it is likely not to affect the future inflation path\".</p><p>The Fed's most concerned inflation expectation indicator-the Common Inflation Expectations Index (CIE), which combines professional forecasters, household surveys and market implied inflation expectation indicators, and professional forecasters and businesses tend to predict inflation more accurately than household surveys or market pricing. CIE moved up from 1.94% in 2020Q3 to 2.05% in 2021Q2 and is not currently surging following the inflation data.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/44dbded41058141db61cdcc3c83bff66\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"415\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>The reason why the US Treasury yields declined in the past month was mainly due to the economic worries caused by the raging mutant virus and the deadlock of fiscal stimulus. The reason why it once fell below 1.2% was mainly due to technical factors at the transaction level (short covering, rebalancing of pension stocks and bonds, strong overseas demand, etc.).</p><p>When the 10-year U.S. bond interest rate falls below 1.20%, what we need to think about is whether the current pricing of the U.S. economic outlook in US Treasury yields is too pessimistic, especially considering that the previous 1.20% level from the end of January to the beginning of February corresponds to the background that the U.S. fiscal stimulus and mass vaccination have not yet landed.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d6a7a8ca1c0e4573b2e48caa2fd25614\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"428\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>Considering the current pessimistic pricing of the economic outlook in US Treasury yields, the unsustainable driving force of technical factors, and the rule that the bear market rebound space of U.S. bonds is about 50bp, the downside of U.S. bond interest rate in the second half of the year is limited.</p><p>Looking back at 2013-2014, the slowdown of employment recovery in 2013Q3 led the Federal Reserve to stand still at the September-October interest rate meeting, and the 10-year US bond interest rate rose by 38bp from a low of 10.23 of 2.51% to 2.89% before the December interest rate meeting. The Federal Reserve officially announced it on December 18 and implemented it in early 2014. The 10-year U.S. bond interest rate rose again by 15bp to a peak of 3.04% during the year, and then returned to the downward channel in 2014 (global economic worries).</p><p>Referring to historical experience, we believe that as the Federal Reserve begins to release the Taper signal in the third quarter, the 10-year US bond interest rate may rise again and gradually peak after the Taper official announcement, but it is difficult to break through the previous high of 1.70-1.80%.</p><p>Therefore, even if the US Treasury yields returns to the upward channel next, the slope is difficult to be too steep, and there is a high probability that it will be in a wide range of fluctuations. In addition, the market's expectation for the Fed's withdrawal from easing is very sufficient, so there will be no more situation in February-March at the beginning of the year that the upward trend of the US Treasury yields will have a serious impact on the equity market. (End)</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4eedbbd7ea3f91182f1395c52927f0f6\" tg-width=\"550\" tg-height=\"417\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"https://cj.sina.cn/article/normal_detail?url=https://finance.sina.com.cn/money/bond/market/2021-07-29/doc-ikqciyzk8314250.shtml\">覃汉投资笔记</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a106188796ec9abb78b8a3cfbae334a5","relate_stocks":{"161125":"标普500","513500":"标普500ETF博时","UPRO":"三倍做多标普500ETF-ProShares","IVV":"标普500ETF-iShares","GOVT":"iShares安硕核心美国国债ETF","SDS":"两倍做空标普500 ETF-ProShares","TQQQ":"纳指三倍做多ETF","DJX":"1/100道琼斯","TLT":"20+年以上美国国债ETF-iShares","OEF":"标普100指数ETF-iShares","IEF":"债券指数ETF-iShares Barclays 7-10年","SQQQ":"纳指三倍做空ETF","QQQ":"纳指100ETF","SPXU":"三倍做空标普500ETF-ProShares","SHY":"债券指数ETF-iShares Barclays 1-3年国债",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","DOG":"道指ETF-ProShares做空","OEX":"标普100","BND":"债券指数ETF-Vanguard美国","IEI":"iShares Barclays 3-7 Year Trea","DXD":"两倍做空道琼30指数ETF-ProShares","QLD":"2倍做多纳斯达克100指数ETF-ProShares","SSO":"2倍做多标普500ETF-ProShares","DDM":"2倍做多道指ETF-ProShares","SPY":"标普500ETF","PSQ":"做空纳斯达克100指数ETF-ProShares","UDOW":"三倍做多道指30ETF-ProShares","SH":"做空标普500-Proshares",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","QID":"两倍做空纳斯达克指数ETF-ProShares","SDOW":"三倍做空道指30ETF-ProShares"},"source_url":"https://cj.sina.cn/article/normal_detail?url=https://finance.sina.com.cn/money/bond/market/2021-07-29/doc-ikqciyzk8314250.shtml","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2155908504","content_text":"美联储7月FOMC会议要点总结：①经济已经朝削减QE取得一些进展并将在未来的会议上继续评估，与“进一步重大进展”（“substantial further progress”）的门槛仍有距离但也更近了；②淡化了市场对Delta变异病毒拖累经济前景的担忧；③重申通胀是暂时的，无需感到恐慌；④未来削减QE大概率会是国债和MBS一起减；⑤再次强调谈论加息过早；⑥设立常备回购便利工具（SRF），分为面向美国国内一级交易商和海外央行。\n本次会议最重要的信号，无疑就是美联储开始为削减QE购买（Taper）进行预热。政策沟通是门艺术，过于突兀与生硬，市场预期往往就会超调，引发资产价格剧烈波动，类似2013年5月的“削减恐慌”。所以，在本轮政策周期中，美联储政策退出和沟通的模式都是力求渐进、平滑和透明。\n本次会议声明措辞中，最重要的变化就是“经济目标已经取得一些进展并将在未来的会议上继续评估”。市场担忧的Delta变异病毒，并没有动摇美联储对经济前景整体乐观的预期，鲍威尔认为疫情对经济的冲击“可能一波比一波弱”。\n考虑到Taper的门槛是经济取得“进一步重大进展”，我们建议关注就业缺口的填补程度。本轮疫情造成的就业缺口截止6月仍差676万人未填补，恢复率为70%，而2013年12月美联储宣布Taper时，金融危机造成的就业缺口恢复率为88%，若下半年平均每月新增就业约69万人，年底12月实现类似的缺口恢复率难度不大。\n市场关心的始终是Taper的节奏，目前来看预期也逐渐走向一致。本次会议美联储按兵不动并不意外，市场普遍预期是8月Jackson Hole的央行年会或者9月FOMC会议将会是美联储开始暗示考虑Taper的时点，并且可能在2021年底或2022年初正式宣布Taper。我们则维持此前的判断，即12月FOMC会议宣布并在2022年开始执行。\n根据鲍威尔所言，7月FOMC会议是美联储官员首次针对未来Taper可能的时点和涉及品种进行深度内部讨论，虽然内部尚未对何时开始Taper形成共识，但倾向于一旦Taper就同时削减美国国债和MBS。\n回顾上一轮Taper，2014年美联储在每次会议上将每月购买额度（美国国债+MBS）减少100亿美元，并在10月会议上正式停止QE，历时10个月完成。对比当下，美联储每月购买额度（美国国债+MBS）为1200亿美元，若按照每月减少额度150亿美元，则大致需要8个月实现停止QE，如果12月宣布Taper，那么大致2022Q3结束。\n\n通胀方面，本次会议再次确认了美联储基本放弃对通胀何时见顶的预测，但它的底线是守住长期通胀预期不能失控，这也是为何通胀数据连续超预期，美联储却依然坚信“通胀是暂时性”的原因。鲍威尔也强调“如果短期的物价水平上涨不会影响长期的通胀预期，那么它就很可能不会影响未来的通胀路径”。\n美联储最关注的通胀预期指标——共同通胀预期指数（CIE），该指数综合了专业预测者、家庭调查和市场隐含的通胀预期指标，而专业预测者和企业对通胀的预测往往比家庭调查或市场定价更准确。CIE从2020Q3的1.94%上行到2021Q2的2.05%，目前并没有跟随通胀数据而飙升。\n\n过去一个月美债利率之所以下行，主要来自于变异病毒肆虐叠加财政刺激僵局所引发的经济担忧，而之所以一度跌破1.2%，主要来自交易层面的技术因素（空头回补、养老金股债再平衡、海外需求较强等）。\n在10年美债利率跌破1.20%之际，我们需要思考的是当前美债利率对美国经济前景的定价是否过于悲观，尤其是考虑到此前1月底-2月初1.20%的水平对应的背景是美国财政刺激和疫苗大规模接种都还没有落地。\n\n考虑到当前美债利率对经济前景的定价过于悲观、技术性因素的驱动力量难以持续、以及美债熊市反弹空间约50bp的规律，下半年10年美债利率下行空间有限。\n回顾2013-2014年，2013Q3就业复苏放缓导致美联储在9-10月议息会议上按兵不动，10年美债利率从10.23低点2.51%累计上行38bp至12月议息会议前的2.89%。美联储在12.18正式官宣并在2014年初执行，10年美债利率再次上行15bp至年内高点3.04%见顶，随后在2014年重回下降通道（全球经济担忧）。\n参考历史经验，我们认为，随着美联储在三季度开始释放Taper信号，10年美债利率可能会再次上行，并在Taper官宣落地后逐步见顶，但很难突破前期高点1.70-1.80%。\n所以，接下来即使美债利率重回上行通道，但是斜率很难太陡，大概率处于宽幅区间震荡格局，再加上市场对联储退出宽松预期非常充分，所以不会再出现年初2-3月份那种因为美债利率上行对权益市场造成严重冲击的情况。（完）","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"161125":0.9,"513500":0.9,"SSO":0.9,"UBmain":0.9,"IVV":0.9,"ZFmain":0.9,"NQmain":0.9,"QID":0.9,"ZNmain":0.9,"SH":0.9,"DJX":0.9,"IEI":0.9,".DJI":0.9,"BND":0.9,"SPXU":0.9,"SDOW":0.9,"DDM":0.9,"UPRO":0.9,"MNQmain":0.9,"TNmain":0.9,".SPX":0.9,"DOG":0.9,"ESmain":0.9,"PSQ":0.9,"SHY":0.9,"GOVT":0.9,"TLT":0.9,"SQQQ":0.9,"OEF":0.9,"IEF":0.9,"UDOW":0.9,"OEX":0.9,"QQQ":0.9,"ZTmain":0.9,"DXD":0.9,"SPY":0.9,"SDS":0.9,"QLD":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,"TQQQ":0.9,"ZBmain":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2395,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":127346059,"gmtCreate":1624837541771,"gmtModify":1703845682609,"author":{"id":"3586587763605977","authorId":"3586587763605977","name":"程導绅","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/17e557db7a706e6821394c3f5dc700d2","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586587763605977","idStr":"3586587763605977"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"??","listText":"??","text":"??","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/127346059","repostId":"2146121007","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2127,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}