Taiwan Semiconductor Is Likely Finished (NYSE - TSM) - Seeking Alpha

5/26/22, 8:41 AM Taiwan Semiconductor Is Likely Finished (NYSE _ TSM) _ Seeking Alpha
Taiwan Semiconductor Is Likely Finished

Apr. 19, 2022 3:26 PM ET | Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Limited (TSM) | AAPL,
ASML, INTC | 300 Comments | 63 Likes
Arne Verheyde
8.88K Followers
Summary
TSMC provided more details about its N2 (2nm) schedule, which is going from
bad to worse. It is a trainwreck, worse than Intel 10nm.
TSMC not only conclusively confirmed the delay, but the schedule is five (!)
quarters later than I had previously expected.
TSMC’s process leadership will be finished by 2025 with a full node

disadvantage. This will likely remain so for the rest of the decade.
Intel will be leading Moore’s Law again. Customers may jump ship and flock to
Intel Foundry Services. This poses a real threat to TSMC's financials and stock.
TSMC remains investible in the near- to mid-term, but not the long-term.
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4502206-tsmc-is-likely-finished 1/17
BING-JHEN HONG/iStock Editorial via Getty Images
Investment Thesis
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSM) reported an absolutely
stunning quarter. And given that there is no in end in sight for TSMC’s massive capex
spending (resulting in much higher capacity), combined with its major price increases
TSMC’s medium-term future looks very bright.
However, in order to measure the long-term potential of TSMC, one must look not at
the financial but at the technological trends. Here, the picture has gone from bad to
worse in the matter of a few quarters. Not only has the extent of the N3 delay
become clear over this time period, but during the recent earnings call, TSMC
presented a very bleak picture for its N2 process. In short, TSMC is likely finished.
witeken
@witeken
I was wrong about TSMC.
A few months ago I thought they were going to ship 2nm

in Q1’25. TSMC basically just said they won’t ship the N2
train wreck until Q2’26. If this was Intel the stock would be
down 25%. @EricJhonsa @SKundojjala
2:57 PM · Apr 15, 2022
81 Reply Share
Read 16 replies
The simplest way to illustrate how much TSMC surprised me is this: I have never
been a TSMC bull, yet the timing that TSMC announced for N2 was 4-5 quarters later
than (the already quite bleak timing) I had told investors about just two quarters ago.
If this was Intel (INTC) the stock would be collapsing right now. Hence, it is now also
clear why Pat Gelsinger is so intent on Intel building fabs like tree leaves sprouting in
the spring, in order to capitalize on its competitor's stumble/complacency.
Background
I have been detailing the 3nm, and now also 2nm, train wreck for quite a while now:
April 2020: Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Losing Its Process

Leadership To Intel (NYSE:TSM)
November 2020: TSMC To Fall Behind Both Intel, Samsung By 2024

(NYSE:TSM)
August 2021: TSMC Confirms 3nm Delay: What This Means For TSM Stock
October 2021: Taiwan Semiconductor Stock: 2nm Also Delayed (NYSE:TSM)
December 2021: Taiwan Semiconductor Stock: 3nm Further Delayed

(NYSE:TSM)
TSMC confirms 2nm delay

One never really knows if analysts of tech companies will ask relevant questions, or
just ask about the financials. Luckily for investors (and unluckily for TSMC), during
the recent Q1 earnings call, it was clear that analysts had been paying close attention
to the developments of TSMC's competitors in the foundry space. So ask questions
they did.
First, as a quick refresher, it was half a year ago that TSMC strongly suggested that
its 2nm node would be delayed (following the delay of 3nm) by stating the 2nm would
only go in production in 2025. For a quick check, take 5nm’s production start in Q2
2020 and add four years (the equivalent of two nodes). Hence, a production start in
2025 implies a cadence of 2.5 years for two consecutive nodes. This is markedly
slower than Moore’s Law’s golden standard of two years per node.
However, admittedly TSMC did leave quite some room for interpretation in its
statement half a year ago. After all, TSMC might have referred to 2025 for when
products would be in the market. For example, if 2nm production started two years
after 3nm (which would be a normal schedule), then production could start in the
second half of 2024 with products in early 2025. Indeed, in my previous analysis I put
TSMC’s 2nm launch in Q1 2025.
Alas, this appears not to be the case. Let’s just consider what TMSC said after the
questioner pointed out that its competitors had “accelerated their schedule” for 2nm,
while TSMC was remaining silent.
CEO C. C. Wei: Our N2 development is on track, including new transistor structure

and progressing to our expectation. We expect our N2 delivery to be the best
technology, maturity, performance and cost for our customers. And we are
confident that N2 will continue our technology leadership to support our customer
growth. And we still plan the production in 2025.
Oof. Remember that not too long, investors and tech enthusiasts expected 3nm to go
into production by mid-2022 – in a few months. There had been many, many people
who thought that Apple (AAPL) would launch a 3nm iPhone this year. (I was arguably
the first, back in early 2020, to suggest this could not be the case.) Instead, several
months ago it became apparent that 3nm had slipped to the last quarter, and perhaps
even the last month, of 2022.
Hence, this means that TSMC’s statement that 2nm is scheduled for 2025
conclusively confirms that 2nm is also delayed: TSMC by definition won’t be able to
meet a two year schedule. Although TSMC denied it wasn’t denied, one should take
these management comments with a grain of salt, as marketing fluff, since Moore’s
Law is (the only) yardstick by which one can measure companies’ progress in the
semiconductor industry. More on this below.
But it gets even worse. Apparently, analysts still weren’t fully satisfied by TSMC’s
comments. A while later in the call, one analyst remarked that TSMC, indeed, didn’t
maintain a two year cadence with 3nm, and wondered if TSMC planned to go back to
two years with 2nm. Let’s hear what TSMC had to say:
CEO C. C. Wei: Brett, our progress so far today for the N2 is on track. And all I
want to say is, yes, at the end of 2024, you will enter the risk production. 2025, it
will be in production, probably close to the second half or the -- or the end of 2025.
That’s our schedule.
With this information, one can conclude following verdict. After a 2.75 year cadence
at 3nm to deliver a measly 1.6x density improvement, TSMC has now scheduled 2nm
at 3 year cadence (which could become even longer if there are any further delays)
to deliver an as of yet unknown transistor density improvement.
Redfire
@Redfire75369
So... TSMC has settled on a 3-year cadence between

N3 and N2.
TSMC is probably the most complacent leading-

edge logic foundry at this point
I scoffed when Samsung said 2GAE was in 2025 and

I'll do it again with TSMC as they've said N2 is in H2-
2025.
4:00 AM · Apr 16, 2022
Read the full conversation on Twitter
120 Reply Share
Read 9 replies
To be clear and unambiguous, how investors should view this is that the 3 year
cadence for N2 stacks on top of the 2.75 year cadence for N3. Those cadences imply
respectively a 0.75 and 1 year delay compared to Moore’s Law. (It is actually even
worse since Moore’s Law implies a 2x shrink, while as stated above 3nm will deliver
just a 1.6x improvement.) In other words, when taking 5nm as a baseline, TSMC is
“on track” to deliver 2nm with what in reality amounts to a 1.75 year delay.
To let the gravity of this announcement sink in, what this all amounts to is that TSMC
just announced a 1 year delay of its 2nm process. For comparison, Intel stock
dropped a whopping 20% the day it announced that 7nm would be delayed by 6-12
months.
So if this were Intel, the stock would have collapsed, but instead the stock didn’t even
blink. To extent the analogy, what TMSC has basically done is as if Intel had never
told investors (in 2019) that it aimed to launch 7nm in 2021, went silent for a couple
years, and then announced that 7nm (now renamed to Intel 4) was “on track” to go
into production in the second half of 2022. But wait a second, didn’t 10nm go into
production in the second half of 2019 already, which implies a 3 year cadence and
hence a 1 year delay?
Exactly. If Intel had never announced anything about 7nm (Intel 4), then it wouldn’t
have had to tell investors anything about how under the hood Intel had discovered a
“defect mode” that had resulted in a 1 year delay, and how Intel then significantly
redesigned this node to use much more EUV layers, so the node is now on track (to
the revised schedule). Instead, Intel had decided (in 2019) to be open about its
roadmap, which then backfired. Investors could then basically follow “live” (quarterly)
how Intel tried to recover from the delay, resulting in the CEO switch, etc.
Like I said, this is exactly how it is (not) going at TSMC, as TSMC has opted to
remain silent. So instead, investors needed to rely on rumors (which then got covered
in articles like this one) to find out that TSMC had a somewhat similar issue as Intel:
whereas Intel used too few EUV layers at Intel 4 and needed to redesign the node,
TSMC had to redesign N3 with less EUV layers, and hence also a lower density
shrink.
With regards to N2, it is anyone's guess what issue or issues TSMC is having.
However, we can make one educated guess: the FinFET is running out of steam,
which requires a completely new transistor to be introduced, the gate-all-around.
Without patting myself too much on the back, anyone who has read some of my
analysis shouldn't be too surprised that Intel is able to use this transition to regain
process leadership while Intel is running behind, as I highlighted Intel's world-class
components research already two years ago: Intel Vs. TSMC: Process Technology
Leadership Is More Than Transistor Density (NASDAQ:INTC). Many people thought
Intel had become a dinosaur destined for irrelevance, but those people years down
the road are now finally getting disproved.
Lastly, analysts also poked about the change in ASML (ASML) lithography
leadership, and the answer is very similar to the last ones: management preferred to
refer to its present leadership position rather than actually answer questions about
the future.
CEO C. C. Wei: Well, let me answer the question. We are the largest user of EUV
tool today in the industry. And so we have intensively evaluated and are very
familiar with those high-end EUV tools for wire. And we will continue to evaluate
and adopt the high-end tool whenever we think is necessary and is ready and cost
effective. Whether it is a N2 or not, I have not yet to be able to share with you.
In stark contrast, while Intel has been shouting from the rooftops that it would be the
first adopter of high-NA EUV in 2025 (including support quotes from ASLM's CEO),
TSMC again choses to remain silent.
I have seen people suggest that TSMC would be just one quarter or so later than
Intel ("Intel bought the first tool, but the second one will go to TSMC"), but this lack of
confirmation may suggest that high-NA may follow much later for TSMC. At this point,
the best-case may be something similar as to how TSMC originally introduced EUV,
by introducing a derivative of N7 (N7 Plus) that used EUV (at a few layers) and was
introduced a year or so after the initial N7.
I feel like I can’t emphasize this enough, but to me this is all very reminiscent to how I
have seen Intel fall behind: as late as 2017, Intel management was putting out
graphs ("Have you lost your lead? No!") talking about how it was 3 years ahead of
the competition at 14nm (TSMC’s equivalent node was 10nm), despite that just one
year later, in 2018, Intel would fall behind for the next 6 years as competitors moved
to 7nm (and then 5nm and 3nm) while Intel struggled with 10nm (and then 7nm aka
Intel 4).
Process leadership
To summarize, literally in the last two months, we now seen two updates from two
competitors, each in the opposite direction: Intel has pulled in 18A by 6 months while
TSMC has delayed N2 by 12 months.
With this information, it is possible to make a new graph to show how process
leadership will evolve over the coming years. If people until now were still giving
TSMC any benefit of the doubt, then this latest information should just have all but
erased this.
(Anecdotally, on Twitter I have seen many comments by people who are still giving
TMSC exactly this benefit, but as mentioned above Intel was also full of confidence
about how it was ahead at 14nm, but then simply was unable to deliver 10nm, which
settled the debate. Note that before the 10nm delay and the smaller 14nm delay, Intel
had an absolutely impeccable track record for at least 1.5 decades, similar to TSMC
now.)
First, here is my previous graph (from late last year), which as discussed gave TSMC
the benefit of the doubt by putting 2nm in Q1 2025:
Own work
Now, here is the new graph:
Own work
Here is the same graph on a logarithmic scale:
Own work
Even though the graph should speak for itself (at the beginning the orange line is
comfortable above the blue line, while at the end the blue line is comfortably above
the orange line), some analysis is still in order to correctly interpret what is shown.
First, on the Intel side I have pulled in 18A by one quarter and left 14A unchanged. I
view this as a conservative estimate given that officially 18A production has been
pulled in by up to six months from Q1’25 to H2’24. The new schedule should allow
products to hit the market by Q2’25.
How about 14A, which Intel hasn’t officially announced? There could be two schools
of thought. First, the conservative investor might assume that Intel will be targeting a
regular 2 year cadence compared to 20A, which implies production in the first half of
2026, and launch in the second half. This is what is displayed in the graph. However,
given the pull-in of 18A, one could speculate that 14A might also be ahead of
schedule. After all, Intel has said that it aims to deliver a yearly cadence of process
nodes (tick-tock). In that case, 14A would launch one year after 18A and hence less
than two years after 20A.
However, this would be akin to Intel Accelerated 2.0, since Intel would repeat the trick
that it is doing at 20A (vs. Intel 4) by adhering to a cadence that is less than two
years. Although as an Intel bull it is tempting to go with this scenario and deliver the
final blow to TSMC’s leadership, for now let’s assume that Intel will not be this crazy.
After all, CFO Dave Zisner promised investors that Intel would start to deliver strong
gross margins and cash flows by 2025. (As I have explained previously, the
accelerated cadence is one part of the reason why gross margin will remain low until
2024.)
For TSMC, I have had to delay 2nm by no less than 5 quarters. Since the quote
above specifically stated “end of 2025” (Q4 2025), investors should not expect to see
products in the market until Q2 2026.
With that said, some people may observe that I couldn’t resist to extrapolate even
further. For the nodes beyond 14A and N2, I have done nothing heroic but just
assumed a regular 2 year cadence for both companies. The main point by this is that
unless Intel and/or TSMC either stumble or somehow accelerate their cadence, the
new status quo will simply remain the same, in favor of Intel.
Indeed, as is obvious in the graph, the combination of TSMC’s delay and Intel’s
accelerated cadence is causing seismic changes with regards to the status quo of
who will have process leadership going forward. In other words, Intel is now in pole
position to reclaim and then retain process leadership for the rest of the decade.
Intel could immediately take an up to 1.5x density leadership with 20A in the
second half of 2024 (compared to N3).
Given the pull-in of 18A, this lead could soon thereafter be extended to up to
1.8x. Intel will have a full node advantage for all of 2025.
Although TSMC should reach parity with N2 in the first half of 2026, in reality this
node will now compete against 14A due to Intel’s relentless pursuit of Moore’s
Law. Although the exact gap will depend on the currently unknown scaling
factors of these nodes, one can quite reliably extrapolate both companies’
historical scaling trends. In this scenario, Intel’s leadership would remain a very
comfortable 1.6x.
For Intel 10A in 2028, I have taken a more conservative 1.8x scaling (Intel’s
shrinks are historically over 2x). But since TSMC hasn’t done a shrink over 2x
for what should be a few decades now, as mentioned above the status quo will
remain the same, with about a 1.6x lead for Intel.
In summary, it may be a bit overkill to extrapolate to 2028, this is actually completely

irrelevant to determine who will have process leadership going forward, because the
most important events are unfolding pretty much here and now (or in the near future):
Intel’s accelerated cadence from 4 to 20A and TSMC’s delays at 3nm and 2nm.
Worse than Intel 10nm

Intel’s 10nm was arguably the biggest slip in the history of semiconductors. How
could one do possibly worse than that? Well, TSMC seem to have some idea.
Simply put, mathematically speaking N3 + N2 taking 5.75 years for a combined

shrink of ~2.9x (20% CAGR) is worse than Intel 10nm taking 5 years for a 2.7x shrink
(22% CAGR).
Just let this sink in for a second. Hence, if 10nm was how Intel lost its process
leadership, then N3 + N2 is how TSMC is losing its process leadership.
Risks and SemiWiki

Generally, I feel the analysis above is very robust. Intel showed an 18A (test) wafer at
Investor Meeting and pulled in the schedule by up to half a year. These and other
proof points are strong signals that this is a very healthy process that Intel is very
comfortable and confident about.
Investors may wonder how this is possible. The answer is because Intel has separate
development teams. One team is working on the 4/3 tick-tocks, while another team is
busy with 20A and 18A. Further teams are researching the nodes and technologies
beyond. Hence, the Intel 4 “defect mode” didn’t necessarily impact 20A. In short, Intel
is back.
By contrast, I have extensively discussed the TSMC delays by now. Although TSMC
maintains it is “on track”, in reality Moore’s Law allows one to call anything that is
longer than two years a delay. Intel shows (at least with 20A) that a 2 year cadence
(or even shorter) is still possible. Given TSMC’s latest disclosures, TSMC’s schedule
until 2025 is now just as well confirmed as Intel’s.
However, admittedly, while the schedule/roadmap of both companies is now known,

the exact specifications (like the scaling factors) are not. Therefore, for illustration I
will review another analysis (published before TSMC's Q1 earnings) on SemiWiki by
an author that for the last few years has been quite bearish about Intel and bullish
about TSMC (with regards to process leadership).
With that background, quite to my surprise the author proposed an expected density
improvement for TSMC’s N2 of just 1.33x. For comparison, in the graph shown above
I have taken a 1.8x improvement for TSMC, in line with TSMC's historic trend.
Although the author put N2 in 2025, this has now proven to be incorrect.
How about Intel? The author proposed a 1.8x improvement for Intel 4 and a 1.6x
improvement for 20A. However, I could not disagree more. Note that the 1.8x is
despite (as mentioned above) Intel having redesigned Intel 4 to use much more EUV
layers. (For comparison, the reduction in EUV layers by TSMC at N3 resulted in a
lower density, so if anything more EUV allows for a higher density. Although Intel did
say several years ago that it would not be as aggressive anymore to prevent getting
into trouble.)
Secondly, the 1.6x assumption is despite 20A being Intel’s second-gen EUV process
and moving to RibbonFET and PowerVia. Note that RibbonFET is simply inherently
more dense than FinFET, since essentially the fins/ribbons (which are laid out
adjacent in FinFET) are instead stacked vertically.
Thirdly, former CEO Bob Swan literally said that 7nm and 5nm (now called 4 and
20A) would both be 2.0x shrinks.
Overall, although I wouldn't completely rule out somewhat reduced scaling targets, I
see no evidence for Intel going as low as 1.6x since Intel has done more than 2x for
at least the half a dozen prior generations.
Financials and stock

The main thesis in this article is that TSMC will lose its technology leadership. In the
old days this would only indirectly benefit Intel as Intel would have to compete against
inferior products. But with Pat Gelsinger going all in on Intel Foundry Services (IFS),
in the long-term a loss of process leadership means that TSMC can now directly lose
customers to Intel.
Indeed, Intel has said that is has already lured (at least) 5 “whale customers”,
including Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO), so this is not just a hypothetical
situation. IFS poses a real threat to TSMC, and given the tech trends discussed in
this article, this frankly makes TSMC currently non-investible for the long-term.
However, there are a few caveats. Although for the sake of this article’s length not
readily discussed, TSMC reported absolutely stellar financials. Combined with the
lackluster stock performance over the last so many quarters, TSMC’s once very high
valuation has deflated like a souffle under a sledgehammer over the last few years.
So for investors with a shorter-term time horizon, TSMC as a business doesn’t show
any weaknesses, going out as far as the stock market usually tends to look. For
example, TSMC is still busy with its massive fab buildout ($40-44B capex just in 2022
alone), and Intel has yet to ramp some of its big foundry projects such as Ponte
Vecchio, Arc and Arrow Lake, all of which have tiled that are manufactured at TSMC.
Hence, in the near-term, TSMC is going exactly nowhere, and management literally
said during the Q&A that it doesn’t have enough capacity in 2022 to fulfill all demand
(despite the aforementioned monster capex, which suggests these trends will
continue at least through 2023).
Inflation
While many are concerned about inflation, this actually provides another argument
for TSMC still being a strong near-to-mid-term investment. Given (for now) TSMC's
important strategic position as partner (middle man) of many of the world's largest
tech companies, including Nvidia (NVDA), Qualcomm (QCOM), AMD (AMD) and
even Intel, TSMC has been able to mitigate the impact of inflation by passing on its
increased costs. In other words, TSMC has been increasing its wafer prices for
customers.
Evidence for this trend is visible in TSMC's increased gross margin, which was 55.6%
in the most recent Q1 quarter compared to 52.4% in Q1 2021 and 51.8% in Q1 2020.
TSMC indicated it had increased its gross margin target, so this higher gross margin
will not be a transitory phenomenon. This shows a business (model) that is very
inflation-resistant as TSMC has been able to increases its prices by more than its
rising costs due to inflation.
Investor Takeaway
It really wasn’t that long ago that many people thought TSMC had become invincible.
(But hey, I am an Intel bull and once thought that Intel was invincible too). The TSMC
plus Apple (AAPL) combination was steamrolling the Intel dinosaur, the relic from the
foregone PC days.
It is now turning out that nothing could have been further from the truth. The PC
came roaring back to life with COVID-19, while Pat Gelsinger is rebuilding Intel as
this iconic technology company.
The simultaneous combination of Intel’s acceleration and TSMC’s deceleration is

causing an unprecedented change in process leadership that is occurring much
faster, and also much more profound, than anyone would have expected. Certainly
not after that day in July 2020 when Intel delayed 7nm, followed by the day that the
stock dropped by 20%.
As detailed, TSMC currently seems to be going through similar difficulties as Intel as

10nm. In fact, management’s stance is also quite reminiscent to how Intel
management for years continued to feed off their past glories, while remaining silent
about and downplaying the issues about the present and future. In fact, TSMC is now
taking these Intel practices to the next level by claiming that its nodes are “on track”
(for comparison, Intel truthfully confirmed all four its 1 year delays; for some reason it
was only the fourth 1 year delay, of 7nm, that investors started to notice).
Strictly speaking, though, TSMC may be speaking the truth: if you never announce
any schedules, then you can tell investors any date you like without having to
announce delays. Internally, management might previously have set much more
aggressive schedules to its engineers, but investors will never know about this.
In any case, the simple fact of the matter is that in my previous coverage on TSMC’s
N2 node, I had given it the benefit of the doubt. But because of the latest
management comments, I had to reduce my expectations for N2 by a staggering 5
quarters.
In the end, you simply can’t delay a node by four or more quarters and expect to
remain (as) competitive. This was true for Intel then, and it remains true for TSMC
now. The knife cuts both ways, and now it is cutting into TMSC’s competitiveness big
time.
Moore’s Law continues relentlessly. As I see no roadblocks for Intel going forward
given how drastically the technology and management landscape has changed in just
the last year (RibbonFET, high-NA EUV, Pat Gelsinger, etc.), one cannot do anything
but to conclude that TSMC is finished.
It might hence only be a matter of time until these technology trends start to impact
the financials and hence the stock (as it did to Intel eventually). The biggest and real
threat is that customers jump ship to Intel Foundry Services, which has been
announcing new fabs on an almost quarterly cadence for the last year. To be sure,
TSMC certainly remains investible for at least the next three to five years, in part
given the stock’s decreased valuation in the recent past (even despite TSMC’s beats
and raises).
Memorial Day Sale: 62% Off High Dividend

Opportunities
Inflation is now at 8.3% but there is an antidote: High
quality dividend stocks.
Prices continue to rise - at the supermarket, at the

pump, even at the mall - but top dividend names could
generate a steady stream of cash to offset inflation’s
sting.
And now, for a limited time, Seeking Alpha has lowered

the price to join High Dividend Opportunities, our largest
investing community. Let the Seeking Alpha experts
help you create your inflation-beating portfolio.
Start your free trial »
However, due to the technology evolution (which shows that Intel could attain a full
node advantage by 2025 already), I believe the foundry market is now primed for
disruption. As mentioned it turns out Intel is exquisitely well positioned to capitalize
with IFS. Pat Gelsinger strikes back.
This article was written by
Arne Verheyde
8.88K Followers
With an engineering background, looking for companies with expertise to be well-positioned for growth and
leadership.
Follow
Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of INTC either through stock
ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own
opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no
business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.
63 Likes 300 Comments
Comments (300) Sort by Newest

Taiwan Semiconductor Is Likely Finished (NYSE - TSM) - Seeking Alpha

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Taiwan Semiconductor Is Likely Finished (NYSE - TSM) - Seeking Alpha

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

5/26/22, 8:41 AM Taiwan Semiconductor Is Likely Finished (NYSE _ TSM) _ Seeking Alpha

Taiwan Semiconductor Is Likely Finished

TSMC’s process leadership will be finished by 2025 with a full node

BING-JHEN HONG/iStock Editorial via Getty Images

I was wrong about TSMC.

A few months ago I thought they were going to ship 2nm

2:57 PM · Apr 15, 2022

April 2020: Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company Losing Its Process

November 2020: TSMC To Fall Behind Both Intel, Samsung By 2024

October 2021: Taiwan Semiconductor Stock: 2nm Also Delayed (NYSE:TSM)

December 2021: Taiwan Semiconductor Stock: 3nm Further Delayed

TSMC confirms 2nm delay

CEO C. C. Wei: Our N2 development is on track, including new transistor structure

So... TSMC has settled on a 3-year cadence between

TSMC is probably the most complacent leading-

I scoffed when Samsung said 2GAE was in 2025 and

Read the full conversation on Twitter

120 Reply Share

Now, here is the new graph:

Here is the same graph on a logarithmic scale:

In summary, it may be a bit overkill to extrapolate to 2028, this is actually completely

Worse than Intel 10nm

Simply put, mathematically speaking N3 + N2 taking 5.75 years for a combined

Risks and SemiWiki

However, admittedly, while the schedule/roadmap of both companies is now known,

Financials and stock

The simultaneous combination of Intel’s acceleration and TSMC’s deceleration is

As detailed, TSMC currently seems to be going through similar difficulties as Intel as

Memorial Day Sale: 62% Off High Dividend

Prices continue to rise - at the supermarket, at the

And now, for a limited time, Seeking Alpha has lowered

This article was written by

63 Likes 300 Comments

Comments (300) Sort by Newest

You might also like