Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Michael Kerrison's avatar

Very interesting piece, but I think it's not doing enough to justify *why* consumption share is (conclusive) evidence of a bottleneck. It *could* be the case that we observe high utilisation in resource X, but because production is more elastically scaled to actual/other bottlenecks.

My quick research:

- HBM: Almost certainly independently binding. Sources say 3-4x wafer intensity per GB, there are sold-out-through-2026 statements, price spikes in downstream DRAM

- CoWoS: Likely also independently binding, but evidence is TSMC's capex behaviour and customer allocation reports

- Logic fabs: Possibly binding at the frontier nodes too, but harder to see because TSMC has more pricing power and allocation flexibility there.

No posts

Ready for more?