Wednesday, February 7th 2024

TSMC Overtakes Intel and Samsung to Become World's Largest Semiconductor Maker by Revenue

by
AleksandarK
 Discuss (11 Comments)
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) has reached a significant milestone, overtaking Intel and Samsung to become the world's largest semiconductor maker by revenue. According to Taiwanese financial analyst Dan Nystedt, TSMC earned $69.3 billion in revenue in 2023, surpassing Intel's $63 billion and Samsung's $58 billion. This is a remarkable achievement for the Taiwanese chipmaker, which has historically lagged behind Intel and Samsung in terms of revenue despite being the world's largest semiconductor foundry. TSMC's meteoric rise has been fueled by the increased demand for everything digital - from PCs to game consoles - during the coronavirus pandemic in 2020, and AI demand in the previous year. With its cutting-edge production capabilities allowing it to manufacture chips using the latest process technologies, TSMC has pulled far ahead of Intel and Samsung and can now charge a premium for its services.

This is reflected in its financials. For the 6th straight quarter, TSMC's Q4 2023 revenue of $19.55 billion also beat Intel's $15.41 billion and Samsung's $16.42 billion chip division revenue. As the world continues its rapid transformation in the AI era of devices, TSMC looks set to hold on to its top position for the foreseeable future. Its revenue and profits will likely continue to eclipse those of historical giants like Intel and Samsung. However, a big contender is Intel Foundry Services, which is slowly starting to gain external customers. If IFS takes off and new customers start adopting Intel as their foundry of choice, team blue could regain leadership in the coming years.
Sources: Dan Nystedt (on X), via Tom's Hardware

Related News

Add your own comment

11 Comments on TSMC Overtakes Intel and Samsung to Become World's Largest Semiconductor Maker by Revenue

#1
Dave65
It was bound to happen sooner or later.
Posted on Reply
#2
Daven
A long time ago, I was a regular poster over at Tech Report and I would try to explain to others that TSMC would overtake Intel in the race to more advanced nodes. The reason this would happen is because TSMC would make tons of money off of mobile phone ARM chip manufacturing.

The other TR readers laughed and laughed. They said I was crazy to think any company could get ahead of Intel. Oh well. I’m just happy to have a competitive landscape where no one dominates.
Posted on Reply
#3
bug
Judging by that graph, this isn't so much "overtakes" as "sees a smaller decline, leaving it ahead".

Regardless, we need them all (and then some), the demand still exceeds the supply.
Posted on Reply
#4
bonehead123
Aint capitalism great (when it works properly).....

Course #1: Supply & demand
Course #2: Competition (ie.. beat your's & you will succeed)
Course #3: Demand & supply

And like I've said before:

T - The
S - Smartest
M - Manufacturing
C - Company
Posted on Reply
#5
Wirko
bonehead123Aint capitalism great (when it works properly).....

Course #1: Supply & demand
Course #2: Competition (ie.. beat your's & you will succeed)
Course #3: Demand & supply

And like I've said before:

T - The
S - Smartest
M - Manufacturing
C - Company
#4: repeat #1 through #3 until three or four competitors remain alive in every single industry
Posted on Reply
#6
bug
Wirko#4: repeat #1 through #3 until three or four competitors remain alive in every single industry
You're on to something here, but I'm afraid you drew the wrong conclusion.

In a new market, margins tend to be high, so many players will want in. As the number of players increases, the margins lower and players either bow out or merge together. This is the part where a bit of regulation can work wonders.
Having said that, chip manufacturing is a business with a very, very high entry-barrier. The numbers of players here is naturally limited.
Posted on Reply
#7
bonehead123
bugHaving said that, chip manufacturing is a business with a very, very high entry-barrier. The numbers of players here is naturally limited
Yep, just anutha lesson of Capitalism 101:

"If ya wanna play, ya gotsta pay"

In other words, unless you have extremely DEEP pockets, you need not bother trying to compete in the chip biz arena :D
Posted on Reply
#8
bug
bonehead123Yep, just anutha lesson of Capitalism 101:

"If ya wanna play, ya gotsta pay"

In other words, unless you have extremely DEEP pockets, you need not bother trying to compete in the chip biz arena :D
That is totally related to capitalism. I mean, look at China: over there, everyone and their dog runs their own fab. Right?
Posted on Reply
#9
chodaboy19
I'll wait for the book about TSMC haha

intel and Samsung already have theirs.
Posted on Reply
#11
Random_User
And this is considering, many clients cut their orders. They surely enjoy their sweet margins. Let's hope they won't stop to invest in their development, and not become the "blue team".


TSMC is foreign company. It's not under the US jurisdiction. Taiwan invested heavily into it. They can do everything they want. The problem is, there is huge US foundry owner, which falls behind every competitor, and still has self-image of market leader, and hubris, to ask tax-payer's money for own opportunistic whims. Instead of making the trully competitive brand-agnostic in-house foundry business, they just fuel up the TSMC by ordering the waffers there.

This is the reason, why TSMC has got this big, and out of control. And building fabs by TSMC and Samsung on US land, won't really help. The best case would be if someone like GloFo, or other independent foundry would enter the competition, and get the funding for upgrading their nodes. Because eventually, this is just a matter of time, until the next giant will fall on it's knees. And nobody in right mind should ever place all eggs in single basket. There should be diversity of fabs, using similar specs and nodes. This should bring prices down, and nobody would really able to gouge the fabless clients, and thus hamper the progress.
bugThis is the part where a bit of regulation can work wonders.
Except they don't work for sh*t. When the regulators are in bed with big capital corporations, there won't be any positive outcome.

But yes. Regulations should be applied to all private and publicly traded companies, regardless of their power or size. These should be rules clearly visible to everyone, who wants to make business. And never be afraid of "upsetting" investors and corporations. Because they will be upset as little children with excessive fat, whose parents didn't let to eat "just one more" candy.
Everyone has to understand. These companies, are beasts by their nature. They are predators. And they should be put in cage. Roomy enough for comfortable existing, but still, behind the barrier. What it is now, is the governments, let predators walk free between gulible observers outside their supposed area. And govs just put more victims/visitors inside this giant enclosure. Gov's got their "ticket money", and companies are fed.
Restrictions and regulations do not hurt companies, they are required for safe existing of consumers ant the market as a whole. Right now, the consumers are hurt, and if they are incapable of buying the products, there won't be any any profits, nor margins. Heck, there won't be any money to begin with.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Apr 28th, 2024 02:13 EDT change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts