How Difficult is Chip Making? A Division Error Costs 475 Million Dollars

marsbitОпубліковано о 2026-06-15Востаннє оновлено о 2026-06-15

Анотація

How Hard Is It to Make a Chip? A Division Error Cost $475 Million Chip expert Shi Kan, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Sciences and a popular tech creator, explains the immense challenges of chip development. Chips are foundational to modern technology, but their creation is extraordinarily difficult. The journey from sand to a functional chip involves complex design and manufacturing, but a critical bottleneck is verification—ensuring the design works flawlessly before costly production. A single, undetected bug can have catastrophic consequences, as illustrated by the infamous 1994 Intel Pentium FDIV bug. A flaw in the floating-point division unit forced a recall costing $475 million. Unlike software, chips cannot be easily patched after manufacture, making "first-time success" paramount. However, industry surveys show only 24% of chip projects achieve this; over three-quarters require at least one costly re-spin due to design flaws. Verification has thus become the dominant phase, consuming up to 70% of the design cycle. The core challenge is a "verification impossible triangle" between high performance, good debuggability, and low cost. Exhaustively verifying a modern CPU core could take 15,000 years with software simulation, or 30 years with advanced hardware emulation—timeframes utterly impractical for development. Despite being essential, verification is often seen as unglamorous "dirty work," receiving less academic attention than fields like AI. Shi and hi...

Hello everyone, I'm Shi Kan from the Institute of Computing Technology at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, a 'slash technology worker'. I have over a decade of experience in the chip industry, and currently, I conduct academic research related to chips at the Chinese Academy of Sciences; at the same time, I am also a science and technology Bilibili UP host 'Lao Shi Tan Xin', and my viewers call me 'Lao Shi'.

Chips: The Cornerstone of Modern Society

When it comes to chips, everyone surely knows their importance.

Whether it's the currently hot artificial intelligence, life sciences and medicine, autonomous driving, network communications, and so on, almost all the technologies of modern society you can imagine are inseparable from chips—this foundational technology of the information age.

I have been involved in chip work for a long time, and the chip development process is actually a very interesting one, mainly due to two aspects.

Firstly, the applications of chips are extremely wide-ranging. Once you enter this industry, you probably don't have to worry about unemployment because many industries require chip technology.

The second reason might be more important: chip development is a very difficult endeavor. As chip engineers, we need to constantly learn and enrich ourselves to face and embrace this era full of opportunities and challenges.

So the question arises: what exactly makes chip technology so difficult?

Why Are Chips So Difficult?

Completed: 10%//////////

Everyone might know that the manufacturing process of a chip is essentially an evolution journey of a grain of sand. Sand might be something inexhaustible and abundant on this planet; but turning low-value sand into high-value chips adds up to nothing but human intelligence.

Starting from sand, we need to purify it to obtain wafers. Then, through a series of steps such as photolithography, ion implantation, etching, packaging, and so on, the abundant, inexhaustible sand is transformed into the final tiny chip.

So, having said all that, with so many steps, chip manufacturing is actually only part of the entire chip development process; it does not equal chip development itself.

There is another crucial step, which is chip design. It refers to completing the circuit design according to requirements and making the circuit function properly. Then, we hand over the designed circuit to chip manufacturers for the later stages of manufacturing, ultimately obtaining the physical chip.

But there is another question here: how do you ensure that the chip's functionality matches your initial design?

There is an interesting little story here. In 1947, a very famous female programmer named Grace Hopper found her computer wasn't working. After careful investigation and exploration, she discovered that a moth had flown into a relay of the computer. So, she carefully used tweezers to remove this moth and taped it onto a piece of paper.

This might be the first 'bug' discovered in the entire history of computer development, meaning a vulnerability.

If the previous example seems too distant, we actually have more examples. Here's a math problem for everyone: What is the final result of this expression? Actually, this problem is simple because the numerator and denominator in the later part are the same and can cancel out; then the numbers before and after the minus sign are also the same, so subtracting the same number should result in 0. However, in actual computers and chips, the result might not be this.

For example, in an Intel Pentium chip, the result was 255.00000000. What happened? It turned out that when an American scientist was conducting scientific research, he kept getting incorrect calculations when running this expression. Finally, he discovered that there was an undetected design flaw in a floating-point division unit of this chip.

Don't underestimate this design flaw; its consequences were actually very serious. In the 1990s, Intel spent $475 million to recall all problematic Pentium chips worldwide.

So, returning to the earlier question: what exactly makes chip technology so difficult?

In my view, the difficulty of chips lies in the need to succeed on the first try. Making chips is not like software, where you can patch and fix various problems later. In contrast, once a chip completes the evolution journey from sand to chip, you may have already spent tens of thousands, millions, or even hundreds of millions to complete the tape-out and manufacturing, making it very difficult to modify afterwards.

Then, the next question is: how many chip projects today can achieve success on the first try?

The 'Bottleneck' of Chip Verification

Completed: 40%//////////

According to survey data, only 24% of chip projects can achieve success on the first try. That is to say, 3/4 of chip projects, due to various major and minor undetected design flaws, require at least one more tape-out, which consumes a lot of time and money.

Therefore, the key question is: how can we ensure, as much as possible, that chips have as few or no bugs/design flaws as possible before tape-out and manufacturing? This is the direction I have been dedicated to researching over the past few years.

Also according to this research data, throughout the entire chip development process, especially with the current development of AI and various high-tech fields, chips are becoming increasingly complex. As a result, chip verification has become a very high proportion of the entire chip development cycle, even exceeding half, reaching 70% of the entire chip design cycle.

But unfortunately, chip verification is also a difficult task. I list some astronomical numbers here, such as the Earth's circumference, the possible number of stars in the Milky Way, or the length of a light-year.

In chip verification, there is also an astronomical number, which is the number of cycles needed to fully verify a CPU core. What exactly does this astronomical number represent?

If we use the most advanced software simulation technology available today to fully verify a CPU core, it would take at least 15,000 years. Using the most advanced hardware emulation technology can slightly reduce this time to 30 years. But we all know that developing a chip cannot wait 15,000 years, nor can it wait 30 years.

So, what is the essence of the problem? We have actually been researching this over the past few years. We found that in chip verification, there exists a so-called 'impossible triangle', namely the high performance of chip verification, good debugging capability, and low cost; these three factors crucial to chip verification cannot be satisfied simultaneously. For current mainstream research or methods, at most, two out of the three can be achieved, and this is the fundamental reason for the low efficiency of chip verification.

Someone Must Do Something Different

Completed: 60%//////////

Due to these reasons, chip verification has not seen significant development over the past period.

In chip companies, chip engineers may spend more time writing test cases and running regression verification. Essentially, it's dirty and tiring work. The same goes for academia; very few scholars are devoted to chip verification research, especially compared to current hot fields like artificial intelligence, research related to chip verification is very scarce.

So, an academic leader once told me that in the same amount of time, they could publish three or even more papers in the field of artificial intelligence, but in chip verification, they might not even publish one.

Unfortunately, what they said is true.

However, someone must do something different.

Therefore, over the past few years, I have led a team in conducting research related to chip verification and have built an agile verification research system from scratch. The core of this research system is a verification platform called ENCORE, which is based on a special chip—the Field-Programmable Gate Array (FPGA). ENCORE can significantly improve verification efficiency while achieving good verification debuggability.

To build this agile verification research system, on one hand, we need to continuously optimize the efficiency of vulnerability mining, debugging, and repair at the algorithmic level; on the other hand, we also hope to build an end-to-end agile verification acceleration platform based on programmable logic chips (FPGAs). At the application level, we hope this platform can be suitable for both general-purpose processor verification, such as CPUs or GPUs, and specialized chip verification, such as the currently very popular AI accelerators.

Over the past period, we have done a lot of cutting-edge exploratory work in this field, including the aforementioned ENCORE and many new research projects. We have also published these research results at many internationally renowned academic conferences.

We are actually working on some interesting projects afterwards, but since these works have not been published yet, I won't show them to you one by one for now.

Letting More People Understand Chips

Completed: 80%//////////

However, during the research process, I gradually realized that these scientific or academic achievements are mainly for people within our small circle who only understand chip verification and related fields. So, how can we let more people see our work, understand our research, and even participate in our endeavors?

Naturally, I thought of chip science popularization, which also feels very interesting to me. I have been engaged in science popularization for four or five years, starting from text initially to later making videos on Bilibili. Chip science popularization has not only brought me many gains but also helped me meet many like-minded friends, as well as viewers who like and support me.

However, making chip science popularization videos is not a simple task, especially in today's era of short video proliferation. A fellow science popularization blogger and leader told me that in the same amount of time it takes me to produce one long, hardcore chip science popularization video, they could make 10 or even more short videos related to hot topics, and the traffic could be many times greater than mine.

Unfortunately, what they said is also true.

But based on this, I think there still needs to be people who persist in doing difficult things. I hope to combine chip science popularization and chip verification—two equally difficult but equally interesting things—and use video and text formats to show everyone what we have done, the papers we have published, and the open-source chip projects our entire large team is researching.

Besides chips, I will also share hardcore technologies like artificial intelligence and computers with everyone, as well as share my growth experiences, the books I have read, and the knowledge I have acquired. I know that I am not a genius myself, nor am I a so-called all-around expert or guru. I would rather be a 'guide' for everyone, sharing the path I have walked.

So, returning to the question I wanted to share with everyone today: chip research and chip science popularization, which one is more interesting? Of course, for me, both are equally interesting. The reason is simple: because they are equally difficult. At the same time, they both require me to persist very long-term and enduringly.

Many people say we need to do difficult and right things. But the problem actually is: how do you judge if something is right before you do it? If something is seen as sitting on a cold bench in others' eyes, or seen as doing dirty, tiring work, would you still persist in doing it?

Therefore, I prefer to do difficult and long-term things, such as academic research in chip verification, or making long hardcore chip science popularization videos. Because if something is difficult and requires long-term persistence, then it is probably right.

That's all I wanted to share with you today. I am Lao Shi, thank you, everyone!

This article comes from the WeChat public account: Gezhi Lundaotan , Author: Shi Kan, Original Title: 'How Difficult is Chip Making? A Division Error Costs 475 Million Dollars | Shi Kan'

Трендові криптовалюти

Пов'язані питання

QWhat was the main point of the story about the Intel Pentium chip flaw mentioned in the article?

AThe story illustrated a critical design bug in the Pentium chip's floating-point division unit. A calculation that should have resulted in '0' instead produced '255.00000000'. This seemingly minor error forced Intel to spend $475 million on a global recall of the faulty chips in the 1990s, highlighting the high cost of failure in chip development.

QAccording to the article, why is chip development so difficult, especially compared to software development?

AChip development is exceptionally difficult because it requires 'first-time success'. Unlike software, which can be patched and updated after release, a physical chip cannot be easily modified once manufactured (or 'taped out'). The entire expensive process, from sand to finished silicon, costing potentially hundreds of millions, must be redone to fix design flaws.

QWhat percentage of chip projects achieve first-time success according to the survey data cited by the author?

AAccording to the survey data presented by the author, only 24% of chip projects achieve first-time success. This means approximately three-quarters (76%) of projects require at least one re-spin or re-fabrication due to various undetected design bugs, leading to significant extra time and cost.

QWhat is the 'impossible triangle' in chip verification, as explained in the article?

AIn chip verification, the 'impossible triangle' refers to the three crucial factors—high performance, good debuggability, and low cost. The article states that these three factors cannot be satisfied simultaneously with current mainstream methods. Engineers and researchers can only achieve a maximum of two out of these three, which fundamentally limits verification efficiency.

QWhat are the two 'hard but long-term' pursuits that the author, Shi Kan ('Lao Shi'), is committed to?

AThe author is committed to two challenging, long-term endeavors. First, he leads academic research in chip verification, specifically developing an agile verification framework called ENCORE based on FPGAs. Second, he creates hardcore, long-form chip and technology popular science content (like his Bilibili channel videos), aiming to make complex topics accessible to a wider audience beyond academic circles.

Пов'язані матеріали

Matrixdock Featured Again in SBMA’s 《Crucible》: Discussing How Tokenisation Enhances Efficiency in the Precious Metals Market

Matrixdock's research article, titled "Why Tokenisation Matters for the Bullion Industry and How Carrying Costs Fit In," has been featured again in the SBMA's industry publication *Crucible*. Authored by Matrixdock lead Eva Meng, the piece examines how tokenisation enhances the efficiency and utility of the precious metals market. The article argues that tokenisation builds upon the accessibility improvements brought by gold ETFs, not by redefining gold's value but by enabling it to function within digital finance. It extends gold's role beyond a portfolio holding, potentially facilitating instant settlement, digital collateral, and operation in 24/7 markets. A key focus is transparently handling the unavoidable carrying costs (storage, insurance) of physical assets like gold and silver. Matrixdock introduces the Fungible Reserve Standard (FRS) framework, based on an "Economic Purity Principle," which aims to reflect these real-world economic costs clearly within the token mechanism, rather than bundling them opaquely. The platform's practical applications are highlighted, including its gold token XAUm and its silver token XAGm, the first built on the FRS framework. As the tokenised gold market surpassed $6 billion in February 2026, the industry's focus is shifting from initial proofs of reserves to broader concerns of market efficiency and capital utilization. Tokenisation is positioning gold and other precious metals to become active components within the evolving digital financial system.

marsbit7 хв тому

Matrixdock Featured Again in SBMA’s 《Crucible》: Discussing How Tokenisation Enhances Efficiency in the Precious Metals Market

marsbit7 хв тому

New Huo Research: Dense Bottom Fishing in the $60K BTC Range, a 'High Value-for-Money Zone' Sees a Handover Surge

Bitcoin has shown a significant oversold rebound this week, with extreme panic in the crypto market easing. Multiple data points indicate a notable market bottom is forming. On the market front, the net outflow from Bitcoin spot ETFs has continued to shrink, and the negative premium between Coinbase and USDT is steadily correcting. Industry fundamentals suggest the shutdown cost for mainstream miners is concentrated between $30,000 and $50,000, potentially solidifying a阶段性 industry cost floor—a classic signal of market bottoms in previous cycles. Institutional capital is notably positioning against the trend. For instance, Sinohope Group's weekly OTC trading volume surged over 8 times环比, with active platform users doubling, both reaching record highs. This confirms a sharp increase in large capital transaction activity and a spike in off-exchange funding demand. Sinohope Research also observed on-chain data showing that funds from entities with public company attributes and long-term "whale" wallets are actively accumulating Bitcoin around the key $60,000 price level. The research institute has maintained since mid-May that a high-value investment window has reopened, and the market is now undergoing a shift from panic selling to long-term holding. Looking ahead, the core drivers for an upward market move will be liquidity release and macro policy developments. The successful and strong performance of SpaceX's IPO has reignited market optimism, and the massive liquidity frozen during its subscription period is now being unlocked. This substantial capital is expected to seek new value opportunities, potentially flowing into currently undervalued assets like Bitcoin. On the macro and policy front, the tone set in Kevin Warsh's upcoming speech at the FOMC meeting is crucial for near-term monetary policy expectations. Furthermore, the potential passage of the CLARITY Act by late July could significantly boost institutional confidence for capital entry. Considering these bottoming signals alongside favorable liquidity and policy factors, Sinohope Research remains optimistic about the market's subsequent trajectory.

marsbit11 хв тому

New Huo Research: Dense Bottom Fishing in the $60K BTC Range, a 'High Value-for-Money Zone' Sees a Handover Surge

marsbit11 хв тому

Uncovering the 'God of Investment Research' Behind Citrini: Perpetual Substack Chart-Topper, a Single Report Evaporated Trillions from US Stocks

Revealing the "Research God" Behind Citrini: A Non-Finance Founder Shaking Up Markets Citrini, an independent research firm consistently ranked #1 on Substack's finance charts with nearly 250,000 subscribers, has gained significant attention in the current bull market. Its founder, James van Geelen, holds dual degrees in biology and psychology from UCLA, with a background as an emergency medical technician and a healthcare entrepreneur before founding Citrini. The firm is known for its deep, narrative-driven analyses focusing on long-term "super trends" like AI, geopolitics, and macro policy. Citrini made headlines in February with its report "The 2028 Global Intelligence Crisis," a thought experiment on AI's potential societal impact. Despite being labeled a scenario analysis, it triggered a widespread sell-off in software and related stocks, briefly wiping hundreds of billions from the US market. Other notable reports include an on-the-ground analysis of the Strait of Hormuz and accurate calls on the copper foil industry's importance for AI/semiconductors. Geelen champions "second-order thinking," focusing on the indirect consequences of events. His investment style is thematic and often contrarian, seeking opportunities others miss. Citrini operates with a founder-driven, anonymous elite team model, recently adding specialists in macroeconomics and semiconductor analysis. The firm also manages a model portfolio, Citrindex, which has reportedly achieved over 200% cumulative returns.

marsbit15 хв тому

Uncovering the 'God of Investment Research' Behind Citrini: Perpetual Substack Chart-Topper, a Single Report Evaporated Trillions from US Stocks

marsbit15 хв тому

Ethereum Q1 2026 Review: On-chain Activity Hits New Highs, Tokenized Assets Lead the Industry

Ethereum Q1 2026 Review: Chain Activity Hits Record High, Tokenized Assets Lead the Industry In Q1 2026, the Ethereum ecosystem displayed a dual narrative: record-high on-chain activity coincided with declining USD-denominated metrics. User adoption surged, with monthly active addresses reaching 13.2 million (up 53.5% QoQ) and layer-1 transactions hitting 200.4 million (up 38% QoQ). However, the total value locked (TVL) decreased 11% to $316.2B, and protocol revenue fell 16.9% to $2.0B, largely due to a broader crypto market downturn. Tokenized assets emerged as a key strength. Their total market cap reached $203.4B, with significant growth in tokenized funds (+73.1% YoY) and commodities (+325.9% YoY). Ethereum dominated cross-chain comparisons, holding over 61% of stablecoin value and 84% of tokenized commodities value among top chains. A major development was the impact of network scaling. The "Blob" upgrade significantly increased data capacity, causing average transaction fees on layer-1 to plummet 47.9% QoQ despite higher usage. This demonstrates the "Jevons Paradox" in action: cheaper block space stimulates demand. The report highlights Ethereum's established position as the primary settlement layer for institutional tokenization, evidenced by new fund launches from giants like BlackRock and JPMorgan in May. Analysts draw parallels between Ethereum's current stage and the internet in the mid-1990s, suggesting its open, neutral network is poised to become the foundational infrastructure for global finance, outcompeting closed, private alternatives.

Foresight News19 хв тому

Ethereum Q1 2026 Review: On-chain Activity Hits New Highs, Tokenized Assets Lead the Industry

Foresight News19 хв тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси

Популярні статті

Як купити CHIP

Ласкаво просимо до HTX.com! Ми зробили покупку USD.AI (CHIP) простою та зручною. Дотримуйтесь нашої покрокової інструкції, щоб розпочати свою криптовалютну подорож.Крок 1: Створіть обліковий запис на HTXВикористовуйте свою електронну пошту або номер телефону, щоб зареєструвати обліковий запис на HTX безплатно. Пройдіть безпроблемну реєстрацію й отримайте доступ до всіх функцій.ЗареєструватисьКрок 2: Перейдіть до розділу Купити крипту і виберіть спосіб оплатиКредитна/дебетова картка: використовуйте вашу картку Visa або Mastercard, щоб миттєво купити USD.AI (CHIP).Баланс: використовуйте кошти з балансу вашого рахунку HTX для безперешкодної торгівлі.Треті особи: ми додали популярні способи оплати, такі як Google Pay та Apple Pay, щоб підвищити зручність.P2P: Торгуйте безпосередньо з іншими користувачами на HTX.Позабіржова торгівля (OTC): ми пропонуємо індивідуальні послуги та конкурентні обмінні курси для трейдерів.Крок 3: Зберігайте свої USD.AI (CHIP)Після придбання USD.AI (CHIP) збережіть його у своєму обліковому записі на HTX. Крім того, ви можете відправити його в інше місце за допомогою блокчейн-переказу або використовувати його для торгівлі іншими криптовалютами.Крок 4: Торгівля USD.AI (CHIP)Легко торгуйте USD.AI (CHIP) на спотовому ринку HTX. Просто увійдіть до свого облікового запису, виберіть торгову пару, укладайте угоди та спостерігайте за ними в режимі реального часу. Ми пропонуємо зручний досвід як для початківців, так і для досвідчених трейдерів.

377 переглядів усьогоОпубліковано 2026.04.21Оновлено 2026.06.02

Як купити CHIP

Обговорення

Ласкаво просимо до спільноти HTX. Тут ви можете бути в курсі останніх подій розвитку платформи та отримати доступ до професійної ринкової інформації. Нижче представлені думки користувачів щодо ціни CHIP (CHIP).

活动图片