> Actually I would put the blame squarely on AMD and Qualcomm for making themselves dependent on TSMC - especially AMD who have turned themselves into a "fabless manufacturer" and are now experiencing the consequences...
The consequences being if you don't like what your fab is up to, you can switch fabs. Doesn't sound too bad. GlobalFoundries, the former AMD fab, has all but given up on smaller nodes at this point, but AMD switched to TSMC for CPUs and a mix of TSMC and Samsung for GPUs. On the other hand, Intel had problems with their fab for several years, and is only now starting to consider using other fabs, when their process seems to be starting to work.
Yes, designing chips to fabricate on different lines is more work, but it's something AMD has intentionally done and it has benefits over running your own fab, especially when your own fab has trouble with node shrinks.
The consequences being if you don't like what your fab is up to, you can switch fabs. Doesn't sound too bad. GlobalFoundries, the former AMD fab, has all but given up on smaller nodes at this point, but AMD switched to TSMC for CPUs and a mix of TSMC and Samsung for GPUs. On the other hand, Intel had problems with their fab for several years, and is only now starting to consider using other fabs, when their process seems to be starting to work.
Yes, designing chips to fabricate on different lines is more work, but it's something AMD has intentionally done and it has benefits over running your own fab, especially when your own fab has trouble with node shrinks.