Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

EUV machines are the most complicated tools humans make. Their supply chain has over 10,000 individual suppliers, and any one of them not scaling fast enough can bottleneck the entire AI industry. An EUV tool fires lasers at a tiny tin droplet three times in precise sequence, blasting it...

154,381 views • 6 months ago •via X (Twitter)

34 Comments

Finn Stockinger's profile picture
Finn Stockinger6 months ago

People underestimate how much this comes down to a few hundred specialized engineers in Europe rather than just raw capital. You can't just "software update" your way out of a physical hardware bottleneck when the tolerances are that tight. It feels like the market is pricing in infinite compute while ignoring the fact that we're essentially reliant on a handful of master craftsmen.

🌿 lithos's profile picture
🌿 lithos6 months ago

i've been waiting for this day my whole life 🥲

Bram Van Genechten's profile picture
Bram Van Genechten6 months ago

True, but nothing new:

Alex Valente's profile picture
Alex Valente6 months ago

I would watch @dylan522p and @dwarkesh_sp try and convince a Swiss lens manufacturer to increase production live in Switzerland.

DaRazor's profile picture
DaRazor6 months ago

A LEAP-1A has about 19,000 individual parts. The hot section turbine blades operate at temperatures above their own melting point. They survive only because of internal cooling channels cast into single-crystal nickel superalloys using ceramic cores that dissolve after casting. The metallurgical tolerance on grain boundaries is effectively zero; one stray crystal and the blade fails. These blades are coated in thermal barrier ceramics deposited in electron-beam PVD chambers that cost tens of millions each. The supply chain is dominated by three casting houses globally (PCC, Howmet, ITP). Safran and GE have been shipping ~2,000 LEAP engines per year and targeting higher. Nobody writes Twitter threads about how jet engine production caps at 100 units because the ceramic core supplier in New Hampshire only has 400 people. My ai is wicked smaht

Tobin Farrand's profile picture
Tobin Farrand6 months ago

EUV is just one way to project a pattern on a wafer. Expect Elon to do it differently. Everyone in this thread seems stuck in a box.

Olivier Heckendorn's profile picture
Olivier Heckendorn6 months ago

@dylan522p you can learn more here if you want (not @dwarkesh_sp of course but people coming in this thread ;) )

Frederic Jacobs's profile picture
Frederic Jacobs6 months ago

Cymer no longer produces the EUV light sources. They have been made by Trumpf for a few years now

dLogos's profile picture
dLogos6 months ago

Fewer than a thousand people at Carl Zeiss are a bottleneck for the entire AI industry. Does that feel like a solvable recruiting problem or something structurally different?

fabian's profile picture
fabian6 months ago

Zeiss is the crazy rabbit hole

François Cattelain's profile picture
François Cattelain6 months ago

3/ missing the point. ASML knows the market and knows their own suppliers and their needs. It's just that not everyone is a bull-pilled starry-eyed believer ready to bet the farm that Christmas will happen 10 times per year in the next 10 years. These are reasonably cautious

François Cattelain's profile picture
François Cattelain6 months ago

1/ Yes, but in the real world, increasing capacity at all these suppliers would require enormous CAPEX that nobody can reasonably finance. And these players have to take into account the long term calculus (many have been burned before). You don't increase capacity like that just

Jona Engel's profile picture
Jona Engel6 months ago

@DanielleFong Na. We are golden here. We will run out of copper fast enough that the tire 2 suppliers of ASML should make sure to not overspent on the hype. Energy and energy distribution, let alone the whole capex and return on capital tropic, will be the bottlenecks.

William Bakker's profile picture
William Bakker6 months ago

How many droplets of tin per second you may ask? 50.000 And they are working on 100.000 tin droplets per second.

David Dabney's profile picture
David Dabney6 months ago

amazing how much of @dylan522p's alpha is "in order to make x chip we it needs y passes on an EUV machine and we can only make z of them". Genius is the ability to find alpha in plain sight by contemplating the obvious

Alex Bortok's profile picture
Alex Bortok6 months ago

And how do you make sure the positioning is within 3nm? Turns out it is just one company manufacturing interferometers in Santa Clara, CA that makes it possible. I now feel really bad we didn’t show that to the @SemiAnalysis_ team when we had a meeting on a separate topic

ON_AI_Foundry's profile picture
ON_AI_Foundry6 months ago

@dwarkesh_sp High-NA EUV is the peak of engineering, but lithography is only half the battle. Even at 2nm, the pJ/bit wall remains the ultimate ceiling. If we don’t innovate in 3D packaging/interconnects, we’re just making efficient transistors for a leaky energy bucket. 🏛️⚡

François Cattelain's profile picture
François Cattelain6 months ago

6/ In other words: Yes, adjacent "good old industries" (power generation, optics for ASML, etc.) are a new terrifying bottleneck for this crazy DC buildup. But these industries don't operate on the tsunami timeline and that's just how it is. At some point, the tsunami hits walls.

SaaSquatch Jackson's profile picture
SaaSquatch Jackson6 months ago

Fascinating breakdown. But I'd wager markets innovate around bottlenecks faster than expected when profits align. Constraints often accelerate solutions.

Brian Jordan's profile picture
Brian Jordan6 months ago

now that's what I call feeds and speeds gd

Bryan Bishop's profile picture
Bryan Bishop6 months ago

Delete like 9,000 of those suppliers. And then delete another 900. Radically simplify this machine like your lives depend on it. Because they do.

Giordano Bruno's profile picture
Giordano Bruno6 months ago

Chinas new approach does NOT need these machines. Please stop talking gibberish. You are embarassing yourself, do the research.

Thomas's profile picture
Thomas6 months ago

I always thought the US superpower was quickly allocating capital, and kinda shocked we don't have industrialists just rabidly copying all these firms, possibly by adopting the Chinese model and just trying to steal or buy outright all their engineers and processes

John Dinsdale's profile picture
John Dinsdale6 months ago

Could you have a chat with the TeraFab authors?

Bishwajeet Jha's profile picture
Bishwajeet Jha6 months ago

10,000 suppliers and most companies can barely map past tier 1. The bottleneck isn't just scaling, it's that nobody has visibility into who supplies the supplier. That's where risk actually lives.

Amol Parikh's profile picture
Amol Parikh6 months ago

time to think how to make suppliers efficient or reduce the number of suppliers needed by EUVs

Lipsa's profile picture
Lipsa6 months ago

It’s astonishing, few things humans have built operate at this level of precision, where physics, engineering, and coordination all meet at the very edge of what’s possible.

toni's profile picture
toni6 months ago

EUV is the bottleneck but not for the reason most think. More suppliers = more failure points, not more resilience. The AI race depends on 10,000 strangers all doing their job right.

M.A Dhavan's profile picture
M.A Dhavan6 months ago

Really? ASML has 10,000 suppliers for the EUV Lithography equipment?

Sam's profile picture
Sam6 months ago

The EUV lightsource is definitely advanced science and tech But how difficult is it to hit a droplet with lasers 3 times? Haha should i Vibecode this?

Leon's profile picture
Leon6 months ago

Guaranteed the most complicated piece of equipment humans ever built. No one will copy that. ASML’s biggest risk is a competitor developing entirely new tech to produce chips, instead of imaging silicon.

François Cattelain's profile picture
François Cattelain6 months ago

2/ for the next 3 years. And money to finance this expansion isn't free either. Yes, everyone is very "excited" these days by the current tsunami going through the industry. By in my humble opinion, stating that "None of these companies have woken up" is factually wrong and

Webcraft Gallery's profile picture
Webcraft Gallery6 months ago

When can we expect this kind of machine can be used by everyone? I dont even know any kind of euv machine

Clipsleuth.com's profile picture
Clipsleuth.com6 months ago

Dwarkesh Podcast Episode: "Dylan Patel — Deep Dive on the 3 Big Bottlenecks to…" Mar 13, 2026 · Clip Starts at 47:25 Full episode ↓

Related Videos

.Dylan Patel lays out how we know the hard upper bound on how much compute can be produced annually by 2030: around 200 GW/year. That’s a crazy number (there’s about 20 GW of AI deployed in the world right now), but it’s nowhere near enough to satisfy Sam/Elon/Dario/Demis’s ambitions. Lots of things in the supply chain can be scaled up over 4 years, including things that other people think are bottlenecks, like datacenter power or fab clean room space. But the thing that’s inflexible over that timeline is the number of EUV tools. Dylan forecasts that production of ASML’s EUV tools will scale from 60 per year now to about 100 per year by the end of the decade - which means something like 700 total machines running in 2030. For a fab to make a GW worth of the Rubin chips that NVIDIA is deploying later this year, it needs to make 55,000 3nm wafers, 6,000 5nm wafers, and 170,000 memory wafers. Each 3nm wafers needs about 20 EUV passes, so about 1.1 million passes per GW. Adding on 5nm and memory, you need two million passes. Each tool can do 75 passes per hour, so with 90% uptime that’s around 600k passes per year - so a single machine can make less than a third of a GW in a year. So in 2030, we have 700 total machines, each making 0.3ish GW a year, which means we can produce 200 GW of compute a year. That’s a lot. But Sam Altman wants a gigawatt a week by the end of the decade. Anthropic and Google will be wanting about the same. And Elon wants to be putting 100 GW in space every year. Any one of these players could maybe get what they need, but not all of them.

Dwarkesh Patel

114,538 views • 6 months ago

ACCELERATOR-BASED LITHOGRAPHY AND THE INDUCTION STORAGE RING LIGHT SOURCE The future of chipmaking may look less like a factory and more like a power grid. The proposed “Terafab” paradigm reimagines semiconductor manufacturing at utility scale: chip design, wafer fabrication, EUV lithography, memory, advanced packaging, and testing all under one roof, with the ambition of producing more than one terawatt of AI compute capacity per year. Its most radical innovation is treating light as a utility. Today, each EUV scanner relies on its own laser-produced plasma source, firing lasers at molten tin to generate 13.5 nm light. The process is inefficient, intensely hot, debris-heavy, and difficult to scale. Terafab replaces those individual sources with centralized, accelerator-driven free-electron lasers capable of distributing multi-kilowatt EUV light across an entire network of scanners. The advantages could be transformative: • No tin contamination or destructive plasma debris • Higher efficiency through electron-beam energy recovery • Greater photon flux to suppress stochastic defects at sub-3 nm nodes • Redundant accelerators that keep scanners operating during maintenance • Tunable wavelengths, potentially enabling 6.x nm “Beyond EUV” lithography THAT LAST POINT MATTERS ENORMOUSLY Conventional EUV is locked to the atomic emission of tin. Free-electron lasers are not. Their wavelength can be tuned through the energy of the electron beam creating a possible path beyond today’s 13.5 nm limit. If realized, Terafab would represent more than a larger semiconductor plant. It would transform lithography from a collection of isolated tools into shared industrial infrastructure. The next era of chipmaking may not be defined by a better machine. It may be defined by an entirely new architecture for manufacturing intelligence at civilization scale.

Lacey

12,738 views • 1 month ago

Marc Andreessen explains the "Elon Method" of leadership, and it completely contradicts how most CEOs operate today. Most leaders get bogged down trying to manage every single moving part of their business. But according to Andreessen, Elon's approach is actually the exact opposite: he delegates almost everything. He isn't involved in 99% of what his companies are doing on a daily basis. Instead, his entire focus is hunting for one specific thing: The Bottleneck. In any manufacturing chain, there is always a bottleneck keeping the line from running the way it's supposed to. It could be a lack of raw materials at the beginning, or a shortage of warehouse space at the end. Whatever it is, that bottleneck is holding everything up. Job number one is to remove it and get things flowing again. Elon has universalized this concept. He looks at every company like it's a conceptual assembly line—sometimes a literal one making cars and rockets. He knows that on any given week, there is guaranteed to be one main bottleneck holding his people back. So, what’s the secret to his management paradox? He relentlessly micromanages the solution to that one specific problem. He doesn't need to manage everything else because, by definition, the rest of the company is running better than the bottleneck. Once it's fixed, he moves on to the next biggest problem. But here is the part where most non-technical CEOs would completely fail trying to replicate this method: When Elon identifies the bottleneck, he has zero patience for bureaucracy. He doesn't ask the VP of Engineering to ask the Director to ask the Manager to ask the individual contributor to write a report to be reviewed in three weeks. He would throw that entire chain of command out the window. Instead, he bypasses the middleman completely. He goes straight to the manufacturing line or the software group, personally finds the exact line engineer who actually understands the technical nature of the bottleneck, sits in a room with them, and fixes the problem together.

Ian Miles Cheong

71,502 views • 5 months ago

Marc Andreessen went on Chris Williamson's podcast and broke down exactly how Elon Musk runs multiple companies at once No other CEO on Earth does this: 1. Every week, Musk shows up at each of his companies, identifies the single biggest problem that company is having that week, and fixes it. Then he does that for 52 weeks in a row. At the end of the year, each company has solved its 52 biggest problems. Meanwhile, most large companies are still having the planning meeting for the pre-planning meeting for the board presentation with the compliance review and the legal review attached. 2. This is not a new operating method. It is actually how the great industrialists of the late 1800s and early 1900s ran their companies. Henry Ford, Andrew Carnegie, Thomas Watson, who built IBM. Total devotion from the leader to fully and deeply understand what the company does, be in the trenches, talk directly to the people doing the work, and be the lead problem solver in the organization. Andreessen says he is not aware of another current CEO who operates this way. 3. The framework Musk uses is the bottleneck. In any manufacturing chain, there is always one thing holding everything up. Sometimes it is raw materials at the start. Sometimes it is warehousing at the end. Sometimes it is in the middle. The job is to find it and remove it. Musk has universalized this concept across every company he runs. In any given week, there is one main bottleneck. He micromanages the solution to that one thing and delegates almost everything else. 4. Musk delegates almost everything. Andreessen is clear about this. He is not involved in most of what his companies are doing. He is involved in the one thing that is the biggest problem right now. Once that is fixed, he moves to the next biggest problem. Everything else by definition, is running better than the bottleneck, so it does not need him. 5. When Musk identifies the bottleneck, he goes directly to the engineer who actually understands it. not the VP of engineering, not the director, not the manager. The individual contributor who has the actual technical knowledge. He sits in the room with that person and fixes the problem alongside them. He does not ask for a report to be reviewed in three weeks. he shows up at the keyboard or on the manufacturing line and works through it overnight if necessary. 6. This is why technical people who work for Musk say it was the best experience of their lives. Andreessen's framing: if you are stuck on a problem you cannot solve, Elon Musk is going to show up in his Gulfstream, sit with you in front of the keyboard, and help you figure it out. For an engineer who genuinely cares about the work, that is an almost incomprehensible level of support from the CEO of the company. 7. Business school teaches the opposite of this: management as a generic skill applicable to any industry. Soup company or a rocket company, the management principles are the same. process, balance sheet, meeting schedules, compliance, executive motivation, interpersonal conflict resolution. Andreessen says those skills are useful in many contexts. They just give you nothing; you need to do what Musk does. And Musk pushes as far as he can away from all of that so he can spend all of his time doing the things only he can do.

Jaynit

272,111 views • 3 months ago

Elon just confirmed how long every working human has left before the robots take over. "AI will probably increase the global economy by 20 to 30%. That's my rough estimate. Meaning, on the order of 20 to 30 trillion per year." So that's a second United States economy appearing out of thin air, EVERY single year. And Elon's whole point is that the machines produce it, not the people. He even gave us the exact date for the digital half: "AI will be able to do anything digital, anything that does not require the shaping of atoms by hand, by the end of next year." By the end of next year... And on software specifically: "It's going to be impossible for a human to compete in writing software with AI." So every coder, every analyst, every job that lives on a screen is on a 12 to 18 month timer, straight from the richest man alive. But that's only the part that runs on electricity. And this is where it gets crazy... "There will be at least a billion robots in 10 years, and each will produce at least five times the output of a human." "The billion humanoid robots will be more productive than all humans combined." A billion machines, out-working ALL 8 billion of us. And he put a deadline on it: 10 years. And he even called that estimate small. So the version where robots out-produce the entire human race is the number he treats as safe. He said he'd bet serious money on it. But how does a billion of anything get built that fast? Robots building robots building robots. It starts slow and then it goes vertical. That’s how a few thousand becomes a billion. Elon also explained his own formula for how useful a robot actually is. He said it's the quality of the AI software, times the quality of the AI chip, times the dexterity of the hands. Software and chips are the exact things Elon and Nvidia have spent a decade making exponential. The third one is the hand. And the hand is the thing robotics has been stuck on for 40 years. A machine can crush the best human alive at chess and still can't pick a strange object off a messy table the way a toddler can. Grip, pressure, touch, knowing how hard to squeeze. That problem has barely moved while everything digital went vertical. The thing he named as the hard part is the exact thing his whole 10 year number depends on. So it all comes down to one variable, and it's the slowest-moving one in the entire machine: The robot hand. The brain is basically solved. The fingers have to catch up to it this decade, at planetary scale. Now to be fair, this is also where the most money on Earth is pointed right now. Tesla and a dozen others are throwing everything at exactly this problem. Elon's software calls tend to land but his atoms calls tend to fail. Because anything physical always takes longer than anything digital. He's also made this exact robot call before with wildly different numbers, 10 billion of them by 2040 in one speech, five per human in another. So here's the real question: Do you believe robot hands get solved inside 10 years? Because that one bet is the core of Elon‘s prediction. Everything else already came true.

Ricardo

449,882 views • 18 days ago

SITUATION EXPLAINED: Dwarkesh argues compute could get 10X more expensive. • Anthropic's revenue has been 10X-ing year over year while lab compute only 3X's • Three ways that gap can close: margins rise, compute gets more expensive, or labs shift compute to inference • All three are already happening, Anthropic went from 40% margins in 2025 to possibly 80%+ this year • But labs don't want the third one, heavy inference spend signals AI progress has stalled and you're now a cloud provider • Spot compute prices are up 40%+ since February, and labs pay well above spot for security and scale • Google is reportedly paying SpaceXAI $900 million a month for 110K GPUs, roughly 2X spot • Key claim: if a human-level software engineer ran on an H100, that H100 should rent for $250K a year, 15X today's price • The 3X annual compute growth is 1.4X Moore's Law, 1.2X new fabs, and 1.8X from AI taking wafer allocation from other devices • The fab piece is bottlenecked by EUV tool supply through 2030, and the wafer piece hits a wall by end of 2027 • If compute stays scarce, new labs need far more capital just to reach the same starting line • Compute gets cheap again only once robots can turn sand and copper into computers, which is gated on robotics, not RSI sof 𓋹: "This is what I'm most concerned about, a lack of innovation, not within companies, but a lack of new companies that can actually do something substantially new, because of the scarcity of compute." Theo Jaffee: "The biggest companies in the world by revenue are Amazon and Walmart, at 743 billion and 725 billion. If Anthropic makes 100 billion by the end of this year, that puts them at Target. To go from Target to bigger than Walmart in a year would be very impressive."

MTS

10,617 views • 1 month ago