AMD wants to be the great alternative to NVIDIA in AI chips, and Meta has a plan that involves both

Meta has signed one of the largest contracts in history with AMD regarding chips for artificial intelligence. The agreement It represents a boost for AMD in its attempt to stand up to NVIDIA. It also shows how Lisa Su’s company intends to continue putting its foot even further into that little corner of circular financing that big technology companies have created in relation to AI. There are some nuances worth commenting on, so let’s get down to it. The agreement. Meta will purchase enough chips from AMD to power data centers with up to six gigawatts of computing power over the next five years. Just like esteem According to the Wall Street Journal, the total value of the contract would exceed $100 billion, since each gigawatt represents tens of billions in revenue for AMD, according to the company itself. First deliveries will begin in the second half of 2026, with a first gigawatt of AMD’s new MI450 chips. There is more. The agreement is not only about buying chips. As part of the pactAMD will offer Meta purchase guarantees (warrants) to acquire up to 160 million AMD shares at a symbolic price of one cent per share, which could make Meta the owner of up to 10% of the company. Of course, there are conditions, since the titles will be released in tranches as certain technical and commercial milestones are met. The last tranche will only be unlocked if AMD stock reaches $600, according to share the WSJ. On Monday it closed at $196.60, and after hearing the news, AMD shares have risen more than 10% in pre-opening. AMD seeks its place alongside NVIDIA. The company led by Lisa Su has been trying to gain ground in a market that NVIDIA dominates with more than 90% share. This agreement with Meta, together the one who signed with OpenAI in October in very similar terms, is its most ambitious bet to achieve it. “Meta has a lot of options. I want to make sure we always have a clear place at the table when they think about what they need,” counted His at the press conference prior to the announcement. Meta doesn’t put all her eggs in one basket. Zuckerberg’s company is not betting exclusively on AMD. Last week too closed an agreement with NVIDIA to acquire millions of its chips for tens of billions of dollars, and also is in talks with Google for the use of its AI processors. “At the scale at which we operate, there is room for all three,” counted Santosh Janardhan, head of infrastructure at Meta. The company’s strategy involves diversifying suppliers and ensuring sufficient supply for its major expansion. Meta spent 72 billion dollars last year in data centers and plans to disburse up to 135,000 million this year. And back to circular financing. Meta pays AMD for chips, and AMD returns some of that money in the form of shares. A similar scheme that we already saw in the agreement with AMD and OpenAI, but also identical to that of the rest of the big technology companies around AI. The problem of demand is also worth noting. And Reuters stood out the words of Matt Britzman, an analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown, who said that although Meta is securing supply and diversifying, “having to give up 10% of its capital suggests that AMD could have difficulty generating organic demand.” What’s coming now. The AI ​​race is not only fought in laboratories, but also in the field of finance. For AMD, the challenge now is to demonstrate that its chips live up to the demands. For Meta, the goal is to build with them “tens of gigawatts this decade and hundreds of gigawatts or more over time,” in words from Zuckerberg himself. All this while we are witnessing unprecedented spending on infrastructure and energy and of which we apparently do not see the bottom line. Cover image | AMD and Meta In Xataka | IBM has been living for decades that no one could kill COBOL. Anthropic has other plans

China already has an army of 5.8 million engineers. His new plan involves accelerating doctorates

China has a plan to win the technology race, one that began more than 40 years ago when decided to invest in training millions of engineers. We have seen it in the signings of the Meta superintelligence teamwhere the vast majority are Chinese. Chinese universities have a new plan to further accelerate the attainment of doctorates, one that puts aside theory to focus on practice. What is happening. They tell it in South China Morning Post. China is implementing a new policy that affects STEM students pursuing doctorates. The title PhD or ‘Doctor of Philosophy’ is the highest academic rank that can be obtained and until now required the development of a thesis. With this change, led by Harbin University of Technology, engineers can earn the PhD degree with the development of real products and systems. First case. The first student to achieve the PhD based on practical results was Wei Lianfeng last September. He graduated in 2008 and joined the China Nuclear Institute, where he worked for more than a decade until he decided to return to university to pursue his PhD, which he earned for his results in developing a vacuum laser welding system. To evaluate their work, the court that attended the oral defense included industry experts. Why is it important. The training of technical talent has been a priority for China for decades and more recently they have redoubled their efforts. In 2022, the government launched a program to promote STEM education especially in strategic areas such as semiconductors and quantum computing. Among the key points of the plan was close cooperation between companies and universities for joint training. This measure is the culmination of this strategy and the recognition that theoretical knowledge is not enough to compete in the technological race, especially with US blockades of key technologies. This allows China to solve the bottleneck in graduating higher-ranking engineers; It is not only about training more engineers, but about training them as soon as possible and with solutions that can be applied to the real world, instead of theses that are hundreds of pages long. STEM Power. The push to train engineers and scientists is part of a long-term government plan that began in the post-Mao era. And the plan is going from strength to strength. If we focus only on doctorates, according to data from 2023, China awarded 51,000 doctorates (PhD) in STEM careers, while the US was at 34,000. The projection at that time was that by 2025 the figure would rise to 77,000. In terms of total figures, In 2020, China was already the country that produced the most STEM graduates throughout the world with an abysmal difference: 3.57 million compared to the 2.55 million that India produced or the 822,000 in the United States. At the moment China already has 5.8 million graduates and it is estimated that more than 40% of all graduates choose a STEM career. Image | Joshua Hoehne in Unsplash In Xataka | Silicon Valley has a problem: its engineers are beginning to look to the other side of the Pacific. Specifically towards China

China does not want to give up ground as the world’s factory. Their plan involves deploying a legion of industrial robots with AI

For years, looking at the label of any device, garment or charger has been almost a formality. The answer used to be the same: “Made in China“. That phrase became silent proof that the Asian giant had managed to establish itself as the factory of the world. From American brand mobile phones to small components of European appliances, much of what we use every day has come from Chinese production lines. But that reality is beginning to change. China’s industrial leadership is no longer sustained solely by abundant labor and low costs, and the model that dominated the last decades needs to be transformed. The shift is not only economic, but also social. Fewer and fewer young Chinese want to work in factoriesa phenomenon that in the United States follows similar patterns: physical jobs, long hours and little professional projection. In both cases, the industry is no longer synonymous with progress for many and is perceived more as a destiny from which one tries to escape. Even so, both China and the United States consider that manufacturing remains strategic, either to maintain global influence or to reduce dependence on foreign countries. Everything indicates that none of them are trying to recover the model of the past, but rather to build a new one based on automation and artificial intelligence. Robots and factories to avoid losing “Made in China” When the Chinese Vice Minister of Industry, Zhang Yunming, said that Adopting artificial intelligence is a necessary and not optional task, I was not speaking only in technological terms. He was referring to protecting one of the country’s great assets: its manufacturing industry, which represents around 25% of the national economy, well above the world average. China remains the world’s largest producer, but it can no longer rely solely on volume or labor. The challenge now is to maintain that leadership by manufacturing with fewer people and more artificial intelligence. In this context, China is responding decisively. The pace at which it is deploying industrial robots is unmatched. Last year alone it installed 295,000 units, almost nine times more than the United States and more than the rest of the world combined. according to the International Federation of Robotics. In some facilities there is already talk of “dark factories”, operations so automated that the plants can operate with minimal human intervention. The Wall Street Journal mentions the Baosteel caseone of the largest steel plants in the country, where workers only intervene every half hour, when before they did so every three minutes. Automation no longer consists only of mechanical arms that repeat movements, but of connected plants, capable of making decisions. The aforementioned newspaper points out how Midea uses an AI system that coordinates robots, sensors and virtual agents to detect failures, assign tasks and adjust processes without human intervention. In the textile industry, Bosideng uses AI models developed with Zhejiang University to conceptualize and design garments, reduce development times and cut costs. This type of solutions not only speeds up production, it also generates a competitive advantage over Western manufacturers that implement changes more slowly. Where China’s industrial ambition is also clearly seen is in the ports. In Tianjin, a fleet of autonomous trucks moves containers without visible human presencewhile artificial intelligence optimizes variables such as ship arrival times and crane capacity. The system, called OptVerse AI Solver, has compressed planning tasks that previously took 24 hours to about ten minutes. PortGPT, a system developed together with Huawei to analyze images and monitor security operations, has also been deployed. The American discourse is based on the idea of ​​sovereignty: manufacturing more within the country to depend less on the outside. The Trump administration has raised that strategy through tariffs on China, Vietnam and other Asian economieswith the aim of attract factories and rebuild supply chains. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick maintains that automation is not incompatible with employmentbut it can generate better-paid technical professions. In an interview he stated that “it is time to train people for the jobs of the future, not for those of the past,” and defended that these factories could support families for several generations. One of the differences between the two models is clearly seen in the ports. While China has deployed autonomous trucks, AI-based planning systems, and tools like PortGPT without significant union opposition, in the United States automation is subject to collective bargaining. The International Longshoremen’s Association and port operators they agreed to veto new automated terminals until the end of 2030, also limiting the use of artificial intelligence in administrative tasks. For unions, automation means losing jobs and bargaining power. For China, it is a national strategy. China wants to continue being the world’s factory, but not exactly the same. It is no longer about cheap labor, but about factories capable of producing more with fewer people and with more artificial intelligence. The United States seeks its own path, with more work conditions and a different rhythmbut with the same objective of not depending on the outside. What is at stake is not just where it is manufactured, but how. And it is possible that, in a few years, the label we find will not only be “Made in China”, but a different form of manufacturing where robots will no longer be accessories, but protagonists. Images | Homa Appliances | Xataka with Gemini 3 In Xataka | Nexperia China has been trying to contact the Dutch headquarters for days. The only response has been absolute silence

If the war involves electromagnetic catapults, Beijing has a problem

In mid-September there was a tense scene in China. It happened on the deck of his brand new Fujian aircraft carrierand all the hopes of his Navy were placed on the reliability of that test: If for decades takeoffs were dominated by steam, his new “monster” was going to do it with electricity. Your electromagnetic catapult confirmed They were very serious. Although now the United States has something to say. Structural limitation. The news have given two former US Navy aircraft carrier officers, who conclude, after analyze images of the Fujian, that the deck configuration of the new Chinese aircraft carrier forces takeoffs and landings to be sequenced instead of overlapping them, which reduces its operational rhythm to approximately 60% of a Nimitz no less than half a century. The explanation. As they say, the angle of support of only 6th compared to 9th of the American ships, the greater length of the landing area (which invades the area where the planes are parked in tip before the catapult) and the position of the two forward catapults intercepting the landing system convert the deck into a plane with kinetic conflict pointswhere moving a recovered aircraft can momentarily block the catapult and disrupt the next sortie. Given this risk of collisions in an extremely dense and fast environment, the only realistic mitigation, according to officialsis to lower the tempo, which is equivalent to a direct degradation of the output generation capacity. Technological leap. He FujianAs we said, it is the first Chinese aircraft carrier with electromagnetic catapultsallowing devices to be launched with more fuel and weapons, increasing radius and hit mass. In fact, only Gerald R. Ford American shares this characteristic. It is a radical leap from Liaoning and Shandongwhich continue with ski jumping and limit weight at takeoff. But the material leap does not imply an immediate doctrinal leap: the deck operational culture (cycles, sequences, discipline of human and mechanical flow under hostile climate) is only achieved through years of operation and “with a blood curve,” as veterans remember. Without that accumulated experience, hardware introduces potential capacity that practice does not yet know how to exploit without a penalty in pace (or risk). Quantitative advantage. we have told before: China launches ships at an accelerated pace, building the largest navy in the world in total numberbut its deficit in aircraft carriers is not countable but rather generational: eleven compared to two in service, and decades of know-how compared to a first cohort that is barely entering the real training phase. The Fujian is the first volumetric competitor of the Nimitzbut according to American commanders, it is born with a deck topology that compromises your cadencewhile Washington operates ten Nimitz with doctrine mature and closes the cycle with the Ford class. That the Nimitz, launched in 1975in its last deployment may still surpass Fujian in rate of departures, illustrates that distance between tonnage and competition. The “intermediate link.” The officials, furthermore, interpret the Fujian as a bridge platform: first introduce the catapult, and then clear restrictions in subsequent generations. The next unit (the Type 004) will adjust, a priori, errors and move geometries to unleash the potential that the Fujian contains but does not release due to its disposition. China already shows the industrial pattern of fix in production: fail, learn and launch an iteration in a few years, something consistent with its naval pattern in other ship classes. In that sense, it would not be entirely correct to say that the Fujian fails: rather it fulfills the function of teaching and learning so that the successor is born without those collars. From steam to electricity. Steam catapults dominated shipborne aviation since the fifties: They use steam pressure to drive a piston that drags the plane. They are huge, but energy inefficient, with control thick acceleration and high maintenance requirements. the arrival by EMALS (Electro-Magnetic Aircraft Launch System), first in the Ford class and now in Fujianreplaces thermal hydraulics with digitally controllable induction force: acceleration can be modulated, reducing the structural fatigue of the aircraft, allowing heavier devices to be launched with less stroke and recovering energy more quickly between departures. The “but”. It turns out that the electromagnetic advantage is conditional: to translate into real power requires a deck architecture, doctrine, rhythms and sequence discipline capable of capitalizing on the new margin. In other words, the first generation system in the hands of a fleet without “deck kilometers” inherits the physical power but far from the operational efficiency that decades of steam they taught to squeeze. The key is time. Ultimately, the background thesis of the veteran Marines is not that the Fujian is an unsolvable error, but that its limitation reveals the real nature of naval aviation warfare: it is not pure engineering but engineering amortized with habit, and where the enemy is not design but the chronology. Although it may seem like it, the combat power of an aircraft carrier is not its displacement or its systems, but rather the cycles per hour and the psychological confidence accumulated to sustain them at night, under storms, with low fuel and/or zero margin. That casuistry, which defines lethal performance, cannot be bought. AND, according to officialsChina still operates in the stadium in which only through years of cover will it be able to convert the physical leap from Fujian in sustained air power output. Image | Ministry of National Defense The People’s Republic of China/ LI GANG/XINHUA, Ministry of National Defense In Xataka | China has just tested the Fujian with three different aircraft. The electromagnetic catapult is no longer theory, it is practice In Xataka | For years the Airbus A380 symbolized European power against Boeing. Today he survives like a colossus without a kingdom

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.