The fight over AI chips just turned into a straight-up chess match, and Trump’s own top AI guy David Sacks thinks China is already many moves ahead. He said ChinaThe fight over AI chips just turned into a straight-up chess match, and Trump’s own top AI guy David Sacks thinks China is already many moves ahead. He said China

China is turning down Nvidia’s H200 as David says Beijing wants full chip independence

2025/12/14 22:35

The fight over AI chips just turned into a straight-up chess match, and Trump’s own top AI guy David Sacks thinks China is already many moves ahead.

He said China and Xi Jinping have figured out the US plan behind letting them buy Nvidia’s H200, and he said they are now turning the chip down while they double down on their own semiconductors.

David based that on news reports he read as the White House pushed a plan backed by him and Donald Trump to let H200 shipments reach China in an attempt to challenge firms like Huawei on their home turf.

He also admitted on Friday that he was not sure the plan would work. He said, “They’re rejecting our chips,” and added that “apparently they don’t want them, and I think the reason for that is they want semiconductor independence.”

China sets limits on H200 access

David posted on social media that his comments were tied to a Financial Times report saying China was preparing a local approval process that would force buyers to justify H200 purchases.

That move raised questions about whether Nvidia can recover any China-related revenue now that the firm removed the market from its forecasts, even though Jensen Huang put the value of China’s data-center demand at $50 billion for this year.

Bloomberg Intelligence said H200 sales could reach $10 billion there, but only if China actually accepts the chips, which at this point is not happening.

Nvidia sent a statement saying it is still working with the administration to secure H200 licenses for vetted buyers. The company said, “While we do not yet have results to report, it’s clear that three years of overbroad export controls fueled America’s foreign competitors and cost US taxpayers billions of dollars.”

A spokesperson for China’s embassy, Liu Pengyu, said cooperation in tech and the economy serves both sides and added, “We hope the US will work with China to take concrete actions to maintain the stability and smooth functioning of global supply chains.”

Cryptopolitan had reported that China is considering up to $70 billion in incentives for its chip industry. That plan shows Beijing’s push to reduce its dependency on foreign firms and keep backing companies like Huawei and Cambricon Technologies even though Washington cleared the H200 for export.

The H200 itself came out in 2023 and began shipping last year. It sits inside Nvidia’s Hopper line, behind Blackwell, and two generations behind the Rubin chips coming up next. The White House said its lag, around 18 months, was one reason it allowed China to access it.

Sacks ties China’s reluctance to Huawei support

David said China wants to support Huawei, and that explains its reluctance to take H200 chips. He still defended the idea of letting China buy the older chip, calling it “lagging” and “not the best.” He said, “What you see is China’s not taking them because they want to prop up and subsidize Huawei.”

David said selling weaker chips was part of the plan to cut into Huawei’s market share, but he now thinks “the Chinese government has figured that out, and that’s why they’re not allowing them.”

David added that the decision was shaped by US views that Huawei’s AI systems can rival Nvidia’s in raw output. Huawei’s Cloud Matrix 384 links hundreds of processors together to offset weaker power in each unit.

Some officials saw H200 access as a compromise after Nvidia tried to export a version of Blackwell to China earlier. As officials debated the move, Jensen Huang told reporters he had “no clue” if China would accept H200 chips. On Monday, Trump said Xi Jinping gave a positive response to possible approvals on Truth Social.

China has not publicly agreed to import H200 chips, and it has not formally rejected them either. Earlier this year, Beijing turned down the H20, a weaker chip that Trump allowed into the market in the summer.

Get $50 free to trade crypto when you sign up to Bybit now

Sorumluluk Reddi: Bu sitede yeniden yayınlanan makaleler, halka açık platformlardan alınmıştır ve yalnızca bilgilendirme amaçlıdır. MEXC'nin görüşlerini yansıtmayabilir. Tüm hakları telif sahiplerine aittir. Herhangi bir içeriğin üçüncü taraf haklarını ihlal ettiğini düşünüyorsanız, kaldırılması için lütfen [email protected] ile iletişime geçin. MEXC, içeriğin doğruluğu, eksiksizliği veya güncelliği konusunda hiçbir garanti vermez ve sağlanan bilgilere dayalı olarak alınan herhangi bir eylemden sorumlu değildir. İçerik, finansal, yasal veya diğer profesyonel tavsiye niteliğinde değildir ve MEXC tarafından bir tavsiye veya onay olarak değerlendirilmemelidir.

Ayrıca Şunları da Beğenebilirsiniz

Coinbase Vs. State Regulators: Crypto Exchange Fights Legal Fragmentation

Coinbase Vs. State Regulators: Crypto Exchange Fights Legal Fragmentation

US-based crypto exchange Coinbase has made a significant appeal to the Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding a wave of lawsuits aimed at its operations. The company is urging federal action to address what it describes as an “increasingly fragmented and hostile” regulatory landscape for the crypto market. Coinbase Urges Federal Action  In a recent letter, Coinbase highlighted the steps taken by the current Administration to create a more equitable framework for digital asset regulation. This includes the introduction of stablecoin legislation and two pending bipartisan market-structure bills aimed at fostering uniformity in the oversight of cryptocurrencies.  Coinbase argues that these initiatives have begun to mitigate the adverse effects of the previous Administration’s enforcement-driven regulatory approach.  However, the company warns that certain states are perpetuating this problematic trend by adopting “expansive and flawed” interpretations of securities laws and implementing new licensing requirements that undermine the federal government’s pro-innovation stance. Related Reading: REX Shares Claims Its DOGE And XRP Spot ETFs Will Be Approved By US SEC Tomorrow They make an example with the Oregon Attorney General, who has filed a lawsuit against Coinbase, claiming that many digital assets traded on its platform qualify as alleged unregistered securities.  The letter affirms that the suit not only targets Coinbase but also encourages other states to address what the Attorney General perceives as a regulatory gap left by federal authorities.  Similarly, the New York Attorney General has initiated legal action to regulate transactions involving digital assets based on decentralized protocols as securities, further complicating the regulatory environment. Coinbase has faced cease-and-desist orders from four states, which demand the company halt its retail staking services. These orders are deemed by Coinbase as “legally unfounded and inconsistent.” Unified Framework For Digital Assets In light of these challenges, the letter to the DOJ calls for urgent federal intervention to establish broad preemption provisions. The crypto exchange argues that preemption has historically been an effective tool for addressing state interference in national markets, referencing past Congressional actions. Coinbase contends that the current patchwork of state regulations not only disrupts market efficiency but also leads to unequal access to cryptocurrency services based on geographic location. Related Reading: Citi’s Ethereum Forecast: No New All-Time High Expected, Year-End Target At $4,300 To remedy these issues, Coinbase advocates for Congress to adopt legislation that would exempt federally regulated digital assets from state blue-sky laws and clarify that state licensing requirements do not apply to crypto intermediaries.  Additionally, the company urges the SEC to expedite rulemaking and provide clearer guidance on why digital asset transactions and services, including staking, should not be classified as securities. Such clarity would help prevent states from imposing conflicting regulations based on their interpretations of securities laws. Featured image from Shutterstock, chart from TradingView.com
Paylaş
NewsBTC2025/09/18 15:00