Sure, if they've got production grade EUV, but right now they don't even have production grade DUV.
I'm also sure they can go as far as 5nm like SMIC if they really wanted to, since it's strategic for China, but the cost would only be justified if the current cycle lasts long enough.
Not 10nm, they are producing with 18.5nm and 17nm now, which technically already is in breach of US restrictions, the US government can blacklist them if they feel like it.
3D DRAM is no magic, it will only give them maybe 2 generations' breathing room if they got the required etching equipment figured out. But others will be doing 3D DRAM with EUV by then.
Their scale is simply too small to affect the market outside China, majority of their chips will be eaten up by HBM3 production with yet unknown yield rate.
They are forbidden to buy foreign equipment beyond their current process node, which is already obsolete, die size is 40% bigger than Samsung, not to mention lithography, the big 3 are using EUV while they are stuck with lobotomized DUV.
They can start making some decent money now, but vastly expanding capacity as is means enormous losses if the cycle went downward a few years later, that's how all previous makers went bankrupt.
They can squeeze out a bit more performance if they are ready to go beyond their current node using only domestic equipment and be blacklisted by the US government.
But the cap is there, unless they can make a working EUV machine in 5 years, they are doomed to be a minor player, if the current cycle even lasts that long.
Russia has always been selling it's oil and gas at a discount, that's why it had so much clout in the EU and CIS, nothing new, it's literally its geopolitical strategy since the Soviet Union.
All these talk of cutting off Russia won't last more than a year after the war, nobody refuses cheap energy, certainly not the cash strapped Europeans.
They'll probably be the world leader in critical metals and rare earth deposits if they invested more on prospecting and the ice melts.
Your geopolitical views are so naive it's hard to take seriously.
EU is now an unwilling dumping ground for China, hostility and paranoia are growing by the day now that China is no longer a lucrative market itself and is pursuing its interests outside commerce, the cordial days are numbered.
Russia would never be subservient to China, once the war ends Russia would be back being a geopolitical player because of its vast natural resources, and they are already import substituting even Chinese products.
Russia can turn to the west to be a real western country whenever they see fit, the eternal fear for China.
This is why China is going as far as it can to accommodate Putin, even souring it's relations with the EU which isolated itself.
In this sense, it is China being "subservient" to Russia.
The problem is that the EU and China are both looking for export markets to fund their economic growth, unless EU blows up it's welfare system and prints money like the US, the two are competitors.
But doing that would undermine Euro's credibility, as the EU is a loose union of countries with their distinct interests and politics, also member countries would compete on outspending each other as the Euro would have been essentially free money, a Euro debt crisis on turbocharge.
So, the EU can never print like the US. The EU and China will be rivals.
I think people are ignoring the reciprocity in the global trading system.
People and news articles always talk about goods trade deficits for rich countries, but never their almost universal services trade surpluses, and the profit margins are vastly different.
For manufacturing, a large part of the revenue goes to materials costs, but for services, almost all of it are net incomes.
Yes you can bring back manufacturing jobs, but your services surpluses would also shrink, because when you don't open your market, countries were not obligated to let you reap profits there too.
Democratic governments are weak on deficit spending, especially poor ones, the debt from their tiny stretch of high speed rail almost became a scandal.
This is retaliation for China recently phasing out European gears, which should be expected after Europe already banned Chinese gears in effect.
China for years has been allocating a share of the market to European gears, considering their domestic offerings are much cheaper, this was basically a reciprocal gesture, but it's not needed now for neither side.
Germany has been reluctant to completely remove its Huawei gears, but now that German cars are losing ground in China, they probably felt it's time to make the move.
This JV obssession is weird, China basically admitted that they can never compete on ICE cars and bet on EVs instead, either this JV model doesn't actually work or what was transferred do not have much value.
Now people claim they stole their IPs through JVs and that's why they are good at making EVs, this theory doesn't add up.
Also, what China offered is a vast untapped market, no one forced these companies to go to China to set up JVs and start picking up gold down the street, this was way before WTO and China was not at all obligated to open it's market, let alone for free.
Now ask one question, what the EU has to offer to "force" China to set up JVs? Guaranteed billion dollars profit?
EU car market is crowded and full of incumbents, Chinese cars represent a low single digit market share despite the weekly "China is taking over the EU car market" news article.
The problem, however, is IO controller support has been dropped, many new CPUs don't even support DDR4 any more, especially mobile ones.