Windows Errors? Fix Them Before They Spread
Repair common Windows errors and clear accumulated junk for a smoother, more stable PC - no reinstall needed.Free scan · no reinstallOutdated Drivers Are Slowing You Down
One free scan finds every outdated or missing driver and matches the right update for your exact hardware.Free scan · exact hardware matchIn a 2008 report from Shenzhen, EE Times journalist Rick Merritt profiled Peter Shi of Arkmicro Technologies and Norman Hu of Anyka Microelectronics Technology. Their contrasting chip businesses show how access to customers, shared design infrastructure and lower startup barriers coexisted with thin margins, large upfront costs and fierce competition.
Who were the two Shenzhen chip entrepreneurs?
Their companies sold chips into different parts of the electronics market. Arkmicro pursued a broad range of video and consumer products; Anyka focused on mobile application processors and aimed to distinguish customers’ devices through features such as H.264 video and mobile TV. The figures below describe the period around 2007–2008, as reported by Merritt for EE Times on 8 April 2008—not present-day company performance.
| Dimension | Arkmicro Technologies | Anyka Microelectronics Technology |
|---|---|---|
| Leader | Peter Shi, chief executive | Norman Hu, chief executive |
| Product focus | Video chips for televisions, PC cameras and portable devices | Mobile application processors for phones and other devices, with emphasis on H.264 codecs and mobile TV |
| Market position | Broad range of cost-sensitive consumer chips | Middle- and high-end products; Hu said the company did not target the low end |
| Scale reported | 180 employees and about $10 million in revenue in the prior year | About $20 million in revenue in the prior year; 200 engineers |
| Capital reported | A further $10 million financing round; planned estimated $1 million mask set for a 65-nanometer product | $30 million in venture funding to date |
| Engineering approach | Specific chip-team size and process node not stated in the EE Times report | Roughly half of the 200 engineers worked on chips, typically using 130-nanometer processes; the remainder developed software |
Shi described Shenzhen’s progress alongside Shanghai and Beijing, saying, “After several years of development in IC design, we are making significant progress in Shenzhen – as well as in Shanghai and Beijing.” Hu characterized Anyka’s offer as differentiation rather than lowest price: “We only target the middle- and high-end products, not the low end. People come to us looking for help differentiating their products. It’s not about cost.”
How did Shenzhen help semiconductor startups?
Chip design requires specialized tools, manufacturing access and expertise even when a startup does not own a fabrication plant. Shi said that foundries, electronic design automation (EDA) tools and reusable intellectual property had become more accessible than they had been a decade earlier, lowering the threshold for entering IC design. In his words, “A decade ago, there were no readily available foundries, so the threshold was very high in IC design. Now we have foundries, EDA tools and IP.”
The report also described practical cost-sharing and talent advantages in Shenzhen at the time:
- Government-subsidized rent helped reduce overhead for young design firms.
- Shared EDA licenses spread the cost of expensive design software.
- Foundry access let design companies manufacture chips without building their own fabs.
- Reusable IP reduced the need to create every design component from scratch.
- Shi said Arkmicro recruited 5–30 interns annually through partner universities. He also said salaries could be as much as 30% lower outside Shenzhen; that was his account, not a measured market-wide comparison.
Merritt’s report estimated that China had as many as 600 chip-design startups, most with 10–20 people, and noted about 15 startups in Arkmicro’s building. These are historical estimates from the 2008 account, not a current count.
Rank #2
Why were chip startups under price and cash pressure?
Low selling prices left little room for error
Shi cited target average selling prices of $2–$8 for products Arkmicro pursued, and said MP3 chips could sell for about $1.50, close to cost. Those 2008-period examples illustrate why volume alone did not guarantee healthy economics: price competition could leave little gross margin to pay for engineering, support and the next product generation.
Arkmicro’s broad, cost-conscious strategy put it in markets where product similarity and price could be decisive. Shi acknowledged the challenge: “It’s not that different [from chips from competitors]. That’s our problem-not just mine, but the whole country of IC designers. But as long as your chip is good and cheaper, you will always have customers.” That approach could win business, but depended on controlling costs while maintaining quality.
Development bills arrived before sales
Mask sets and process development required substantial cash before a new chip could generate revenue. The report’s estimated $1 million mask-set cost for Arkmicro’s planned 65-nanometer product shows the scale of one prospective development expense in that period. Anyka’s typical 130-nanometer work and larger software team reflected a different allocation of effort, but the report does not give a directly comparable per-product development budget for either company.
This creates a financing challenge: a startup must fund design and manufacturing preparation while still trying to secure customers and forecast demand. If a product misses its market window, faces a price drop or fails to win design-ins, that upfront spending is difficult to recover.
Rank #4
Standards and customer concentration affected the bet
Standards uncertainty could make product planning riskier, particularly when a chip depended on a specific video or mobile-TV format. At the same time, winning business from large Chinese system companies and handset makers mattered enormously. Independent design houses helped shape handset architectures, but industry consolidation increased pressure to remain close to major customers. A strong technical design still needed an OEM commitment and a sufficiently durable product roadmap.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What distinguished Arkmicro’s and Anyka’s strategies?
Arkmicro sought opportunities across cost-sensitive video and consumer devices. A broad product range could expose it to more customer applications, but also placed the company in categories where buyers could focus heavily on price and competing chips might be hard to distinguish.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Best Value
Anyka chose a narrower positioning: serve customers seeking differentiated middle- and high-end devices rather than compete at the low end. That required investment in both silicon and software—roughly half of its 200 engineers worked on chips and half on software, according to the report. The trade-off was that differentiation had to be valuable enough for device makers to pay for it; the article does not establish whether that positioning delivered superior margins or later outcomes.
Neither strategy removed the need to land major design wins. In this business, the customer’s product plans, shipment scale and willingness to adopt a chip could matter as much as the chip’s engineering merits.
What did their experience reveal about growth and survival?
Shenzhen’s ecosystem could make it more feasible to start a design house, but it could not by itself ensure a sustainable business. Shared tools and foundry access lowered entry costs; they did not erase the cost of tape-outs, development cycles, customer acquisition or competition. With many small firms chasing orders, a company needed a defensible product position, reliable customer relationships and enough capital to survive the gap between design work and sales.
Hu captured the pressure to scale when he said, “We need to grow faster to survive. That’s why we are thinking of going to the public market.” This was a statement of consideration reported in 2008, not evidence that Anyka later went public. The EE Times account does not verify subsequent company performance, IPOs or current Shenzhen policy, so its financial figures and market descriptions should be read strictly as a period snapshot.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
