分类： technology

The global quantum technology sector has entered a new phase of accelerated state-backed competition after the U.S. Commerce Department announced a $2.013 billion strategic funding package for nine domestic quantum computing firms on May 21, triggering sharp stock rallies in both U.S. and Chinese quantum companies and underscoring rising stakes in the race for global quantum supremacy.

Under the terms of the CHIPS and Science Act, the U.S. government will take minority non-controlling equity stakes in all funding recipients, marking a historic shift from traditional research grant models to direct government investment in private quantum firms. The bulk of the funding, $1.375 billion, is allocated to domestic quantum foundry development: GlobalFoundries receives $375 million to build a multi-modal quantum chip foundry, while IBM gets $1 billion to launch a new subsidiary focused on manufacturing quantum-grade superconducting wafers. The remaining $538 million is distributed across seven specialized quantum computing companies, with major recipients including D-Wave, Infleqtion, Rigetti, and PsiQuantum, each receiving up to $100 million to solve long-standing engineering challenges across different quantum technology modalities, and smaller player Diraq receiving up to $38 million for silicon spin qubit development.

“With today’s CHIPS Research and Development investments in quantum computing, the Trump administration is leading the world into a new era of American innovation,” U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said in the announcement. “These strategic quantum technology investments will build on our domestic industry, creating thousands of high-paying American jobs while advancing American quantum capabilities.” The equity stake structure is designed to generate potential returns for U.S. taxpayers, and the CHIPS Research and Development Office noted it will continue accepting new proposals for microelectronics and quantum advancement projects.

The funding announcement immediately sent shockwaves through global capital markets. Over the following two trading days, leading U.S. quantum stocks posted double-digit gains: Infleqtion surged more than 30%, Rigetti Computing jumped 63%, D-Wave rose 53%, and IBM gained around 13%. The rally spilled over to Chinese markets, where key domestic quantum companies recorded similar gains: Quantum CTEK climbed 19% to 641.08 yuan, GuoChuang Software gained nearly 18% to 40.24 yuan, and Koal Software rose 9.5% to 20.97 yuan. Investors are betting that the expanded U.S. government push will prompt China to accelerate its own state-backed investment in the sector to maintain its competitive position.

China has already laid significant groundwork in quantum technology, with a flurry of major breakthroughs announced just weeks before the U.S. funding reveal. On May 9, domestic firm Origin Quantum launched Origin Wukong-180, its fourth-generation 180-qubit superconducting quantum computer, which is now open to global users for cloud-based quantum computing tasks. Two days earlier on May 7, the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Cold Atom Technology (CASCA) unveiled the Hanyuan-2, billed as the world’s first dual-core neutral-atom quantum computer with 200 total qubits, marking a global breakthrough in multi-core quantum processor architecture. On May 13, the University of Science and Technology of China (USTC) published results for its Jiuzhang 4.0 photonic quantum computer in *Nature*, showing the system solves a core benchmark problem 10^54 times faster than the world’s most powerful conventional supercomputer, while scaling up from 255 to 3,050 manipulated photons from its previous generation.

Industry analysts and commentators note that these recent developments, paired with the U.S. funding push, are expected to speed up Beijing’s timeline for expanded state investment in quantum technology. China already designated quantum technology as the top priority among six core future industries in its 15th Five-Year Plan (2026-2030), outlined in 2025. The other five prioritized sectors are biomedical technology, hydrogen and nuclear fusion energy, brain-computer interfaces, embodied artificial intelligence, and 6G telecommunications.

Industry observers widely frame quantum technology as a defining strategic battleground for major global powers, for three core reasons. First, quantum computing and communications will reshape national defense and information security architectures. Second, the unprecedented processing power of quantum systems can dramatically accelerate breakthroughs in drug development and advanced materials design. Third, early technological leadership will grant countries major influence over global industry standards for the next generation of computing.

“The U.S. move represents the first time a national government has directly taken equity stakes in quantum technology companies, marking a formal escalation from a laboratory race to a state-level industrial war,” a technology analyst based in Anhui, China’s central quantum research hub, noted. He added that nearly 70% of U.S. strategic investment is concentrated in quantum wafer manufacturing, mirroring the policy blueprint used to build up the U.S. domestic semiconductor industry and laying the foundational manufacturing infrastructure for next-generation computing power.

China remains one of the only nations capable of competing head-to-head with the U.S. across quantum technology, with a maturing domestic industrial chain. It holds three distinct core competitive advantages: it maintains a global lead in quantum communications, with Quantum CTEK’s quantum cryptography technology already deployed for commercial use nationwide; Origin Quantum operates China’s only 6-inch quantum chip production line, with a daily capacity of over 100 wafers, a 92% yield rate, and its 180-qubit system already available as a cloud service; and quantum technology sits at the top of Beijing’s national priority list for the next five-year development cycle.

However, China also faces key gaps that the U.S. is explicitly targeting with its latest funding push. “China’s core weaknesses lie in dedicated quantum wafer fabrication and high-end control and measurement equipment, precisely the areas Washington is targeting with its latest funding push,” the Anhui-based analyst said. “Domestic quantum chips still partly rely on conventional foundries for production, while purpose-built quantum wafer facilities remain under construction.”

The two superpowers are competing across four major quantum computing architectures, with domestic leaders on each side: for superconducting quantum computing, China’s Origin Quantum and Quantum CTEK face off against IBM, Google and Rigetti; for photonic quantum computing, USTC’s Jiuzhang series rivals U.S. firm PsiQuantum; for trapped-ion quantum computing, China’s Qudoor competes with Quantinuum and IonQ; and for neutral atom quantum computing, China’s CASCA goes up against U.S. firms Atom Computing and Infleqtion.

This competition has unfolded against a backdrop of escalating U.S. export controls targeting China’s quantum sector. During the final months of the Biden administration, Washington introduced sweeping export restrictions on quantum computers, critical components and related software in September 2024, followed by a ban on most U.S. investments in Chinese quantum firms that took effect in January 2025. The Trump administration expanded these controls in March 2025, adding roughly 80 companies to its export blacklist, more than 50 of which are Chinese, including six subsidiaries of leading Chinese cloud and AI firm Inspur Group, which were accused of acquiring U.S. technology for military quantum and supercomputing development. Currently, most major Chinese quantum firms and research institutions, including Quantum CTEK, Origin Quantum, and USTC, are named on the U.S. export blacklist.

Despite these restrictions, Chinese firms have continued to advance their technology, bypassing controls by sourcing key equipment from non-U.S. suppliers and investing in homegrown alternatives that avoid Western-controlled components. For example, in 2023 Chinese state broadcaster CCTV showed Origin Quantum using a mask aligner manufactured by Germany’s SÜSS MicroTec for superconducting quantum chip production, proving U.S. controls have not fully cut off access to critical fabrication equipment. This progress allowed Origin Quantum to launch its third-generation 72-qubit Wukong system in 2024, followed by the 180-qubit fourth-generation model in May 2026.

Chinese researchers have also worked around controls by developing quantum architectures that do not rely on Western-controlled dilution refrigerators, a critical cooling component for superconducting systems. Photonic and neutral-atom quantum computing, the two areas that saw major Chinese breakthroughs in May 2026, fall into this category.

Data on overall investment in the sector paints a mixed picture of the current competitive balance. A columnist based in Liaoning cited McKinsey data showing China invested a total of $15 billion in its quantum sector in 2024, more than double the combined $7 billion invested by the U.S. government and private firms. However, independent observers caution that China’s overall investment figure includes large amounts of general infrastructure spending, and a significant share of Chinese R&D funding is allocated to quantum communications rather than quantum computing, where the U.S. still retains a clear technological lead.

The ongoing technological rivalry between the United States and China entered a new, more tense phase this May, when Beijing implemented a sudden ban on imports of Nvidia’s RTX 5090D V2 – a customized graphics card built specifically for the Chinese market to comply with existing US export controls. The unexpected restriction, which took effect on May 15, the same day US President Donald Trump’s delegation left Beijing after high-level summit talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping, has delivered a fresh setback to Chinese domestic gamers and independent AI hobbyists, who relied on the chip for both leisure and small-scale development work.

First reported by the Financial Times, the RTX 5090D V2 was added to China’s banned import list during the summit. Built on Nvidia’s cutting-edge Blackwell architecture, the chip had only received approval for sale in the Chinese market back in August 2025, after years of incremental adaptations by Nvidia to navigate successive rounds of US export restrictions.

This ban compounds growing pressure on Nvidia, which already faces a Chinese government push to domestic firms to prioritize locally produced chips over the company’s premium H20 and H200 AI chips. Industry analysts estimate that the H200 line alone could generate more than $14 billion in annual revenue for the US semiconductor giant for the Chinese market. The timing of the ban is particularly striking: Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang joined Trump’s Beijing delegation at the last minute, which had stoked widespread market expectations that he could secure formal approval for continued H200 sales in the country.

Alongside the chip ban, the Trump-Xi summit produced a key breakthrough on AI governance talks. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced that Washington and Beijing have opened discussions to establish binding safety guardrails for advanced artificial intelligence. The core goal of these talks is to prevent the most cutting-edge AI models from falling into the hands of criminal organizations and terrorist groups, while preserving space for continued commercial technological development. Bessent noted that the US entered these talks from a position of strength, holding a clear technological lead over China in the AI sector. He added that cross-border working groups from both nations will soon launch formal consultations to craft shared safety standards that do not stifle innovation or industry growth.

Despite the growing tensions over semiconductor trade, US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer told reporters that chip export controls were not a central topic of negotiation during the bilateral summit. “This was not a major topic of discussion at the bilateral meeting. We did not talk about chip export controls at the meeting,” Greer stated, though he acknowledged that US chief executives in attendance raised individual corporate concerns during the summit. Greer also emphasized that any final decision on allowing H200 imports rests with Beijing.

Industry observers and commentators point out that the impact of the RTX 5090D V2 ban extends far beyond consumer gaming. While the card is marketed as a high-end gaming graphics processing unit (GPU), independent and hobbyist AI developers across China have relied on it to access Blackwell architecture computing power at a time when sales of Nvidia’s full-powered enterprise AI GPUs are blocked by US controls. Many of these developers use consumer-grade RTX cards to run and fine-tune open-source large language models (LLMs) such as Meta’s Llama series, Google’s Gemma, and China’s own DeepSeek from home-based workspaces.

“Although the RTX 5090D V2 appears to be a gaming graphics card, its actual uses go far beyond that,” explained a columnist for Hainan-based news outlet Kdnet.net. “Because access to Nvidia’s more powerful AI graphics processing units has been restricted, many Chinese AI developers have been using the RTX 5090D V2 to tap into the computing power of Nvidia’s Blackwell architecture for AI training and inference tasks. In other words, banning this card is equivalent to cutting off a back channel that allowed indirect access to Blackwell computing power while circumventing export controls.”

The columnist added that the move reflects a clear shift in China’s approach to the US-China chip war: “What is unfolding points in one clear direction. The US is using export controls to pressure China, while China has decided it no longer wants even downgraded versions of foreign chips, turning instead to homegrown alternatives. This episode marks a new phase in the US-China chip contest, though where it ultimately would lead remains to be seen.”

This latest restriction is the culmination of years of back-and-forth adaptation in the US-China semiconductor trade. The cycle began in October 2022, when the previous Biden administration introduced sweeping new export rules that banned sales of Nvidia’s top-tier A100 and H100 AI chips to China. Nvidia responded by launching downgraded, export-compliant variants – the A800 and H800 – specifically built for the Chinese market. In October 2023, Washington tightened restrictions further, adding the A800, H800, and consumer RTX 4090 graphics cards to the banned list. Nvidia again adjusted, launching the even more scaled-back H20 AI chip. After taking office, the Trump administration initially banned H20 exports in 2025, before later reversing course and approving exports of both the H20 and H200.

Even with US approval, however, Chinese government guidance urging domestic tech firms to prioritize local chips such as Huawei’s Ascend 910B has resulted in zero H200 imports to date. A nearly identical pattern has played out in the consumer graphics card segment: when Nvidia launched its flagship RTX 5090 in January 2025, it designed a downgraded RTX 5090D variant for China, but Washington blocked that shipment. A further adjusted, lower-spec version – the RTX 5090D V2 – launched in China last August, only to be banned by Beijing this May.

The ban opens up new market opportunities for Chinese domestic graphics card manufacturers, including Lisuan Technology, Moore Threads, and Biren Technology. But some analysts question whether Chinese consumers will readily shift to local alternatives. Consumer tech commentator Renjian Siliang, based in Henan, noted that for most mainstream 4K gaming use cases, the difference between the full-spec RTX 5090 and the downgraded 5090D V2 is barely noticeable, as Nvidia only cut non-core performance features. The gap becomes far more apparent, however, for 8K gaming, large 3D rendering workloads, and small-scale AI development work.

Critically, Chinese consumers still have access to Nvidia’s RTX 5080, which falls outside the scope of current US export controls. While the RTX 5090 is 30% to 68% faster than the 5080, the 5080 still outperforms the top Chinese-made graphics card by a factor of multiple times. The most advanced current offering from domestic producer Lisuan Technology, the LX 7G100, is only comparable to Nvidia’s last-generation RTX 4080, leaving a substantial performance gap for both enthusiast gamers and independent AI developers.

In a landmark ruling that wraps up a three-year regulatory dispute, Australia’s Federal Court has imposed a AUD 650,000 (USD 465,000) penalty on Elon Musk-owned X Corp. for refusing to hand over critical information to the country’s top online safety watchdog about its handling of child sexual exploitation material on its platform. The court also ordered the Texas-based social media giant to cover AUD 100,000 (USD 71,000) in legal costs incurred by the Office of the eSafety Commissioner, with payment required within 45 days of Thursday’s ruling.

The legal conflict dates back to February 2023, when eSafety issued a formal transparency notice to then-Twitter Inc., demanding a public report detailing the company’s actions to curb the spread of child sexual abuse and exploitation content, aligned with Australia’s national Basic Online Safety Expectations. The company was given a March 29, 2023 deadline to submit the completed response, but X failed to provide a report that fully addressed the regulator’s questions. The company ultimately admitted it violated Australia’s 2021 Online Safety Act through this non-compliance.

X’s legal team told the court the non-compliance occurred during a period of significant corporate transition, when Elon Musk completed his high-profile acquisition of the platform and rebranded Twitter as X. The merger between Twitter Inc. and X Corp. closed in March 2023, just weeks after the transparency notice was issued, and X’s legal representative noted the regulator does not claim the violating conduct continued past May 5, 2023.

The long legal battle reached its conclusion after two previous court rulings sided with the regulator: an initial October 2024 judgment upheld by the full Federal Court in July last year confirmed X was legally required to respond to eSafety’s inquiry. Notably, both the regulator and X have agreed the size of the issued fine is appropriate. Christopher Tran, the lead lawyer for eSafety, told reporters the penalty was set at this level specifically because of X’s status as a large global corporation. He emphasized that a significant penalty was necessary to avoid treating regulatory violations as just a routine cost of doing business for large tech firms.

eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant, a former Twitter employee herself, framed the ruling as a critical win for corporate accountability in the tech sector. “In early 2023, we asked some of the world’s biggest technology companies, including Twitter, to report on steps they were taking to comply with the Australian Basic Online Safety Expectations in relation to the proliferation of child sexual exploitation and abuse materials on their platforms,” Inman Grant said in a post-ruling statement. She added, “This is not only a key part of our work as Australia’s online safety regulator, it also provides the Australian public with important information about how these companies are tackling the worst-of-the-worst content on their platforms.”

As of Thursday, X had not issued any immediate public response to requests for comment on the court’s ruling.

Tens of thousands of Samsung Electronics union members gathered at a major factory complex south of Seoul on April 23, bringing a high-stakes labor dispute to the brink of work stoppage that threatened global tech supply chains. On the eve of a planned strike, the tech giant and its largest employee union reached a last-minute tentative wage and bonus agreement, suspending industrial action set to begin Thursday while union members vote on the deal between May 22 and May 27.

The conflict erupted against a backdrop of unprecedented global demand for AI-related memory chips, which has sent Samsung’s profits and market valuation soaring in recent months. The core point of contention was the unequal distribution of record profits generated by the AI boom across different business units. Samsung initially proposed paying memory chip division workers bonuses equal to as much as 607% of their annual salary – far higher than the 50% to 100% offered to staff in other chip and electronics units, including those producing advanced semiconductors for major clients like Tesla and Nvidia.

The union, which represents nearly 48,000 Samsung employees, pushed back against the lopsided bonus structure, arguing that 23,000 non-memory chip workers should not be excluded from the windfall. The union also demanded the elimination of a company-wide 50% bonus cap on annual salaries and the allocation of 15% of annual operating profit to a shared worker bonus pool. Industry analysts widely noted that a full strike at Samsung – the world’s largest memory chipmaker by sales and a core supplier to global AI data center builders, smartphone manufacturers, and consumer electronics brands – would have sent shockwaves through already strained global chip supplies.

Samsung’s outsized role in the global economy amplifies the stakes of any labor unrest: the broader Samsung Group contributes roughly one-fifth of South Korea’s total economic output, making any production disruption a risk to the country’s entire export-driven economy. The dispute also comes at a moment of intensifying competition for Samsung, as rivals SK Hynix and Micron Technology capitalize on the AI chip boom to gain market share. Last year, SK Hynix scrapped its 10-year bonus cap, pushing average bonuses three times higher than Samsung’s previous offerings, which led to a noticeable exodus of skilled Samsung workers to the competitor.

By early May, booming AI chip demand pushed Samsung’s total market capitalization past the $1 trillion mark, following a 750% year-over-year jump in operating profit during the first quarter of 2025. Even as the deal was struck, legal constraints had already limited the scope of potential strike action: a South Korean court granted Samsung an injunction forcing the company to maintain full staffing for safety, facility maintenance, and quality control operations, and barred the union from blocking facility access or occupying plant grounds, with daily fines of $74,000 for any violations.

Financial analysts from JP Morgan had projected that a sustained strike could cut Samsung’s annual operating profit by between $14 billion and $20.8 billion, a blow that would have rippled through global tech markets. In a statement released after the tentative agreement was announced, Samsung said: “With a humble attitude, we will build a more mature and constructive labour-management relationship to ensure that such an incident never happens again.” Markets reacted positively to the news, with Samsung’s share price jumping more than 5% on Thursday morning following the announcement.

The American Chamber of Commerce in Korea had previously warned of the broader global risks of prolonged labor unrest, noting that “In today’s interconnected global economy, disruptions in strategically important industries can create ripple effects extending well beyond a single company or market. Competing regional manufacturing markets could benefit if concerns over predictability and continuity persist.” With the deal now headed for a member ratification vote, the temporary agreement has eased immediate fears of production disruption during a critical period of AI infrastructure expansion worldwide.