Core Viewpoint - The debate over whether to use consumer-grade chips or automotive-grade chips in vehicles continues, with strong arguments on both sides regarding safety and performance [3][5]. Group 1: Differences Between Consumer-grade and Automotive-grade Chips - Automotive-grade chips are governed by industry standards, specifically AEC-Q100, which includes rigorous testing for environmental stress, longevity, packaging integrity, manufacturing reliability, electrical validation, and defect screening [18][23]. - Consumer-grade chips typically have less stringent temperature requirements, often ranging from 0 to 70°C, compared to automotive-grade chips that can operate in extreme conditions from -40°C to +150°C [20][22]. - The automotive industry recognizes AEC-Q100 as a benchmark for reliability, even though it lacks legal enforcement, leading to widespread acceptance across the supply chain [24]. Group 2: Reasons for Using Consumer-grade Chips - Automotive-grade chips face challenges such as insufficient computing power and higher costs, prompting some manufacturers to opt for consumer-grade chips [25][26]. - Companies like Tesla have consistently used consumer-grade chips for their infotainment systems, citing their superior performance and cost-effectiveness [26][29]. - The rapid evolution of automotive technology demands higher performance from chips, which consumer-grade options can provide more readily than automotive-grade alternatives [30][40]. Group 3: Future of Automotive Chips in China - The automotive industry is evolving quickly, and existing standards may not adequately address the needs of modern smart vehicles, necessitating a reevaluation of chip standards [41][46]. - The establishment of a national automotive chip standard verification platform in China indicates a move towards developing relevant standards for the industry [47][49]. - The future direction of automotive chips may involve either enhancing automotive-grade chip performance or allowing consumer-grade chips with compliance processes, but the AEC-Q standard should remain a fundamental guideline [52][51].