Intel CEO to Visit Taiwan, Home of Biggest Chipmaking Rival

[Portland]

When pat gelsinger is fired my guess Intel will try to be tsmc-lite and will have a collaborative relationship. Semiconductor manufacturing is a demanding job and people will be willing to share the labor.

 

[lilo777]

"Pat" first name basis? move is because he needs tsmc's ecosystem and process lead to remain competitive. It not wise it's desperation. What's the difference between intel or amd.

Are you saying that AMD is different because Intel needs TSMC and AMD does not?

 

[Portland]

Are you saying that AMD is different because Intel needs TSMC and AMD does not?

Apple, mediatek, qualcomm, intel, amd, nvidia, marvell, .... need tsmc. Tsmc has the process lead and the networking in the ecosystem.

Let's be honest if Intel wants to make a chiplet with a nvidia GPU they need to get tsmc's permission.

 

[fansink]

TSMC is both a rival + partner, just like many other big names out there. Pat's move is wise: "Keep your friends close..."

Pat is more than wise, he’s a wise guy.

 

[Daniel Nenni]

I hear this a lot but nobody can provide a single example.

There are plenty of examples. The same can be said for Intel and Apple.

Times have changed. Pat operates under the "frenemy" concept of old. Unfortunately for him when you disrespect a customer or partner as a way of competing it is no longer acceptable. You will get "cancelled". It does not matter how you cut it, a frenemy is still an enemy and Pat is proof of that.

Globalfoundries did the same when they first started with a goal to unseat TSMC. They pushed the "what if a major earthquake or typhoon wiped out Taiwan, where would we be?" narrative. And how did that work for GF? Intel will be the same. The only hope for Intel is competitive products and competitive pricing. This other nonsense is just a smokescreen, a delay tactic to bide time for Intel to catch up. Unfortunately Pat is pissing people off in the process and that is not going to end well for him or Intel, my opinion.

"Taiwan is not a stable place," said Gelsinger, adding that Beijing sent 27 warplanes to Taiwan's air defense identification zone this week. "Does that make you feel more comfortable or less?"

"How do you compete with a 30 to 40% subsidy? Because that means we're not competing with TSMC or Samsung, we're competing with Taiwan and Korea. The subsidies in China are even more significant." This one is false. Pat needs to site his source here.

 

[Daniel Nenni]

Article link:

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

My thoughts:

1. If Pat's Taiwan/TSMC upcoming visit has been planned for a while in advance, then Pat's recent talking against TSMC is a strange preparation style. It's like someone claimed to be Pat Galsinger who tried hard to sabotage the real Pat Galsinger's Taiwan trip.

2. If this trip is organized only recently, then probably someone inside of Intel (including Pat) recognized there are some signs of serious relationship problems between Intel and TSMC that Pat has to make a trip to tackle it.

How is Pat getting around the Taiwan quarantine requirement? Or will he sit in a hotel room for 14 days like the rest of us?

 

[lilo777]

There are plenty of examples. The same can be said for Intel and Apple.

Times have changed. Pat operates under the "frenemy" concept of old. Unfortunately for him when you disrespect a customer or partner as a way of competing it is no longer acceptable. You will get "cancelled". It does not matter how you cut it, a frenemy is still an enemy and Pat is proof of that.

Globalfoundries did the same when they first started with a goal to unseat TSMC. They pushed the "what if a major earthquake or typhoon wiped out Taiwan, where would we be?" narrative. And how did that work for GF? Intel will be the same. The only hope for Intel is competitive products and competitive pricing. This other nonsense is just a smokescreen, a delay tactic to bide time for Intel to catch up. Unfortunately Pat is pissing people off in the process and that is not going to end well for him or Intel, my opinion.

"Taiwan is not a stable place," said Gelsinger, adding that Beijing sent 27 warplanes to Taiwan's air defense identification zone this week. "Does that make you feel more comfortable or less?"

"How do you compete with a 30 to 40% subsidy? Because that means we're not competing with TSMC or Samsung, we're competing with Taiwan and Korea. The subsidies in China are even more significant." This one is false. Pat needs to site his source here.

Obviously, none of these statements is criticism of TSMC. I am surprised people are interpreting it this way. The tensions between China and Taiwan are well documented and they are not caused by TSMC. The issue of subsidies - true or false - is not criticism of TSMC either. He is criticizing US government for not providing subsidies to chip manufacturers in the US. There is a reason why TSMC refused to comment PG statements. There is nothing to comment there from TSMC perspective since he did not say anything about TSMC to begin with.

 

[Daniel Nenni]

Obviously, none of these statements is criticism of TSMC. I am surprised people are interpreting it this way. The tensions between China and Taiwan are well documented and they are not caused by TSMC. The issue of subsidies - true or false - is not criticism of TSMC either. He is criticizing US government for not providing subsidies to chip manufacturers in the US. There is a reason why TSMC refused to comment PG statements. There is nothing to comment there from TSMC perspective since he did not say anything about TSMC to begin with.

In a game of checkers I agree with you but in a game of chess you are wrong.

Pat is saying that TSMC’s business model requires 30-40% subsidies which is an insult in any part of the world. And if Pat is not insulting TSMC then why is Morris Chang going after Pat? This is very easy to see. Pat is trying to turn public opinion against competitors with false narratives, simple as that.

 

[fansink]

Obviously, none of these statements is criticism of TSMC. I am surprised people are interpreting it this way. The tensions between China and Taiwan are well documented and they are not caused by TSMC. The issue of subsidies - true or false - is not criticism of TSMC either. He is criticizing US government for not providing subsidies to chip manufacturers in the US. There is a reason why TSMC refused to comment PG statements. There is nothing to comment there from TSMC perspective since he did not say anything about TSMC to begin with.

Successful meat puppets, unsurprisingly, are master wordsmith contortionists.

 

[lilo777]

In a game of checkers I agree with you but in a game of chess you are wrong.

Pat is saying that TSMC’s business model requires 30-40% subsidies which is an insult in any part of the world. And if Pat is not insulting TSMC then why is Morris Chang going after Pat? This is very easy to see. Pat is trying to turn public opinion against competitors with false narratives, simple as that.

I do not see him saying that TSMC "needs" these subsidies. He is saying that the subsidies is an advantage. The fact that he is lobbying for subsidies for Intel indicates that he is not against the subsidies in principle. Thus it's hard to interpret his words as criticism of TSMC. What I see him doing is arguing that US government should offer preferential treatment to Intel vs TSMC but that's not a criticism of TSMC. And, in light of the alleged move of Taiwanese chip makers to decouple from US, he may have a point.

 

[Daniel Nenni]

I do not see him saying that TSMC "needs" these subsidies. He is saying that the subsidies is an advantage. The fact that he is lobbying for subsidies for Intel indicates that he is not against the subsidies in principle. Thus it's hard to interpret his words as criticism of TSMC. What I see him doing is arguing that US government should offer preferential treatment to Intel vs TSMC but that's not a criticism of TSMC. And, in light of the alleged move of Taiwanese chip makers to decouple from US, he may have a point.

Absolutely ridiculous. And someone else has already addressed the decoupling nonsense. I stand by Morris Chang on this one. Pat Gelsinger is way out of line with his negative TSMC/Taiwan narrative.

 

[lilo777]

Absolutely ridiculous. And someone else has already addressed the decoupling nonsense. I stand by Morris Chang on this one. Pat Gelsinger is way out of line with his negative TSMC/Taiwan narrative.

TSMC and Taiwan are very different things. Why is nobody equates Intel with US but they do it with Taiwan and TSMC all the time?

 

[tooLongInEDA]

How is Pat getting around the Taiwan quarantine requirement? Or will he sit in a hotel room for 14 days like the rest of us?

As we are discovering again here in the UK, lockdown rules [sometimes] only apply for the little people.

 

[fansink]

TSMC and Taiwan are very different things. Why is nobody equates Intel with US but they do it with Taiwan and TSMC all the time?

Members of China’s 50-cent Army, always write what they’re told to write, and usually quite poorly.

 

[hist78]

How is Pat getting around the Taiwan quarantine requirement? Or will he sit in a hotel room for 14 days like the rest of us?

Taiwan's Covid-19 quarantine requirement for people arriving Taiwan is changing to 7+7 next week. That means a mandatory 7-day stay in designated quarantine hotel and a mandatory 7-day stay-at-home with limited activity and limited social contact.

For busy people like Pat Gelsinger, I think he will use the special "travel bubble" method designed by Taiwan's CDC instead of the 7+7 quarantine. That means he will have very limited and pre arranged contacts, meetings, and travel plan in Taiwan. No matter where he and his associates go, social distancing and wearing masks are required. And probably he won't have a chance to have a nice dinner in a fancy restaurant either. Hope Pat won't feel it's personal .

We can get some ideas by looking at the picture of a meeting in June 2021. Taiwan President Tsai Ying Wen met with Foxxcon founder Terry Gou and TSMC Chairman Mark Liu.

Instead of going through all those troubles and time-consuming requirements, I still think Google Meet, Microsoft Team Meeting, Zoom, or Cisco WebEx are far better and efficient. But just like @fansink pointed out:

Intel CEO to Visit Taiwan, Home of Biggest Chipmaking Rival

Article link: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-10/intel-ceo-to-visit-taiwan-for-talks-crucial-to-turnaround-bid My thoughts: 1. If Pat's Taiwan/TSMC upcoming visit has been planned for a while in advance, then Pat's recent talking against TSMC is a strange preparation style...

semiwiki.com

Pat Gelsinger believes he must make a trip to Taiwan in person by himself.

 

[Daniel Nenni]

Members of China’s 50-cent Army, always write what they’re told to write, and usually quite poorly.

As it turns out Lillo777 is an Intel employee from EU. He will be in time out until the new year.

 

[fansink]

As it turns out Lillo777 is an Intel employee from EU. He will be in time out until the new year.

I in no way mean to conflate the Intel 50-cent Army with the prior.

 

[Daniel Nenni]

This really is turning into a Morris Chang vs Pat Gelsinger mud slinger. Pat may not get the welcome he expects in Taiwan, if he actually goes.

Pat Gelsinger is 60, and there is a rule that Intel's executives must retire at the age of 65. As a result, Gelsinger may not have enough time to put Intel back in a manufacturing technology leadership position, Morris Chang noted in a recent lecture.

 

[fansink]

This really is turning into a Morris Chang vs Pat Gelsinger mud slinger. Pat may not get the welcome he expects in Taiwan, if he actually goes.

Pat Gelsinger is 60, and there is a rule that Intel's executives must retire at the age of 65. As a result, Gelsinger may not have enough time to put Intel back in a manufacturing technology leadership position, Morris Chang noted in a recent lecture.


View attachment 589

According to Pat, he will have Intel back on top, well within his 65th birthday.

 

[Portland]

This really is turning into a Morris Chang vs Pat Gelsinger mud slinger. Pat may not get the welcome he expects in Taiwan, if he actually goes.

Pat Gelsinger is 60, and there is a rule that Intel's executives must retire at the age of 65. As a result, Gelsinger may not have enough time to put Intel back in a manufacturing technology leadership position, Morris Chang noted in a recent lecture.


View attachment 589

Intel has two faults

They don't have the technical people to operate the nova machinery at all their sites. This is the "simple" fix.

Intel's chip design productivity gap is much worse than the fabless ecosystem. Intel will need to reinvent themselves to survive.