That's priced into the stock, and it's already the current situation. TSMC will almost certainly lose some market share, not because they aren't good, but because It's already so high it's difficult to maintain. Especially with Intel coming.
IFS is kind of new, at least in terms of Intel taking it seriously, but Intel is not new, by any stretch, at developing and using nodes. It's doubtful TSMC ever has had a node that matched Intel's in performance, even with all the problems Intel has had. Of course, that's a combination of architecture and process, but it would be safe to say AMD also has a strong interest in getting their processors working at high clock speeds, but they have not reached them with Ryzen (Bulldozer line hit them, but they weren't made at TSMC).
Even now, nothing made at TSMC really approaches I7 in clock speed. Look at all the overclocking records, is a Ryzen even mentioned? So, in the most important metric for Intel, they have always been king, so it's unwise to underestimate them.
But, the rest of the world isn't speed for the sake of speed, outside of IBM and AMD. So, I understand why people have doubts. I do too. I4 won't help, it's another performance node, so we'll have to wait until I3 comes out to see if they can really do it. And then comes the complexity of working with customers as a fab, which they now have some experience with, but hardly on the level of Samsung or TSMC. But, the Tower acquisition should help (if/when it goes through), and their recent experience is at least something. They also mentioned that they have 7 of the top 10 fabless companies in their camp now, and I'm sure as they develop products with them, they are learning a lot about what they know and don't know.
I don't know what the future holds, but I just think we need to let it play out before we condemn them to failure. The bar is a lot lower for them than TSMC too. Intel doesn't need to get 50% of the market to be judged successful. If they get 20%, I'd say a lot of people are going to view that as a success, because they make money in ways TSMC can't.
Personally, I like their chances, because I think they finally got a tech guy as a leader who is willing to make the right decisions, even if they hurt the company short term. Their prior two CEOs, particularly Krzanich, were far from visionaries. Plus, I loved the 486, so already have a soft spot for Gelsinger
.
Who knows? I just think assumptions right now are too soon. Let's wait and see. I'm pretty sure we'll have a lot more clarity as this year finishes up, and even more going forward. Intel still has assets no other company has. Samsung? Yeah, kind of agree, but then again, how many times do companies surprise us? In reality, it wouldn't really be that much of a surprise, would it, if they came out with a very competitive node?
