Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/index.php?threads/two-%E2%80%98pseudo-facts%E2%80%99-about-semiconductors-that-could-distort-the-chips-act-part-4.15087/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2020871
            [XFI] => 1050170
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Two ‘Pseudo-Facts’ About Semiconductors That Could Distort The CHIPS Act (Part 4)

hist78

Well-known member

Additional confusion or misleading information are injected by Intel. For example, Intel said they are the only major IDM left in US or headquarters in US. Intel is trying to create an public impression that they are the only good guy standing in US. All other US semiconductor companies or foundries' capabilities meant little to Intel's propaganda.
 
Pat Gelsinger is just doing his job here. He's has to play the hand he's been dealt. If there's free money on the table, his shareholders need him to push the rules as far as he can - just as we all might do in a competitive benchmarking situation. For the same reason, I hold the banking regulators more to blame for the 2009 crisis than the banks (though the banks don't deserve a free pass or all the bailouts - bad businesses need to fail).

Whether the CHIPS Act is a good idea and will actually work is another matter. It looks like the cost ("includes $52 billion in federal investments") is at least $170 per US citizen.
 

prime007

Active member
Whether the CHIPS Act is a good idea and will actually work is another matter. It looks like the cost ("includes $52 billion in federal investments") is at least $170 per US citizen.
Agreed...Pat is doing everything he can for his shareholders by drumming up nationalistic tendencies. I can easily see the CHIPS Act passing Congress this year. But Pat believes "there will need to be a CHIPS Act 2, maybe a CHIPS Act 3 to fully realize this moonshot [bring the US back to the forefront of chip manufacturing]" (Source: https://www.axios.com/intel-semicon...ity-4ffc8949-4bc7-4460-932c-2c95bebf1daa.html) Given the political dysfunction in DC, I highly doubt Intel will see additional funding via future CHIPS Act(s).

But he is certainly doing a good job drumming up support for these funds with his recent statements:
"We said Intel 4, our Meteor Lake product is looking good. And I’ve said Intel 3, 20A and 18A are ahead of schedule." - Pat Gelsinger, Intel CEO
Just like most people on this forum, I'm eagerly watching this real-life technology/business drama unfold. Can Intel really hit those extremely aggressive milestones they laid out? Will they "return to product leadership" in 2025? What's TSMC's future plans/roadmap (supposedly the details will come in their next earnings call in Jan 2022!)? What happens to IBM's partnership with Samsung? Which foundry (Intel, Samsung, TSMC) will be forced to DROP OUT of the process node race due to the expenses? I wish I had a time-traveling machine just so I can skip to 2026 to find out some of these answers. 😄
 
Top