Lip-Bu Tan seeks US support to rebuild Intel Foundry, aims to secure 2-3 key customers

[XYang2023]

Lip-Bu Tan seeks US support to rebuild Intel Foundry, aims to secure 2-3 key customers

On March 31, at his first public appearance as CEO during the Intel Vision conference in Las Vegas, Lip-bu Tan outlined his strategy for Intel, which includes spinning off non-core assets, enhancing AI-related products, and collaborating with the US government to attract 2 to 3 key customers for...

www.digitimes.com

 

[Paul2]

A sound move, and pretty much the only viable I think. Besides a top few chip brands, none would pull a latest node tapeout financially.

Going for anyone else would mean giving them discounts to lure them away from Asian foundries to place orders on already depreciated, older nodes, and they will not be able beating Asian foundries on cost.

 

[siliconbruh999]

I think at leading edge Intel is only option besides TSMC Samsung is MIA they can pitch Intel 3 to European customers.

 

[Arthur Hanson]

Why should the US back Intel when they can back a proven winner in TSM, that is already proven and the leader? TSM is rapidly building new fabs in the US and our money should go to proven winners with performance and operational requirements and timelines. The US doesn't have enough excess money to invest in also rans. Giving Intel money is gambling, not investing. The US should invest or buy stock issues so it gets a return on its investment. One example of foreign investment is Honda which has more domestic content than Ford. Also, the US investment should be in stock or bonds so there would be a profitable stake if properly handled.

 

[XYang2023]

Why should the US back Intel when they can back a proven winner in TSM, that is already proven and the leader? TSM is rapidly building new fabs in the US and our money should go to proven winners with performance and operational requirements and timelines. The US doesn't have enough excess money to invest in also rans. Giving Intel money is gambling, not investing.

TSMC was backed by Taiwanese government from the very start. KMT used to be the majority shareholder of TSMC. At the moment, Taiwanese government owns around 6% of TSMC. They also intervene TSMC's share price on a regular basis. I think two current board members of TSMC are associated with Taiwanese government.

The electricity price in Taiwan is subsidized. Some articles projected the percentage of electricity consumption by TSMC could reach 24% by 2030.

Ministry keeps power rates unchanged - Taipei Times

Bringing Taiwan to the World and the World to Taiwan

www.taipeitimes.com

TSMC could account for 24% of Taiwan’s electricity consumption by 2030

Production of increasingly advanced chips causing power crunch

www.datacenterdynamics.com

 

[dkr1986]

Why should the US back Intel when they can back a proven winner in TSM, that is already proven and the leader? TSM is rapidly building new fabs in the US and our money should go to proven winners with performance and operational requirements and timelines. The US doesn't have enough excess money to invest in also rans. Giving Intel money is gambling, not investing. The US should invest or buy stock issues so it gets a return on its investment. One example of foreign investment is Honda which has more domestic content than Ford.

Reason to support Intel is National Security interest and foreign entity monopoly concerns.
And honestly, there is also a risk that by the time TSM builds & operates the 3rd fab into HVM, initially announced, Trump will be long gone, and all the remaining 3 fabs & newly announced investments might be pulled back if there is a change in leadership in US government.

There is precedent for this in Trump 1.0 timeframe. https://www.jsonline.com/story/mone...-foxconn-in-wisconsin-a-timeline/71535498007/

 

[siliconbruh999]

Why should the US back Intel when they can back a proven winner in TSM, that is already proven and the leader? TSM is rapidly building new fabs in the US and our money should go to proven winners with performance and operational requirements and timelines. The US doesn't have enough excess money to invest in also rans. Giving Intel money is gambling, not investing. The US should invest or buy stock issues so it gets a return on its investment. One example of foreign investment is Honda which has more domestic content than Ford. Also, the US investment should be in stock or bonds so there would be a profitable stake if properly handled.

Same reason Taiwan backed TSMC when it started it was gambling as well Japan is gambling even more with Rapidus. At this point you are trying to help a monopoly.

Also remind me what was the major thing TSMC did in terms of semi innovation I have always seen them as follower not risk taker they simply observe and than take their decision in a comfortable low risk manner the only thing I can think in recent years is FinFlex and hybrid Bonding.

 

[XYang2023]

Reason to support Intel is National Security interest and foreign entity monopoly concerns.
And honestly, there is also a risk that by the time TSM builds & operates the 3rd fab into HVM, initially announced, Trump will be long gone, and all the remaining 3 fabs & newly announced investments might be pulled back if there is a change in leadership in US government.

There is precedent for this in Trump 1.0 timeframe. https://www.jsonline.com/story/mone...-foxconn-in-wisconsin-a-timeline/71535498007/

They did build a sphere structure.

 

[Artificer60]

Why should the US back Intel when they can back a proven winner in TSM, that is already proven and the leader? TSM is rapidly building new fabs in the US and our money should go to proven winners with performance and operational requirements and timelines.

Because the U.S. wants leading edge manufacturing in their own country?

Why people keep wanting to pretend the TSMC is bringing the leading edge to the U.S. is beyond me. Assuming Intel is successful, and looking at TSMC's timeline it is apparent that, at best, TSMC will be on N-1 at any time (after say June when Intel must start 18A production in Oregon for an End of Year launch), with possible periods at N-2.

The US doesn't have enough excess money to invest in also rans. Giving Intel money is gambling, not investing. The US should invest or buy stock issues so it gets a return on its investment. One example of foreign investment is Honda which has more domestic content than Ford. Also, the US investment should be in stock or bonds so there would be a profitable stake if properly handle

By that logic Ford (no bailout, but a $5.9B government loan), Chevrolet and Dodge should all be dead and buried. The U.S. government should have showered Toyota and Honda with cash. I have trouble seeing that as the best option either.

 

[MKWVentures]

so the options for customers are:

1) go with the best company who delivers and has a proven history but is located in a foreign country IF people want.
2) use US company, who has no history of foundry work because they are headquartered in America.

Do we want to allow people to make a choice on force them to #2

 

[Daniel Nenni]

Because the U.S. wants leading edge manufacturing in their own country?

Why people keep wanting to pretend the TSMC is bringing the leading edge to the U.S. is beyond me. Assuming Intel is successful, and looking at TSMC's timeline it is apparent that, at best, TSMC will be on N-1 at any time (after say June when Intel must start 18A production in Oregon for an End of Year launch), with possible periods at N-2.

Intel 18A and TSMC N2 are both competitive nodes with tape-outs in 2025/2026. Remember, the PDK Intel uses for internal chips is different than the PDK Intel Foundry uses. As Lip-Bu said, there are many different design styles that must be accommodated. 18A will have 2-3 customer tape-outs this year while N2 will a few more than that so it is a good race.

TSMC will bring N2 to AZ in 2030, my opinion, so as far as US manufacturing is concerned, TSMC will be N-1 or more likely N-2, depending on when Intel 14A is available.

Elon Musk Given CHIPS Act & AI Oversight – Mulls Relocation of Taiwanese Fabs - Semiwiki

- Trump gives CHIPS Act & AI oversight to DOGE/Musk-

semiwiki.com

 

[BruceA]

Why should the US back Intel when they can back a proven winner in TSM, that is already proven and the leader? TSM is rapidly building new fabs in the US and our money should go to proven winners with performance and operational requirements and timelines. The US doesn't have enough excess money to invest in also rans. Giving Intel money is gambling, not investing. The US should invest or buy stock issues so it gets a return on its investment. One example of foreign investment is Honda which has more domestic content than Ford. Also, the US investment should be in stock or bonds so there would be a profitable stake if properly handled.

“

A potential solution to the Taiwan issue as well?​

In prior discussions, Musk had commented that the primary reason for China wanting to regain Taiwan was for China to get the critically important semiconductor manufacturing located there. It has been reported by several sources that Musk is putting together a potential plan to move most of the critical, advanced, semiconductor manufacturing out of Taiwan thereby reducing China’s desire to retake the island.

The plan would entail moving the most advanced fabs in Taiwan first, followed by the less capable fabs later. This would obviously be a huge undertaking but would likely be much less costly than a full scale war over Taiwan between the US and China.

Much of the equipment could be moved into already planned fabs in Arizona & Ohio etc. New fab shells would take one to two years to build to house the moved equipment.

Perhaps the bigger issue is where to house all the Taiwanese engineers and their families that would move along with the equipment & fabs. Estimates are that over 300,000 people would have to eventually emigrate to the US. The administration would likely make room for them by the far larger number of illegal immigrants expected to be deported, much of which is already underway.”

The US government seems to think they can do anything they want. Move people, dabs and uproot lives, by countries.

 

[Paul2]

In prior discussions, Musk had commented that the primary reason for China wanting to regain Taiwan was for China to get the critically important semiconductor manufacturing located there.

That troubled billionaire don't have much of a say.

Much of a Western discourse is centred on avoiding war, but you cannot avoid wars. They should talk how to win a war, not avoid it.

Until I start hearing credible political figures speaking that, I take it as empty musings.

 

[osnium]

Intel 18A and TSMC N2 are both competitive nodes with tape-outs in 2025/2026. Remember, the PDK Intel uses for internal chips is different than the PDK Intel Foundry uses. As Lip-Bu said, there are many different design styles that must be accommodated. 18A will have 2-3 customer tape-outs this year while N2 will a few more than that so it is a good race.

TSMC will bring N2 to AZ in 2030, my opinion, so as far as US manufacturing is concerned, TSMC will be N-1 or more likely N-2, depending on when Intel 14A is available.

Elon Musk Given CHIPS Act & AI Oversight – Mulls Relocation of Taiwanese Fabs - Semiwiki

- Trump gives CHIPS Act & AI oversight to DOGE/Musk-

semiwiki.com

I thought this article was an April Fools joke.

 

[osnium]

“

A potential solution to the Taiwan issue as well?​

In prior discussions, Musk had commented that the primary reason for China wanting to regain Taiwan was for China to get the critically important semiconductor manufacturing located there. It has been reported by several sources that Musk is putting together a potential plan to move most of the critical, advanced, semiconductor manufacturing out of Taiwan thereby reducing China’s desire to retake the island.

The plan would entail moving the most advanced fabs in Taiwan first, followed by the less capable fabs later. This would obviously be a huge undertaking but would likely be much less costly than a full scale war over Taiwan between the US and China.

Much of the equipment could be moved into already planned fabs in Arizona & Ohio etc. New fab shells would take one to two years to build to house the moved equipment.

Perhaps the bigger issue is where to house all the Taiwanese engineers and their families that would move along with the equipment & fabs. Estimates are that over 300,000 people would have to eventually emigrate to the US. The administration would likely make room for them by the far larger number of illegal immigrants expected to be deported, much of which is already underway.”

The US government seems to think they can do anything they want. Move people, dabs and uproot lives, by countries.

This article was an April Fools Day joke, right?

 

[Daniel Nenni]

This article was an April Fools Day joke, right?

Yes, he does it every year. I made sure to bold this part at the end:

Happy April Fools Day!!!!!!