Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/threads/exclusive-tsmc-pitched-intel-foundry-jv-to-nvidia-amd-and-broadcom-sources-say.22265/
        )

    [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] => 2021770
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

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

Exclusive: TSMC pitched Intel foundry JV to Nvidia, AMD and Broadcom, sources say

fansink

Well-known member
SINGAPORE/NEW YORK/TAIPEI, March 12 (Reuters) - TSMC has pitched U.S. chip designers Nvidia Advanced Micro Devices and Broadcom about taking stakes in a joint venture that would operate Intel's factories, according to four sources familiar with the matter.

Under the proposal, the Taiwanese chipmaking giant would run the operations of Intel's foundry division, which makes chips adapted for the needs of customers, but it would not own more than 50%, the sources said. Qualcomm has also been pitched by TSMC, according to one of the sources and a separate source.

The talks, which are at an early stage, come after U.S. President Donald Trump's administration requested TSMC, the world's leading contract chipmaker, assist in turning around the troubled U.S. industrial icon, the sources said on condition of anonymity because the talks are not public.

The details of the plan for TSMC to take no more than a 50% stake and its overtures to potential partners are being reported for the first time.

Any final deal - the value of which is unclear - would need approval from the Trump administration, which does not want Intel or its foundry division to be fully foreign-owned, the sources said.

Intel, TSMC, Nvidia, AMD and Qualcomm declined to comment. The White House and Broadcom did not respond to requests for comment.

At stake is the future of the U.S. chipmaking giant, whose shares have lost more than half of their value in the last year.

Intel reported a 2024 net loss of $18.8 billion, its first since 1986, driven by large impairments. The foundry division's property and plant equipment had a book value of $108 billion as of December 31, according to a company filing.

Trump is keen to revive Intel's fortunes, as he seeks to boost American advanced manufacturing, three of the sources said.

The sources said TSMC's joint venture pitch was made to potential backers before the Taiwanese chipmaker announced with Trump on March 3 that the company planned to make a fresh $100 billion investment in the United States that involves building five additional chip facilities there in coming years.

Talks about the joint venture over Intel's foundry division have since continued, the three sources said, with TSMC looking to have more than one chip designer as a partner.

Multiple companies have expressed interest in buying parts of Intel, but two of the four sources said the U.S. company has rejected discussions about selling its chip design house separately from the foundry division.

Qualcomm has exited earlier discussions to buy all or part of Intel, according to those people and a separate source.

Intel board members have backed a deal and held negotiations with TSMC, while some executives are firmly opposed, according to two sources.

Intel's contract manufacturing business, or foundry division, was a crucial part of former CEO Pat Gelsinger's effort to save Intel. Gelsinger was forced out by the board in December, which named two interim co-CEOs who have mothballed its forthcoming AI chip.

Any deals between historical rivals TSMC and Intel would face major challenges and be costly and laborious. The two companies currently use vastly different processes, chemicals, and chipmaking tool setups at their factories, according to separate sources at the companies.

Intel has previously had manufacturing partnerships with Taiwan's UMC and Israel's Tower Semiconductor that could offer a precedent for the two companies to operate together, but it remains unclear how such a partnership would work regarding trade manufacturing secrets.

The Taiwanese chipmaker wants potential investors in the joint venture to also be Intel advanced manufacturing customers, according to one of the sources.

Reuters reported last week, citing sources, that Nvidia and Broadcom are running manufacturing tests with Intel, using the company's most advanced production techniques, known as 18A. AMD is also evaluating whether Intel's 18A manufacturing process is suitable for it.

But 18A has been an area of contention in negotiations between Intel and TSMC, two sources said. During talks in February, Intel executives told TSMC that its advanced 18A manufacturing technology was superior to TSMC's 2-nanometer process, according to those sources.

 
Exactly, I posted this as a joke, really. TSMC will never directly or intentionally rescue Intel.
I dont think it is a joke, it would depend on parameters. TSMC just cannot take on any risk. So if you put Intel Foundry into a JV LLC and let TSMC be managing partner (<50%) with little investment they can be king of the world with little money invested or risk. @Daniel Nenni want competition so this doesnt help that LOL.

It all in the details and the finances. N2 will have much higher volume than 18A but @Scotten Jones likes things bout 18A and i will go with whatever he says.

If it gets called "AMFAB" or "IBM2.0" I want a royalty payment :ROFLMAO::LOL:
 
These articles have a lot of details though. Do you think these conversations have actually taken place?

Perhaps a month ago, or so.

On March 3, 2025, TSMC and President Donald Trump announced TSMC's $100 billion investment in Arizona.

That $100B decision was TSMC's answer to all these other silly rumors. There final solution is a simple straight forward solution, not some Monkey's Knot.
 
I dont think it is a joke, it would depend on parameters. TSMC just cannot take on any risk. So if you put Intel Foundry into a JV LLC and let TSMC be managing partner (<50%) with little investment they can be king of the world with little money invested or risk. @Daniel Nenni want competition so this doesnt help that LOL.

It all in the details and the finances. N2 will have much higher volume than 18A but @Scotten Jones likes things bout 18A and i will go with whatever he says.

If it gets called "AMFAB" or "IBM2.0" I want a royalty payment :ROFLMAO::LOL:

Intel’s ~44% "original" TSMC Rescue Rumor stock price bump as of yesterday had crashed to ~4%, tells you what really going on.

Wall Street believes this is just another recycled head fake.
 
Exactly, I posted this as a joke, really. TSMC will never directly or intentionally rescue Intel.
I guess that is the so-called island mentality, :).

I saw TSMC exectives recalling Intel helped TSMC in its early days, oh, those fond memories! But now, "will never directly or intentionally rescue Intel".
 
I guess that is the so-called island mentality, :).

I saw TSMC exectives recalling Intel helped TSMC in its early days, oh, those fond memories! But now, "will never directly or intentionally rescue Intel".


As it is, TSMC is really the only thing keeping them afloat, otherwise they’d be in a much deeper financial hole.
 
These articles have a lot of details though. Do you think these conversations have actually taken place?

Knowing TSMC, they would have these conversations, it is the politically correct thing to do, but I highly doubt TSMC would act on it. It just does not make sense.

And does Donald Trump really want to give more of the semiconductor industry away? :ROFLMAO:
 
Exactly, I posted this as a joke, really. TSMC will never directly or intentionally rescue Intel.
These articles have a lot of details though. Do you think these conversations have actually taken place?

I had a chance to speak with an investor relations manager from a major corporation last summer. She told me that TSMC has a very strong government relations team, which is much stronger than her company's.

Currently, TSMC's US government relations team is led by Peter Cleveland, Senior Vice President of Global Policy at TSMC. Mr. Cleveland has an interesting background and significant involvement in US politics and the semiconductor industry. Equally important, he is very familiar with Taiwan.

Mr. Cleveland joined TSMC in 2019. Before that, he spent 9 years with Intel as Deputy General Counsel, 5 years as Chief of Staff for the late Senator Dianne Feinstein, and 11 years on the staff of the Senate Foreign Relations and Intelligence Committees and former Senator Chuck Robb.


 
Knowing TSMC, they would have these conversations, it is the politically correct thing to do, but I highly doubt TSMC would act on it. It just does not make sense.

And does Donald Trump really want to give more of the semiconductor industry away? :ROFLMAO:

Exactly.

Additionally, I am confident TSMC negotiated the Mother of All Deals with the Trump team just a couple weeks ago.
 
I guess that is the so-called island mentality, :).

I saw TSMC exectives recalling Intel helped TSMC in its early days, oh, those fond memories! But now, "will never directly or intentionally rescue Intel".
Those people who helped TSMC were in a league of their own though
 
I guess that is the so-called island mentality, :).
I saw TSMC exectives recalling Intel helped TSMC in its early days, oh, those fond memories! But now, "will never directly or intentionally rescue Intel".

Quite a few TSMC executives past and present worked for Intel and TSMC really did follow Intel process technology advancements (HKMG, FinFET, BSPD, HNE-EUV, etc...). Semiconductor manufacturing innovation will really slow without Intel, absolutely.
 
This is no longer an option "at this moment" after TSMC announce their investment plan in America.
But discussion for this plan will be back probably 2-3 years later.
 
I guess that is the so-called island mentality, :).

I saw TSMC exectives recalling Intel helped TSMC in its early days, oh, those fond memories! But now, "will never directly or intentionally rescue Intel".

To me, it's about business sense and shareholders' interests. When Intel first placed an order with TSMC around 1989–1990, it recommended approximately 100 improvements that TSMC needed to make, but it did not share any manufacturing technology with TSMC. At the time, Intel was already a semiconductor giant, while TSMC was a small company on a small island.

Now, even after declining from its peak, Intel remains a large company with a market capitalization around $90 billion and a whopping 100,000 employees. What benefit do TSMC shareholders gain from this complex and costly Intel rescue plan?

Moreover, Pat Gelsinger's attacks on TSMC, Taiwan, Apple, Nvidia, and AMD have further strained relationships. He has burned too many bridges.
 
To me, it's about business sense and shareholders' interests. When Intel first placed an order with TSMC around 1989–1990, it recommended approximately 100 improvements that TSMC needed to make, but it did not share any manufacturing technology with TSMC. At the time, Intel was already a semiconductor giant, while TSMC was a small company on a small island.

Now, even after declining from its peak, Intel remains a large company with a market capitalization around $90 billion and a whopping 100,000 employees. What benefit do TSMC shareholders gain from this complex and costly Intel rescue plan?

Moreover, Pat Gelsinger's attacks on TSMC, Taiwan, Apple, Nvidia, and AMD have further strained relationships. He has burned too many bridges.

Including his own
 
To me, it's about business sense and shareholders' interests. When Intel first placed an order with TSMC around 1989–1990, it recommended approximately 100 improvements that TSMC needed to make, but it did not share any manufacturing technology with TSMC. At the time, Intel was already a semiconductor giant, while TSMC was a small company on a small island.

Now, even after declining from its peak, Intel remains a large company with a market capitalization around $90 billion and a whopping 100,000 employees. What benefit do TSMC shareholders gain from this complex and costly Intel rescue plan?

Moreover, Pat Gelsinger's attacks on TSMC, Taiwan, Apple, Nvidia, and AMD have further strained relationships. He has burned too many bridges.
Well, Pat G has "retired" from Intel, hasn't he?

As I said before, a token financial investment (like $5B) from TSMC (or a consortium led by TSMC) into IFS will be a great gesture and buy a lot of good wills.
 
I recall decades ago when Microsoft invested a billion dollars in Apple during a critical phase in its history. TSMC wouldn't do anything like that for Intel regardless if they even had an equivalent to Steve Jobs.
 
Back
Top