Intel CEO Hints Chipzilla’s Return To Making Memory, As He Teases “New Memory Architecture” & 3D Stacking To Tackle The DRAM Wall

[Daniel Nenni]

Intel has hinted at a return to the memory segment as CEO Lip-Bu says that memory is no longer a commodity business and holds tremendous innovation potential.

Intel Started As A Memory Business & Today's Crisis May Once Again See The Reopening of the DRAM Door At Its Foundries​

Intel, founded back in 1968, started as a semiconductor business, and the very first products that it rolled out were memory chips, starting with the 3101 SRAM and the 1103 DRAM.

Intel's previous venture in the memory space was its Optane products, which were based on the 3D XPoint architecture which was co-developed with Micron, but were discontinued in 2022 since the tech never picked up in the way Intel had hoped for, and competing technologies such as HBM and multi-layer 3D Stacked technologies were showing far better potential and cost/$.

However, four years after the discontinuation of Intel's last known memory technology, the blue team is once again hinting at a return to the memory business. There have been a few hints here and there, such as the recent recruitment drive in which Lip-Bu Tan has managed to hire Ex-CEO of SK Hynix, Seok-Hee Lee, as EVP of the Foundry business & advanced packaging technologies.

Not only that, the company has been making inroads in the memory segment silently with its partners, with upcoming technologies such as XBM and ZAM currently in the works.

Intel's past attempts at DRAM, such as HMC (Hybrid Memory Cube) and MCDRAM, faced various issues and never came to market, but with XBM, Intel is course-correcting its DRAM ambitions, and along with ZAM, the company may once again see a return to the DRAM segment, & this comes at a time when the entire memory segment is facing heightened shortages.

Well you know the you know the first of all we are very excited you know in the Agentic AI and Inference CPU is huge demand so my day is a lot of CEO call I want to have more CPU from you so we truly try the CPU make sure that we meet them and secondly some of the new architecture of CPU so that we can meet some of the requirement and then secondly I think CPU and memory I think there's a lot of way we can really do stacking together and also try to find some new architecture from memory and I think in some way the memory a lot of innovation are not there so there's some really good area.

I used to be don't invest in memory because it's kind of commodity business right but now become different there's a lot of new technology come out so we are kind of looking at.

One of my pet project is looking some of the memory new architecture and I think you just saw the news I hire my good friend Seok-Hee Lee he used to run SK Hynix right so you kind of know something that I'm thinking about we are not ready to unfold it but you know I always have something thinking about what is the short term mid term long term requirement.

Lip-Bu Tan - Intel CEO

During the recent TechSurge: Deep Tech VC Podcast, Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan disclosed some of the details on the company's next venture in the memory segment. Lip-Bu says that there is a lot of demand for CPUs right now, and the company is looking into ways to build CPUs that meet the growing requirements of its customers. The semiconductor and chipmaker isn't just looking at building CPUs with new architectures, but is also working on embedding CPUs with stacked DRAM capabilities.

Lip-Bu goes on to say that a lot of the memory requirements needed today aren't there yet, so the company is working to innovate into this segment. The most crucial statement from Lip-Bu is that he personally didn't want to invest in memory since it was just a commodity business, but market dynamics have changed drastically with the growing AI demand. And now, memory isn't a commodity business anymore.

He teases that he has something in the works, but Intel is not ready to "unfold" it yet. Lip-Bu stresses that he always thinks of the short-term, mid-term, and long-term viability of such projects, and it looks like Intel is indeed planning to return to the memory business with innovative DRAM technologies.

As per the latest timeline, Intel's ZAM project is scheduled for 2029-2030, while XBM should be unveiled at the start of the next decade. Memory shortages will persist beyond 2030, as per the latest reports, as compute and memory demand continues to grow with multiple Gigawatt-scale "AI Factories" coming online in the years ahead.

If Intel does come back to the memory buisness, then its Foundry Services buisness will see an unprecdented boost, becoming one of the leading manufacturers of advanced semiconductors, memory solutions, and bleeding-edge packaging technologies, all under one roof.

Intel CEO Hints Chipzilla's Return To Making Memory, As He Teases "New Memory Architecture" & 3D Stacking To Tackle The DRAM Wall

Intel hints a return to the memory segment as CEO Lip-Bu says that memory is no longer just a commodity business & has many potential.

wccftech.com

 

[hist78]

If Intel does come back to the memory buisness, then its Foundry Services buisness will see an unprecdented boost, becoming one of the leading manufacturers of advanced semiconductors, memory solutions, and bleeding-edge packaging technologies, all under one roof.

Is Intel getting back into the memory business again?

Is Intel CEO Lip‑Bu Tan thinking that “this time” will be different? Or is he simply trying to create a certain perception?

 

[Daniel Nenni]

Is Intel getting back into the memory business again?

Is Intel CEO Lip‑Bu Tan thinking that “this time” will be different? Or is he simply trying to create a certain perception?

It would certainly help the stock. GO INTEL!!!

 

[Xebec]

Is Intel getting back into the memory business again?

Is Intel CEO Lip‑Bu Tan thinking that “this time” will be different? Or is he simply trying to create a certain perception?

I hope he's really just talking about packaging memory and not actually getting into RAM, NAND, or related businesses. The wording isn't clear.

Perhaps it's something SRAM+packaging related which would be lower risk than NAND/DRAM for Intel.

 

[hakim37]

I hope he's really just talking about packaging memory and not actually getting into RAM, NAND, or related businesses. The wording isn't clear.

Perhaps it's something SRAM+packaging related which would be lower risk than NAND/DRAM for Intel.

Intel hasn't shed light on any details on how it plans to execute this memory venture but as far as I'm aware both ZAM and XBM use back end of line processes where Intel is theoretically competitive rather than front end of line trench capacitors which require drilling techniques.

ZAM uses a 2T0C process so forgoes the capacitor entirely and uses a IGZO metal deposition to keep the charge stable. XBM uses BEOL shallow trenches.

 

[MKWVentures]

Stacking DRAM on CPU is not making memory. Apple does that 100M times a year. Intel will always do research on memory and if stacking works, they will use it.

Given Intels bad timing and losses on NAND and Optane and HMC, I think intel is kinda cursed on memory LOL.

Intel is always doing research in RAM and all memory ... I expect that to continue. I am still shocked at the press the ZAM memory project is getting as memory of the future.

Also Intel is not a top 5 user of HBM on its chips. I expect other companies will decide the next memory architecture far more than Intel.

 

[hakim37]

Stacking DRAM on CPU is not making memory. Apple does that 100M times a year. Intel will always do research on memory and if stacking works, they will use it.

Given Intels bad timing and losses on NAND and Optane and HMC, I think intel is kinda cursed on memory LOL.

Intel is always doing research in RAM and all memory ... I expect that to continue. I am still shocked at the press the ZAM memory project is getting as memory of the future.

Also Intel is not a top 5 user of HBM on its chips. I expect other companies will decide the next memory architecture far more than Intel.

Isn't this line of thinking just saying that Intel can't succeed here because historically they haven't been successful? Before they invented HBM SK Hynix was a dumpster of a company. The whole point of these ventures is to try find ways to shake up current market dynamics.

 

[MKWVentures]

Isn't this line of thinking just saying that Intel can't succeed here because historically they haven't been successful? Before they invented HBM SK Hynix was a dumpster of a company. The whole point of these ventures is to try find ways to shake up current market dynamics.

I am not saying they cannot be successful going forward in memory. Intel has very smart people who know a ton about memory. But they are not a volume HBM user today, and they are not making memory today.
They will do the research. How they become a relevant memory manufacturer is not clear. Also why they would do that is not clear .

IMO, Intel needs to regain market share in DC CPUs, become relevant in AI accelerators, try to get IFS to break even, and become a top 6 foundry in revenue.

All of those are difficult tasks. if they want to try memory again, fine. Memory is making tons of money so many companies have a plan to get a piece of the pie.

 

[hist78]

View attachment 5065

Intel has hinted at a return to the memory segment as CEO Lip-Bu says that memory is no longer a commodity business and holds tremendous innovation potential.

Intel Started As A Memory Business & Today's Crisis May Once Again See The Reopening of the DRAM Door At Its Foundries​

Intel, founded back in 1968, started as a semiconductor business, and the very first products that it rolled out were memory chips, starting with the 3101 SRAM and the 1103 DRAM.

Intel's previous venture in the memory space was its Optane products, which were based on the 3D XPoint architecture which was co-developed with Micron, but were discontinued in 2022 since the tech never picked up in the way Intel had hoped for, and competing technologies such as HBM and multi-layer 3D Stacked technologies were showing far better potential and cost/$.

However, four years after the discontinuation of Intel's last known memory technology, the blue team is once again hinting at a return to the memory business. There have been a few hints here and there, such as the recent recruitment drive in which Lip-Bu Tan has managed to hire Ex-CEO of SK Hynix, Seok-Hee Lee, as EVP of the Foundry business & advanced packaging technologies.

Not only that, the company has been making inroads in the memory segment silently with its partners, with upcoming technologies such as XBM and ZAM currently in the works.

Intel's past attempts at DRAM, such as HMC (Hybrid Memory Cube) and MCDRAM, faced various issues and never came to market, but with XBM, Intel is course-correcting its DRAM ambitions, and along with ZAM, the company may once again see a return to the DRAM segment, & this comes at a time when the entire memory segment is facing heightened shortages.



During the recent TechSurge: Deep Tech VC Podcast, Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan disclosed some of the details on the company's next venture in the memory segment. Lip-Bu says that there is a lot of demand for CPUs right now, and the company is looking into ways to build CPUs that meet the growing requirements of its customers. The semiconductor and chipmaker isn't just looking at building CPUs with new architectures, but is also working on embedding CPUs with stacked DRAM capabilities.

Lip-Bu goes on to say that a lot of the memory requirements needed today aren't there yet, so the company is working to innovate into this segment. The most crucial statement from Lip-Bu is that he personally didn't want to invest in memory since it was just a commodity business, but market dynamics have changed drastically with the growing AI demand. And now, memory isn't a commodity business anymore.

He teases that he has something in the works, but Intel is not ready to "unfold" it yet. Lip-Bu stresses that he always thinks of the short-term, mid-term, and long-term viability of such projects, and it looks like Intel is indeed planning to return to the memory business with innovative DRAM technologies.

As per the latest timeline, Intel's ZAM project is scheduled for 2029-2030, while XBM should be unveiled at the start of the next decade. Memory shortages will persist beyond 2030, as per the latest reports, as compute and memory demand continues to grow with multiple Gigawatt-scale "AI Factories" coming online in the years ahead.

If Intel does come back to the memory buisness, then its Foundry Services buisness will see an unprecdented boost, becoming one of the leading manufacturers of advanced semiconductors, memory solutions, and bleeding-edge packaging technologies, all under one roof.

Intel CEO Hints Chipzilla's Return To Making Memory, As He Teases "New Memory Architecture" & 3D Stacking To Tackle The DRAM Wall

Intel hints a return to the memory segment as CEO Lip-Bu says that memory is no longer just a commodity business & has many potential.

wccftech.com

The whole interview can be watched at:

IMO, it's a good conversation to understand Intel's CEO Li-Bu Tan's thoughts.

 

[hist78]

I am not saying they cannot be successful going forward in memory. Intel has very smart people who know a ton about memory. But they are not a volume HBM user today, and they are not making memory today.
They will do the research. How they become a relevant memory manufacturer is not clear. Also why they would do that is not clear .

IMO, Intel needs to regain market share in DC CPUs, become relevant in AI accelerators, try to get IFS to break even, and become a top 6 foundry in revenue.

All of those are difficult tasks. if they want to try memory again, fine. Memory is making tons of money so many companies have a plan to get a piece of the pie.

Intel needs to focus on the few businesses it already has, and exit any business where it cannot compete. There isn’t much time or money left for Intel to waste. It cannot keep expanding the battlefield and putting more stress on its already stretched resources.

From Pat Gelsinger to Lip‑Bu Tan, one thing has remained consistent: both have spent a significant amount of their time and attention raising or preserving cash to fund Intel’s projects and operations.

For Pat Gelsinger, that meant government subsidies, corporate bonds, the Semiconductor Co‑Investment Program (SCIP), Smart Capital, cost‑cutting, layoffs, and suspending dividends. For Lip‑Bu Tan, it included direct government investment, new equity investors (Nvidia, SoftBank), issuing new shares, and corporate bonds.

But Intel’s GAAP Free Cash Flow has been in the red since 2022. One of Intel’s biggest problems is that the cash generated from operations (Intel's core products and services) is significantly less than what it spends.

 

[hakim37]

Intel needs to focus on the few businesses it already has, and exit any business where it cannot compete. There isn’t much time or money left for Intel to waste. It cannot keep expanding the battlefield and putting more stress on its already stretched resources.

From Pat Gelsinger to Lip‑Bu Tan, one thing has remained consistent: both have spent a significant amount of their time and attention raising or preserving cash to fund Intel’s projects and operations.

For Pat Gelsinger, that meant government subsidies, corporate bonds, the Semiconductor Co‑Investment Program (SCIP), Smart Capital, cost‑cutting, layoffs, and suspending dividends. For Lip‑Bu Tan, it included direct government investment, new equity investors (Nvidia, SoftBank), issuing new shares, and corporate bonds.

But Intel’s GAAP Free Cash Flow has been in the red since 2022. One of Intel’s biggest problems is that the cash generated from operations (Intel's core products and services) is significantly less than what it spends.


View attachment 5069

I feel like this is unnecessarily dire given the movements in the last 6 months. Q2 FCF was +$4B once you remove the Apollo buy out which on a quarterly basis is up there in their best performances.

They're still behind on CPU and foundry but they've also made it clear that they're running at max capacity while scaling as fast as they can because demand is so high right now and that they think this will last for at least 12 quarters.

 

[hist78]

. Q2 FCF was +$4B once you remove the Apollo buy out which on a quarterly basis is up there in their best performances.

I think that if we exclude the Apollo JV share buyback, Intel’s Q2 2026 free cash flow (FCF) is at least –$0.7 billion or lower, not the +$4.5 billion that some sources (like Yahoo Finance) report. The reason is that Intel still has other cash outflows, such as non‑Apollo SCIP partner interests (like the Brookfield JV). Intel must pay these partner‑related cash commitments regardless of Apollo’s JV. Yahoo’s number isn’t wrong, but it isn’t thorough enough for analyzing Intel’s real cash position.


Here is the calculation summary:

Intel Free Cash Flow for Q2 226 (excluding Apollo JV buyback):
−$0.7B = $7.0B (Operating Cash Flow) − $7.7B (non‑Apollo capital burden/cash outflow)


Non‑Apollo capital burden:

−$7.7B = −$2.7−$4.5−$0.6+$0.1

PP&E CapEx: –$2.7B
Non‑Apollo partner flows: –$4.5B
Finance leases: –$0.6B
Government incentives: +$0.1B

Non‑Apollo partner flows: –$4.5B

How it was calculated:

Intel reports “Partner contributions, net” in the cash outflow of –$12.2B This number includes all partner‑related capital movements:

• Apollo buyback
• Smart Capital adjustments
• JV ownership changes
• Other partner flows

1. Apollo portion, Intel disclosed:
   
   • Apollo buyback cost = $14.2B
   • Debt (corporate bond) issued = $6.5B
   • Intel’s cash used $7.7B (exclude the bond issued) =$14.2B − $6.5B

Apollo related cash outflow (exclude the bond issued) = –$7.7B.

1. Subtract Apollo from the total partner contributions of $12.2B.

−$4.5B = −$12.2B−(−$7.7B)

1. 
   This –$4.5B represents all partner‑related cash outflows other than Apollo, such as Smart Capital and JV adjustments.
2. 
   Note: If the Apollo–Intel JV had remained in place, Intel would still have been required to make regular cash distributions to Apollo for its 49% ownership stake in the Ireland JV. In other words, without Apollo’s exit, Intel’s free cash flow would likely have been even worse than the –$0.7B figure we calculated.

 

[kevin01]

I am not saying they cannot be successful going forward in memory. Intel has very smart people who know a ton about memory. But they are not a volume HBM user today, and they are not making memory today.
They will do the research. How they become a relevant memory manufacturer is not clear. Also why they would do that is not clear .

IMO, Intel needs to regain market share in DC CPUs, become relevant in AI accelerators, try to get IFS to break even, and become a top 6 foundry in revenue.

All of those are difficult tasks. if they want to try memory again, fine. Memory is making tons of money so many companies have a plan to get a piece of the pie.

I read somewhere that the big three memory makers hold a ton of patents and are quite litigious. Is that why no other companies want to enter the memory business? I am sure capital isn't a barrier to entry nowadays—companies like SpaceX or Apple could easily afford to enter the market.

BTW, as much as I like Intel, I don't think it has a decent chance of becoming relevant in AI accelerators anytime soon — unless it makes a drastic breakthrough in key components of the AI compute stack, such as memory architecture or scale-up interconnect technologies.

 

[Xebec]

@hist78 I agree with you that Intel should not get distracted when their fundamental business has such... Massive opportunity for improvement. But - consider the memory situation going on right now is beginning to kill entire market segments, and makes others very chaotic.

The risk/reward ratio may be a lot different for a partial foray into some kind of memory if it helps Intel sell products in core businesses that may not be possible with very high ram/storage pricing.

 

[hist78]

I am sure capital isn't a barrier to entry nowadays—companies like SpaceX or Apple could easily afford to enter the market.

@hist78 I agree with you that Intel should not get distracted when their fundamental business has such... Massive opportunity for improvement. But - consider the memory situation going on right now is beginning to kill entire market segments, and makes others very chaotic.

The risk/reward ratio may be a lot different for a partial foray into some kind of memory if it helps Intel sell products in core businesses that may not be possible with very high ram/storage pricing.

Apple, SpaceX, Nvidia, TSMC, Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron can all raise enormous amounts of capital through operations, loans, and equity offerings, allowing them to invest heavily in their capital projects. Intel, however, is in a very different position. It is short on capital, short on free cash flow, short on cash generated from selling products and services, and already heavily in debt. This severely limits what Intel can do.

Unlike most companies (except Samsung and potentially SpaceX/Terafab in the future), Intel is an IDM. As an IDM, Intel must allocate precious CapEx across too many areas while competing against too many companies that already dominate those fields.

Among the top three memory makers (Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron) Intel has no realistic chance of competing with them in capital spending. Using Micron as an example, Micron not only spends its CapEx solely on memory manufacturing, but it also spends far more CapEx than Intel does. Micron’s most recent single quarterly net profit of $28.24 billion alone is s not far from the Intel's combined revenue of $29.71 billion from Q1 and Q2 results.

And in both memory production and profit, Samsung and SK Hynix are even larger than Micron.

Intel simply does not have the financial strength required to enter the memory manufacturing market in any meaningful way. Intel really needs to stay focused on the areas where it can compete.



All figures in US$ million

 

[Fred Chen]

ZAM uses a 2T0C process so forgoes the capacitor entirely and uses a IGZO metal deposition to keep the charge stable. XBM uses BEOL shallow trenches.

These sound like low-density approaches, more like embedded DRAM (e-DRAM).

 

[kevin01]

Apple, SpaceX, Nvidia, TSMC, Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron can all raise enormous amounts of capital through operations, loans, and equity offerings, allowing them to invest heavily in their capital projects. Intel, however, is in a very different position. It is short on capital, short on free cash flow, short on cash generated from selling products and services, and already heavily in debt. This severely limits what Intel can do.

Unlike most companies (except Samsung and potentially SpaceX/Terafab in the future), Intel is an IDM. As an IDM, Intel must allocate precious CapEx across too many areas while competing against too many companies that already dominate those fields.

Among the top three memory makers (Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron) Intel has no realistic chance of competing with them in capital spending. Using Micron as an example, Micron not only spends its CapEx solely on memory manufacturing, but it also spends far more CapEx than Intel does. Micron’s most recent single quarterly net profit of $28.24 billion alone is s not far from the Intel's combined revenue of $29.71 billion from Q1 and Q2 results.

And in both memory production and profit, Samsung and SK Hynix are even larger than Micron.

Intel simply does not have the financial strength required to enter the memory manufacturing market in any meaningful way. Intel really needs to stay focused on the areas where it can compete.



All figures in US$ million

View attachment 5071

I was not suggesting that Intel should enter the same memory manufacturing business as Micron or SK Hynix. I was merely curious about what prevents other deep-pocketed companies from doing so.

Intel, on the other hand, could do something more innovative. Who knows?

 

[hist78]

@hist78 I agree with you that Intel should not get distracted when their fundamental business has such... Massive opportunity for improvement. But - consider the memory situation going on right now is beginning to kill entire market segments, and makes others very chaotic.

The risk/reward ratio may be a lot different for a partial foray into some kind of memory if it helps Intel sell products in core businesses that may not be possible with very high ram/storage pricing.

Another problem is that if Intel reenters the memory manufacturing market, it would introduce even more contradictions and conflicts of interest into Intel’s IDM business model.

SK Hynix, Micron, and even Samsung are currently sending huge amounts of memory to TSMC for advanced packaging. Except for Samsung which has a foundry division that competes with TSMC, they are all happy to support TSMC’s requirements and specifications. This is because TSMC is a dedicated logic foundry that does not compete with them in the memory market. Their shared customers, such as Nvidia, AMD, Google, and Microsoft, are also can have more memory suppliers because they can source memory from all top three memory manufacturers.

If Intel enters the memory market again, especially for memory used in AI and high‑performance computing, should Intel Foundry give preference to Intel’s own memory and should Intel’s memory division give preference to Intel Foundry likewise? They should, because Intel is an IDM. Intel’s various divisions are supposed to collaborate to maximize Intel Corporation’s overall profit.

Or should Intel Foundry treat Intel’s memory division the same as an external supplier, demanding the lowest prices, the best payment terms, the most flexible volumes, and the fastest deliver time? And could Intel’s memory division prioritize external customers for external market consideration?

Would Intel Foundry’s customers worry that Intel memory might become the only certified or reliable option if they choose Intel Foundry services and Intel’s advanced packaging? Is it going to limit their options?

I do not believe the top three memory makers, Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron, would willingly endorse Intel’s memory standards. If they did, they would be helping Intel become a competitor to themselves, which directly conflicts with their own interests.

In the views of Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron, collaborating with TSMC and supporting their shared customers is a far more desirable approach than helping Intel become a competitor.

Intel already has enough difficult problems to solve. Does Intel really need to add more?

 

[hist78]

I was not suggesting that Intel should enter the same memory manufacturing business as Micron or SK Hynix. I was merely curious about what prevents other deep-pocketed companies from doing so.

Intel, on the other hand, could do something more innovative. Who knows?

Intel may have some innovative ways to fabricate or stack certain types of memory around compute modules/cores. However, Intel’s financial situation does not give it the strength to compete with memory manufacturers like Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron, plus TSMC, in addition to many other existing problems and competitors at the same time.

If Intel’s innovative new memory approaches truly make sense, TSMC, supported by SK Hynix, Micron, and even Samsung, would develop competing technology. Does Intel have enough financial strength and CapEx capacity to compete against all of them? I tend to think no.

Intel has tried several times to enter the memory manufacturing market but eventually exited each of them. All of those unpleasant reasons behind those exits still exist today.

 

[hakim37]

These sound like low-density approaches, more like embedded DRAM (e-DRAM).

I'm less sure about XBM but ZAM is low density on the wafer but is then thinned out and stacked much higher than HBM (they're targeting 50x making) it more memory dense overall.