Intel has limited customer commitments for latest chip manufacturing tech, CFO say

[hist78]

"May 13 (Reuters) - The volume of processors Intel (INTC.O), is set to produce for external customers using its upcoming manufacturing technology is currently "not significant", finance chief David Zinsner said on Tuesday.

Committed volumes, or the amount of external customers' chips set to be produced by Intel using upcoming manufacturing tech, is presently not significant, Zinsner said at J.P. Morgan's Global Technology, Media and Communications conference being held in Boston, Massachusetts.

"We get test chips, and then some customers fall out of the test chips... So committed volume is not significant right now, for sure," Zinsner said."

https://www.reuters.com/business/intel-has-limited-customer-commitments-latest-chip-manufacturing-tech-cfo-says-2025-05-13/

 

[MKWVentures]

I always liked DZ... he keeps it real.

He is 100% correct.

 

[XYang2023]

They also do not need many customers.

 

[fansink]

"We get test chips, and then some customers fall out of the test chips... So committed volume is not significant right now, for sure," Zinsner said."

"So committed volume is not significant right now, for sure"

Code for....

7 short horn blasts followed by 1 long blast

Then, "All passengers and crew proceed to your assigned muster stations...This is not a drill"

 

[Xebec]

Did Microsoft back out of using 18A?

 

[fansink]

Did Microsoft back out of using 18A?

Everyone knew it would've been a token order at best.

If Microsoft is out, I'd put the fabless clock at 23:57

 

[hist78]

Did Microsoft back out of using 18A?

In terms of volume, potential server or AI accelerator orders placed by Microsoft or Amazon at Intel Foundry likely won’t be significant.

Assume Microsoft needs Intel Foundry to manufacture one million units per year of a particular in-house designed server CPU, and assume a 12-inch wafer yields 300 units of that CPU:


1,000,000 CPU units / 300 (units per wafer) = 3,333 wafers


3,333 wafers / 12 months = ~278 wafers per month


You can plug in your own assumptions, but you'll probably reach the same conclusion: the volume is not significant.

 

[fansink]

In terms of volume, potential server or AI accelerator orders placed by Microsoft or Amazon at Intel Foundry likely won’t be significant.

Assume Microsoft needs Intel Foundry to manufacture one million units per year of a particular in-house designed server CPU, and assume a 12-inch wafer yields 300 units of that CPU:


1,000,000 CPU units / 300 (units per wafer) = 3,333 wafers


3,333 wafers / 12 months = ~278 wafers per month


You can plug in your own assumptions, but you'll probably reach the same conclusion: the volume is not significant.

Translation...

18a is in serious trouble, everything after is suspect

Tan didn't wait til he heard the Death Knell , he’d’ve started long term fabless negotiations with TSMC, before he bacame CEO.

 

[DougDD]

"May 13 (Reuters) - The volume of processors Intel (INTC.O), is set to produce for external customers using its upcoming manufacturing technology is currently "not significant", finance chief David Zinsner said on Tuesday.

Committed volumes, or the amount of external customers' chips set to be produced by Intel using upcoming manufacturing tech, is presently not significant, Zinsner said at J.P. Morgan's Global Technology, Media and Communications conference being held in Boston, Massachusetts.

"We get test chips, and then some customers fall out of the test chips... So committed volume is not significant right now, for sure," Zinsner said."

https://www.reuters.com/business/intel-has-limited-customer-commitments-latest-chip-manufacturing-tech-cfo-says-2025-05-13/

Zinsner is "highly confident" that foundry will breakeven in 2027. That's the most important message from the
JP Morgan conference the other day. Part of that will be due to 18A, but there's a lot more to it than that, like
advanced packaging, etc.:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1922544338950644030

If the staid and conservative Zinsner is "highly confident" in something, it'll happen.
And that's particularly after the new marching orders from Lip-Bu Tan to NOT state
anything in advance that Intel cannot do.

 

[tooLongInEDA]

Zinsner is "highly confident" that foundry will breakeven in 2027. That's the most important message from the
JP Morgan conference the other day. Part of that will be due to 18A, but there's a lot more to it than that, like
advanced packaging, etc.:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1922544338950644030

If the staid and conservative Zinsner is "highly confident" in something, it'll happen.
And that's particularly after the new marching orders from Lip-Bu Tan to NOT state
anything in advance that Intel cannot do.

Hold on a moment - isn't this the same David Zinsner who's been CFO at Intel for almost 3.5 years during the period where they spectacularly missed their forecasts on a consistent basis ? Why should I believe he's "staid and conservative" and likely to change this record ? Other than the fact that Lip-Bu Tan is now in charge and will likely run a tighter ship.

 

[DougDD]

I listened to a lot of those conference calls. Intel has been improving as to meeting and beating
guidance in the more recent past. I think that Zinsner was a little hamstrung by Gelsinger. In
one call he seemed to be a little exasperated as to some analysts stating "Pat said this" and "Pat
said that." Zinsner eventually responded - "Pat says a lot of things." I interpreted that as Zinsner
being frustrated with Pat's overpromising and underdelivering. Zinsner and Lip-Bu seem to be
more aligned.

 

[tooLongInEDA]

I listened to a lot of those conference calls. Intel has been improving as to meeting and beating
guidance in the more recent past. I think that Zinsner was a little hamstrung by Gelsinger. In
one call he seemed to be a little exasperated as to some analysts stating "Pat said this" and "Pat
said that." Zinsner eventually responded - "Pat says a lot of things." I interpreted that as Zinsner
being frustrated with Pat's overpromising and underdelivering. Zinsner and Lip-Bu seem to be
more aligned.

Fair comment. But, if true, then we have to face the fact that Zinsner saw the ship heading for the iceberg for 3.5 years and did very little to prevent that. Lip-Bu at least resigned. Was Pat Gelsinger really so powerful he couldn't be challenged earlier ? Sure, Pat had a big ego (and mouth), but he never seemed like a dictator - and nor, despite everything that's happened and we've learnt since, have I heard anyone say they disliked Pat or couldn't work with him (which is to his credit in my view).