There is a lot of truth in this article but also some fiction. It is hard to believe that so many people were involved in writing it:
Reporting by Jeffrey Dastin, Max Cherney and Stephen Nellis in San Francisco, Dawn Chmielewski in Los Angeles, and Fanny Potkin in Singapore; additional reporting by Milana Vinn in New York and Noel Randewich in San Francisco; Editing by Kenneth Li and Claudia Parsons
I remember having too many drinks with some Intel people at a GSA event after they signed the TSMC contract. They were shocked at the prepay and I can assure you the Intel discount was not as deep as Apple. Intel did renegotiate down the contract and the pricing did go up but it was not list price. That is ridiculous.
Pat did insult TSMC on multiple occasions and Morris Chang did take note of it but more importantly CC Wei took it personally and CC is not one to forgive and forget. Pat's comments were a great motivator for TSMC to be an even stronger competitor. I have also noticed more complimentary langue towards TSMC from Nvidia and other top TSMC customers. That has not always been the case. CC Wei has changed the competitive culture of TSMC and Pat G is one of the reasons.
Even worse, Pat's comment that "Taiwan is not a safe place" insulted an entire country. Do you really think MediaTek and other Taiwan companies are going to use Intel Foundry after that?
"Customers have little incentive to bet on Intel’s manufacturing when TSMC continues to serve them well, said Goldman Sachs analyst Toshiya Hari. “If you care about performance today, tomorrow, next year, over the next couple of years, you are not making that bet,” Hari said."
This is an understatement. As I have said before, you can fly first class on EVA Airlines with TSMC or middle seat coach on Spirit Airlines with Intel Foundry. Hopefully that will change but to facilitate that change Pat needs to own the problem and stop setting unrealistic expectations. Intel Foundry will never compete head-to-head with TSMC. It is time for an Intel Foundry pivot to something that can actually be achieved.
"Still, Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo said in September U.S. manufacturing represents a supply-chain “insurance policy” that major chip designers would pay for. “They should want U.S.-made leading-edge chips,” she said."
Of course US customers want a US based semiconductor supply chain. Every country wants that. US customers would always prefer US made products but our shelves are still filled with products made by China. Cost is everything especially in these inflationary times. What an ignorant thing to say.
I also found it ignorant for Pat G to complain about not getting CHIPs Act money yet. Intel has a performance based contract with the DOC. If they are not getting money then they are not performing, simple as that. Is TSMC complaining? How about Samsung? Has any other company complained? Read the contract Pat.
It will be interesting to compare AMD's Q3 numbers versus Intel's. This could be the undoing of Pat G and his "AMD is in the rearview mirror" mentality.
"A recent planning document produced by an Intel supplier indicates delays, however. The document, seen by Reuters, noted the supplier is still waiting to receive another digital design kit it needs to push ahead. It also lacked access to Intel factories, a person with knowledge of the situation said. Customers have little prospect of making chips in high volume with the 18A process until 2026, two people said."
They are talking about the process design kit (PDK). 9 people were involved in the article and not one knows what a PDK is?
Intel said it expects to reclaim leadership in chip-manufacturing processes in 2025 by launching 18A.Gelsinger said in mid-September Intel had a “lot of work ahead,” but he continues to project confidence in his turnaround plan. “I'm very confident that we're going to pull it off,” Gelsinger told Reuters in August. “Three years in, yeah. This one's going to happen, baby.”
This is another ignorant statement. Define leadership in chip-manufacturing processes? Is that performance? Power? Density? Yield? Or is it the ability for a foundry customer to actually use the process? TSMC will dominate the foundry business once again with N2 and what is Pat going to say when he claims the "leading chip-manufacturing process" with no leading chip manufacturing customers?
The AMD vs Intel saga took an interesting turn when AMD switched to TSMC and Intel started using the same TSMC N3 process. From what I have heard thus far AMD is beating Intel in all regards which means it is not just process but the ability to design to it and more importantly the relationship between design and manufacturing. AMD has been working closely with TSMC for years on design co optimization and packaging while Intel is just starting. And how close is Intel with TSMC? Not as close as AMD, baby.
Just my opinion of course.
