Pat Gelsinger — Intel Foundry aims to build chips for all (including AMD's Lisa Su)

M

Marees

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 28, 2018
Messages
2,098
Wasn't he the same one who declared that AMD is firmly in their rear view mirror 🤔

Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger: I hope to build chips for Lisa Su and AMD​


there are Intel products and Intel foundry, There's a clean line between those, and as I said on the last earnings call, we'll have a setup separate legal entity for Intel foundry this year, " Gelsinger responded."We'll start posting separate financials associated with that going forward. And the foundry team's objective is simple: Fill. The. Fabs. Deliver to the broadest set of customers on the planet."

"We hope that that includes Jensen (Nvidia), Christiano (Qualcomm), and Sundar (Google), and you heard today it includes Satya (Microsoft), and I even hope that includes Lisa (AMD) going forward.

https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-com...tm_campaign=socialflow&utm_source=twitter.com
 
In other news:

Intel will be producing custom chips, designed by Microsoft for Microsoft, as part of a deal that Intel says is worth more than $15 billion. Intel announced the partnership during its Intel Foundry event today. Although neither company specified what the chips would be used for, Bloomberg noted today that Microsoft has been planning in-house designs for both processors and AI accelerators.
“We are in the midst of a very exciting platform shift that will fundamentally transform productivity for every individual organization and the entire industry,” said Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella in the official press release.
The chips will use Intel’s 18A process, which has been a big part of its road map since the company brought CEO Pat Gelsinger back to turn things around. The company is counting on its chip foundry services to put it back on top of the chipmaking world, and it seems that Microsoft will be the first major customer for this project.

https://www.theverge.com/2024/2/21/24079336/microsoft-intel-chip-partnership-foundry-tsmc
 
More news on Intel Foundry

An Intel spokesman offered Fierce the following explanation: "Intel and Arm reaffirmed their ongoing collaboration for foundry customers, with Intel unveiling an 'Emerging Business Initiative' which showcases a collaboration with Arm to provide cutting edge foundry services for arm-based System-on-Chips. This initiative presents an exciting opportunity for arm and Intel to support startups in developing Arm-based technology, offering essential IP, manufacturing support and financial assistance to foster innovation and growth.”

Arm explained the onstage interchange a little differently, saying Haas was referring to an announcement of Arm’s Neoverse Compute Subsystem about enabling AI infrastructure on Arm.

Jack Gold, founder and chief analyst at J. Gold Associates, said the Intel-Arm collaboration is symbiotic. For Intel, it means a “very high volume potential since Arm is the core tech for billions of chips and Intel would like to capture some of that foundry business. For Arm, it provides an alternative foundry to TSMC that can give some of its licensees another option to have chips made. If the volumes increase…Arm makes more license fees. If Intel gets some of that business, it makes money by filling its foundry and potentially its packaging business as well.”

https://www.fierceelectronics.com/analog/arm-and-intel-foundry-collaborate-building-past-work
 
They can still be in the rear view mirror while Intel makes their chips.

Money is king.

Edit: I should mention, before my inbox is flooded like that time, that I'm not saying Intel is ahead or AMD is behind, I'm simply saying that it would be stupid for Intel to not make their chips, no matter where they are in comparison to Intel themselves.
 
Last edited:
Foundries be foundering....wait...yeah, that works, too.

Freaking English.
 
I do wish Intel to do well this time. I do not want to see TSMC being only game in town when it comes to leading edge nodes and Samsung has not been providing good competition for years.
 
JasonLD said:
I do wish Intel to do well this time. I do not want to see TSMC being only game in town when it comes to leading edge nodes and Samsung has not been providing good competition for years.
Click to expand...
Especailly with the risk that "unification" of Taiwan with China may happen at some point in time.
 
philb2 said:
Especailly with the risk that "unification" of Taiwan with China may happen at some point in time.
Click to expand...
Exactly this, the current geopolitical situation is driving bleeding edge technology as much as AI is at this point in time.
From STH:

TEMP.png
 
Red Falcon said:
Exactly this, the current geopolitical situation is driving bleeding edge technology as much as AI is at this point in time.
From STH:

View attachment 637120
Click to expand...
The US has sunk craploads of cash into the Chinese manufacturing sector over the past few decades in an attempt to buy their favor, it hasn't exactly panned out. Now they have to walk it back, if they keep dropping the kind of numbers we see in these CHIPS acts then it might only take another decade or 2 to get there.
 
Lakados said:
The US has sunk craploads of cash into the Chinese manufacturing sector over the past few decades in an attempt to buy their favor, it hasn't exactly panned out. Now they have to walk it back, if they keep dropping the kind of numbers we see in these CHIPS acts then it might only take another decade or 2 to get there.
Click to expand...
Or, the US passes :"Buy American" laws for IT equipment, and to hell with all the howling protests from the Chinese Communist Party
 
philb2 said:
Or, the US passes :"Buy American" laws for IT equipment, and to hell with all the howling protests from the Chinese Communist Party
Click to expand...
They could pass it... But the USA doesn't have the infrastructure to support it, it would require spinning up a multi billion dollar manufacturing industry from scratch, then competing globally with it. Against Mexico, which does have the infrastructure, because they have been moving the tech manufacturing there from China for the past 10 years or so.
 
Was expecting something big when this slide rolled out.

1708667496947.png


No big earthshaking IF customer announcement. If they had Xbox, it would have been front and center, from a PR exposure standpoint alone.

This seemed to be a very interesting way of saying, "We got a couple of contracts, and those might actually turn into something else one day."

1708667595467.png


Makes you really wonder what a "lifetime" is. To me...well....anyway.

Hope our DOD gets some of those billions back.
 
FrgMstr said:
Was expecting something big when this slide rolled out.

View attachment 637142

No big earthshaking IF customer announcement. If they had Xbox, it would have been front and center, from a PR exposure standpoint alone.

This seemed to be a very interesting way of saying, "We got a couple of contracts, and those might actually turn into something else one day."

View attachment 637143

Makes you really wonder what a "lifetime" is. To me...well....anyway.

Hope our DOD gets some of those billions back.
Click to expand...
Gotta start somewhere? TSMC has a proven track record of success, and Intel right now doesn't.
Nobody is going to give up time at TSMC 3 for Intel's new test bed without a lot of assurances, so Intel's only hope is to get some whales who have a baby or 2 they watch. A few Nvidia side projects here, a Microsoft internal product there, and maybe an Amazon side hustle when the investors are distracted. But nothing front and center that's for sure, too risky with too much money at stake and too little to show for it, Intel is known for a lot of really awesome things in the industry but their leading-edge fabs aren't exactly one of them, well they are known for them just not for reasons they want them to be known for.

But their "Billion Dollar Rows" as they are calling them have to count for something, even a terrible carpenter can do some decent work with enough tools covering their behind.
 
Last edited:
Lakados said:
But nothing front and center that's for sure, too risky with too much money at stake and too little to show for it, Intel is known for a lot of really awesome things in the industry but their leading-edge fabs aren't exactly one of them, well they are known for them just not for reasons they want them to be known for.
Click to expand...
I agree with the entire post you made above, but quoted this section because it is 100% the most important. They talk about "customer momentum" and then they bring on an Intel employee? I had heard they had drawn blanks on all the big names, but when I saw the slide, I was hoping here is our "Surprise motherfuckers!" moment, then nothing. Certainly we all saw the Intel/Xbox thing in the "news" in the last weeks. I was told that Intel Foundry went at Microsoft with a BELOW COST contract and still could not get them on board. Anyone that gets on board with Intel right now will demand coverages for shortcomings in terms of yield, and yield is everything. That is a huge expense to carry to your stockholders. (Now that Intel and IF are two separate entities, how does that work with stock? Dunno, never been stock guy, stay far from it....)

I think the the failed acquisition of of Tower Semi may have hurt IF beyond "repair," at least in the short term (6 to 10 years.)

Personally, I truly want IF to succeed. I think it is a good thing for the USA and the world. But this is starting to feel like a Global Foundries vibe. I have a lot of good contacts in the manufacturing side of wafers, and I am getting zero good feelings from them on IF. I just don't know. The CapEx there is huge, and even with the CHIPS act kicking them billions, well let me just say, have you bought a sub-4nm EUV lithography machine lately? A few billion does not go far, then you have to have the actual boots on the ground support inside those fabs. Not a lot of people in that sector.

A fun aside from 12 years ago. A couple vids looking at GloFo. Once you understand the scale of the physical infrastructure, the investment becomes evident, and then you have to do it RIGHT.


View: https://youtu.be/Izea72ojj3s


View: https://youtu.be/-SCskPV00kU
 
FrgMstr said:
I agree with the entire post you made above, but quoted this section because it is 100% the most important. They talk about "customer momentum" and then they bring on an Intel employee? I had heard they had drawn blanks on all the big names, but when I saw the slide, I was hoping here is our "Surprise motherfuckers!" moment, then nothing. Certainly we all saw the Intel/Xbox thing in the "news" in the last weeks. I was told that Intel Foundry went at Microsoft with a BELOW COST contract and still could not get them on board. Anyone that gets on board with Intel right now will demand coverages for shortcomings in terms of yield, and yield is everything. That is a huge expense to carry to your stockholders. (Now that Intel and IF are two separate entities, how does that work with stock? Dunno, never been stock guy, stay far from it....)

I think the the failed acquisition of of Tower Semi may have hurt IF beyond "repair," at least in the short term (6 to 10 years.)

Personally, I truly want IF to succeed. I think it is a good thing for the USA and the world. But this is starting to feel like a Global Foundries vibe. I have a lot of good contacts in the manufacturing side of wafers, and I am getting zero good feelings from them on IF. I just don't know. The CapEx there is huge, and even with the CHIPS act kicking them billions, well let me just say, have you bought a sub-4nm EUV lithography machine lately? A few billion does not go far, then you have to have the actual boots on the ground support inside those fabs. Not a lot of people in that sector.

A fun aside from 12 years ago. A couple vids looking at GloFo. Once you understand the scale of the physical infrastructure, the investment becomes evident, and then you have to do it RIGHT.


View: https://youtu.be/Izea72ojj3s


View: https://youtu.be/-SCskPV00kU
Click to expand...

Even with a below-cost contract, there are too many risks, and Microsoft has to play its gaming division absurdly safe for the next few years.
With the current gaming climate, Microsoft’s investors are already going to be asking a lot of tough questions about the Activision/Blizzard purchase and how they plan to make that profitable in the next few years, and I don't think Microsoft has an answer for them that they will like.
Even if Intel could provide cheaper silicon of similar or greater performance it is a huge unknown variable, that will take time, money, and effort to build a software ecosystem around and get developers on board.
AMD on the other hand is offering a set of known variables with existing tools that developers already know and have prepared for, and that is a huge cost and time offset that Intel can't currently match.
Microsoft entertaining Intel for the XBox silicon at this stage would be a posturing move as leverage with AMD for more favorable terms, which probably succeeded to some degree. It's not like the Intel APU options are bad if anything they are quite impressive, but there are just too many cost unknowns for Microsoft to realistically take that option while a safe bet exists.

I think the IF will succeed, but it will be a slow start they have to prove their newest nodes work with their first-party products while they win over contracts for older processes to cover their losses, because this is not going to have a fast turn around time and Investors are not going to like it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top