Hacker News Reader

Comment by mhh__ | Hacker News Reader

> becoming a big player

Are you saying they aren't a big player now?

Gartner puts them at Nr. 2 in 2021 after Samsung Electronics. However it should be noted that for Intel this seems to include total Revenue while for others it seems to be just their pure semiconductor revenue. If Intel were to sell their chip manufacturing as a subsidiary to themselves at market price, that subsidiary probably would be way further down the list.

Wouldn't this require them to start making SOCs for mobile phones?

In other words producing for chip designers such as Apple, Qualcomm, or Samsung.

US-based TSMC.

They have a good chance of succeeding. They are likely to get a lot of government help.

They’ll probably start with older systems, as there’s already a huge need for these, and they have a gazillion existing fabs. It won’t compete with their current lines, and means they don’t need to mothball their legacy fabs.

> They are likely to get a lot of government help.

Indeed -- the not so subtle subtext of their pitch is "China, eh? Have fun with that.". So a pitch based on the idea that it's strategically important to bring that chip manufacturing "home".

Which is why they picked Israel. /s

> Which is why they picked Israel.

Well, there's a lot of history in that relationship.

Israel really does have some of the finest scientists and engineers in the world -partly thanks to the antisemitism of a lot of other nations.

I have a feeling that Israel (and Iran) have the potential to completely transform the Mideast, but all that fighting is keeping that from happening. If they ever started to work in cooperation with some of their neighbors, we'd see a new power bloc emerge.

If they ever actually have a real, lasting peace, out there, the rest of the world had better hang on, as every single one of those nations would love to not have to be dependent on some superpower.

> I have a feeling that Israel (and Iran) have the potential to completely transform the Mideast, but all that fighting is keeping that from happening. If they ever started to work in cooperation with some of their neighbors, we'd see a new power bloc emerge.

That's exactly what is happening. The emerging power block in the Middle East is Israel+Arab States vs Iran with Turkey playing its own game.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Accords

An Ayatollah free Iran has huge potential, very true. There are reasons for cautious optimism. None of this has anything to do with Intel/Tower however.

The Intel presence in Israel goes back generations and Tower is a cheap and obvious pickup for them.

>Well, there's a lot of history in that relationship.

The Israel branch basically saved Intel when NetBurst failed completely - at the time Intel was behind as much as today.

Yes. I guess what I meant is that there could be an element of the strategic in the choice, particularly for a business that seeks government money in the near future if the US House of Representatives does swing back to GOP control.

Though Tower Semi are clearly enormously capable, so it's hardly a bad acquisition, even absent seeking access to a pot of money with a strategic aspect to it.

Qualcomm is a customer for IFS: https://www.anandtech.com/show/16846/intels-first-highprofil...

Samsung has their own fabs, and I suspect Apple will manufacture with whoever has the most advanced process (so, TSMC for the next couple years at least).

Intel Foundry Services (IFS) is marketing themselves as the only fab capable of producing all three of x86, Arm, and RISC-V.

Back when Intel had a process advantage over everybody else I guess it made strategic sense for them to not let others use their process. Now when that process lead is gone, refusing to fab chips for non-x86 ISA's just means those customers will go elsewhere.

> Intel Foundry Services (IFS) is marketing themselves as the only fab capable of producing all three of x86, Arm, and RISC-V.

Capable? From the fab point of view, all three of those are just rectangles.

I mean, same rectangles won't work for different foundries. It is saying we have these IP cores tested and working with the process.

This, and also the licensing question. Intel has said they will license x86 cores for use in 3rd party SoC's/chiplets, but maybe only if you use IFS.

That sounds a lot like a tying arrangement, which could be unlawful under US anti-trust laws.

> Intel Foundry Services (IFS) is marketing themselves as the only fab capable of producing all three of x86, Arm, and RISC-V.

TSMC is producing all of these. Not like the architecture matters from a foundry POV anyways.

TSMC is producing some x86 cpu's for Intel. I think what they're saying here is that they will license x86 cores for integrating into 3rd party SoC's/chiplets, but only if you use IFS.

As far as I'm aware, all current Intel x86 CPUs are Intel fab-only, although https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/news/intel-to-outsource-some... suggests that TSMC x86 CPUs might come out in 2023.

They're also producing all x86 CPUs for AMD.

Yes [1]? The argument is about whether Intel refuses to license their processor designs to 3rd parties to be fabbed in any random fab.

[1] Evidently the x86 cross licensing deals between AMD and Intel doesn't preclude AMD from using 3rd party fabs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com