4 ms·

why would you believe Intel can actually catch up to the far-ahead competition? TSMC aren't standing still, they obviously aren't stupid and they have shitload

why would you believe Intel can actually catch up to the far-ahead competition? TSMC aren't standing still, they obviously aren't stupid and they have shitloads of money. Intel probably scores zero on those 3 points.

hardware2win 3y ago
The far ahead argument is something I read weekly on investing boards Some claim tsmc is decade ahead, other say it is 3 to 5 years, etc, etc. From my understanding both are in a race that will be decided in next 10-14 months and when it comes to the future, Intel has priority on next gen EUV (HighNA), so there is a chance Various medias report that Intel has 1-2 year advantage due on tech like PowerVia So, it is not that clear how far ahead TSMC is _____ >TSMC isnt stupid Yes, they arent, so arent their customers who want geo diversified supply chain and risk amortization (Earthquake? War? Drought?) Also they will have leverage when negotiating deals with TSMC
- sanxiyn 3y ago
  I am somewhat skeptical about high-NA EUV. There are reasons why Intel got priority on that: ASML marketing materials themselves imply high-NA EUV is worse than low-NA EUV in terms of cost. https://www.semianalysis.com/p/asml-dilemma-high-na-euv-is-worse https://www.semianalysis.com/p/asml-dilemma-high-na-euv-is-w...
- j_walter 3y ago
  > Also they will have leverage when negotiating deals with TSMC Except Intel hasn't talked about price at all...they have a completely different cost structure that isn't competitive at all. Think about AMD gross margin vs. Intel's gross margin. AMD has similar...all while giving TSMC 50%+ gross margin also. Now tell me Intel's cost will be similar to TSMC...
  - Wytwwww 3y ago
    Their foundry business is a tiny fraction of their revenue at this point and I'm not sure their overall gross margin is particularly relevant here (also Intel has lower gross margins than AMD or TSMC these days?)
    - j_walter 3y ago
      If they can't make good gross margin when making their own products that are higher priced (than similar AMD products)...how are they going to do it when they have to support an end customer that expects high gross margins? Intel GM ~46% AMD GM ~46% TSMC GM ~53%
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
yborg 3y ago
As they always say in investing, "Past performance is no guarantee of future results." It wasn't that long ago that Intel was dominating and it looked like nobody would ever dislodge them. Once the top management that drove a company to success retire, they are almost guaranteed to be replaced by people whose main skill set was political navigating in a large bureaucracy and then the decline begins.
- torginus 3y ago
  In this case it does make sense for Intel to catch up - right now NVIDIA is a quasi-monopoly in the AI space due to the stranglehold on CUDA - and all competitors are working day and night to close the gap in the toolchain. I think it's a plausible conservative prediction that Intel will close the gap somewhat and will have a significant (but not dominant) slice of the pie.
- Wytwwww 3y ago
  To be fair their stock wasn't necessarily doing that great at all (relative to AMD , let alone Nvidia over the last few years) when they were completely dominated the market. Even with all dividends included their stock is worth about as much as back in 2000 (which they only managed to surpass in 2019/2020)), and if they are excluded they are yet to surpass their dot.com peak...
j_walter 3y ago
Even if they can catch up with the technology...can they high volume manufacture it? Can they manufacture it at a similar price point as TSMC? All signs point to No. They have the talent to have competing tech...but they have shown time and time again that they can't do high volume manufacturing or do it at a price that also allows their customers to have high gross margins (like AMD, NVIDIA, etc).
- tester756 3y ago
  >but they have shown time and time again that they can't do high volume manufacturing What do you mean with that?
  - j_walter 3y ago
    There is a big difference in making a technology work and making a lot of high yielding wafers with it. I'm not sure Intel 7nm ever got to high volume manufacturing...there were constant delays and yield issues. Read the 3rd article I have below to show how bad it is. Plans to implement SR in 2021, but yields were crap and mass production was put out to 1H23. Intel and TSMC use very different terminology for when things are ready...manufacturing ready (Intel) is being assumed to be the same as high volume manufacturing (TSMC), but they are not the same at all. TSMC is doing 2nm risk production in Q4 this year, we will see what Intel ends up doing... Example(s): https://www.theverge.com/22597713/intel-7nm-delay-summer-2020-apple-arm-switch-roadmap-gelsinger-ceo https://www.theverge.com/22597713/intel-7nm-delay-summer-202... https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-sorry-but-our-7nm-chips-will-be-delayed-to-2022-2023 https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-sorry-but-our-7nm-chips-wil... https://www.eenewseurope.com/en/poor-yield-at-intel-delays-server-processors-says-trendforce/ https://www.eenewseurope.com/en/poor-yield-at-intel-delays-s...
ryukoposting 3y ago
In 2015, why would anyone have believed AMD could catch up to Intel? Let's not forget that the Bulldozer/Excavator days are not that long ago, and those chips were even less competitive in 2011-2016 than Intel's current offerings are in 2024. I think we can confidently say that bigger architectural gaps have been closed before. Comparing Intel to other fabs, it's uglier, sure. The Krzanich years were characterized by over-promising and under-delivering, and Intel isn't far enough removed from that period for trust to be rebuilt. That said, they have shrunk the process gap over the last couple years, even if the gap isn't entirely closed. Given the firehose of government money being directed at domestic manufacturing right now, I assume Intel is doing fine on the "shitloads of money" front. I don't think Intel is a favorite to be the world's process leader by 2025, but it's reasonable to think they could get close. I don't think the doom-and-gloom perspective is well-founded at all.

hardware2win 3y ago

The far ahead argument is something I read weekly on investing boards Some claim tsmc is decade ahead, other say it is 3 to 5 years, etc, etc. From my understanding both are in a race that will be decided in next 10-14 months and when it comes to the future, Intel has priority on next gen EUV (HighNA), so there is a chance Various medias report that Intel has 1-2 year advantage due on tech like PowerVia So, it is not that clear how far ahead TSMC is _____ >TSMC isnt stupid Yes, they arent, so arent their customers who want geo diversified supply chain and risk amortization (Earthquake? War? Drought?) Also they will have leverage when negotiating deals with TSMC

sanxiyn 3y ago
I am somewhat skeptical about high-NA EUV. There are reasons why Intel got priority on that: ASML marketing materials themselves imply high-NA EUV is worse than low-NA EUV in terms of cost. https://www.semianalysis.com/p/asml-dilemma-high-na-euv-is-worse https://www.semianalysis.com/p/asml-dilemma-high-na-euv-is-w...
j_walter 3y ago
> Also they will have leverage when negotiating deals with TSMC Except Intel hasn't talked about price at all...they have a completely different cost structure that isn't competitive at all. Think about AMD gross margin vs. Intel's gross margin. AMD has similar...all while giving TSMC 50%+ gross margin also. Now tell me Intel's cost will be similar to TSMC...
- Wytwwww 3y ago
  Their foundry business is a tiny fraction of their revenue at this point and I'm not sure their overall gross margin is particularly relevant here (also Intel has lower gross margins than AMD or TSMC these days?)
  - j_walter 3y ago
    If they can't make good gross margin when making their own products that are higher priced (than similar AMD products)...how are they going to do it when they have to support an end customer that expects high gross margins? Intel GM ~46% AMD GM ~46% TSMC GM ~53%
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

yborg 3y ago

As they always say in investing, "Past performance is no guarantee of future results." It wasn't that long ago that Intel was dominating and it looked like nobody would ever dislodge them. Once the top management that drove a company to success retire, they are almost guaranteed to be replaced by people whose main skill set was political navigating in a large bureaucracy and then the decline begins.

torginus 3y ago
In this case it does make sense for Intel to catch up - right now NVIDIA is a quasi-monopoly in the AI space due to the stranglehold on CUDA - and all competitors are working day and night to close the gap in the toolchain. I think it's a plausible conservative prediction that Intel will close the gap somewhat and will have a significant (but not dominant) slice of the pie.
Wytwwww 3y ago
To be fair their stock wasn't necessarily doing that great at all (relative to AMD , let alone Nvidia over the last few years) when they were completely dominated the market. Even with all dividends included their stock is worth about as much as back in 2000 (which they only managed to surpass in 2019/2020)), and if they are excluded they are yet to surpass their dot.com peak...

j_walter 3y ago

Even if they can catch up with the technology...can they high volume manufacture it? Can they manufacture it at a similar price point as TSMC? All signs point to No. They have the talent to have competing tech...but they have shown time and time again that they can't do high volume manufacturing or do it at a price that also allows their customers to have high gross margins (like AMD, NVIDIA, etc).

tester756 3y ago
>but they have shown time and time again that they can't do high volume manufacturing What do you mean with that?
- j_walter 3y ago
  There is a big difference in making a technology work and making a lot of high yielding wafers with it. I'm not sure Intel 7nm ever got to high volume manufacturing...there were constant delays and yield issues. Read the 3rd article I have below to show how bad it is. Plans to implement SR in 2021, but yields were crap and mass production was put out to 1H23. Intel and TSMC use very different terminology for when things are ready...manufacturing ready (Intel) is being assumed to be the same as high volume manufacturing (TSMC), but they are not the same at all. TSMC is doing 2nm risk production in Q4 this year, we will see what Intel ends up doing... Example(s): https://www.theverge.com/22597713/intel-7nm-delay-summer-2020-apple-arm-switch-roadmap-gelsinger-ceo https://www.theverge.com/22597713/intel-7nm-delay-summer-202... https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-sorry-but-our-7nm-chips-will-be-delayed-to-2022-2023 https://www.pcmag.com/news/intel-sorry-but-our-7nm-chips-wil... https://www.eenewseurope.com/en/poor-yield-at-intel-delays-server-processors-says-trendforce/ https://www.eenewseurope.com/en/poor-yield-at-intel-delays-s...

ryukoposting 3y ago

In 2015, why would anyone have believed AMD could catch up to Intel? Let's not forget that the Bulldozer/Excavator days are not that long ago, and those chips were even less competitive in 2011-2016 than Intel's current offerings are in 2024. I think we can confidently say that bigger architectural gaps have been closed before. Comparing Intel to other fabs, it's uglier, sure. The Krzanich years were characterized by over-promising and under-delivering, and Intel isn't far enough removed from that period for trust to be rebuilt. That said, they have shrunk the process gap over the last couple years, even if the gap isn't entirely closed. Given the firehose of government money being directed at domestic manufacturing right now, I assume Intel is doing fine on the "shitloads of money" front. I don't think Intel is a favorite to be the world's process leader by 2025, but it's reasonable to think they could get close. I don't think the doom-and-gloom perspective is well-founded at all.