Intel Approaches Apple For Potential Investment Amid Struggles (reuters.com) 79
Intel has approached Apple about a possible investment and closer collaboration, following recent multibillion-dollar deals with Nvidia, the U.S. government, and SoftBank to stabilize the struggling chipmaker. Reuters reports: The iPhone maker and Intel have also discussed how to work more closely together, the report said, adding that the talks are at an early stage and may not lead to an agreement. Shares of Intel closed 6% higher after the news. [...] Striking lucrative partnerships and persuading outside clients to use Intel's factories remain key to its future. Intel has also reached out to other companies about possible investments and partnerships, according to the Bloomberg News report. The reported investment from Apple would come as another vote of confidence for Intel - Apple had been a longtime customer of Intel before it transitioned to using its own custom-designed silicon chips in 2020.
For Apple, which relies heavily on Intel's rival TSMC to manufacture its chips, the new partnership would allow it to diversify its chipmaking supplier base - a move that would be valuable if geopolitical risks in Taiwan worsen due to China's role in the region. It would also help Apple improve its relationship with U.S. President Donald Trump, by showing that it is investing in the United States - while much of Apple's supply chain remains international, the company has committed about $600 billion to domestic initiatives over the next four years.
For Apple, which relies heavily on Intel's rival TSMC to manufacture its chips, the new partnership would allow it to diversify its chipmaking supplier base - a move that would be valuable if geopolitical risks in Taiwan worsen due to China's role in the region. It would also help Apple improve its relationship with U.S. President Donald Trump, by showing that it is investing in the United States - while much of Apple's supply chain remains international, the company has committed about $600 billion to domestic initiatives over the next four years.
LOL! (Score:5, Interesting)
Considering how Apple has been been progressing this seems like a desperate move by Intel. They are throwing out FUD in hopes that Apple will cave. However, if TSMC goes dark then everyone is fucked. Trump isn't going to be in power much longer, so that's a not a winning argument either. I'm telling you, this smacks of desperation.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it does.
Unfortunately, I think desperation is all Intel has left.
Re: (Score:2)
they got stock investment from USA, they got money from nVidia partnership, and this is all billions, their stock has increased in value (from 20 to over 30), and they are still desperate for money?
Smells like dead fish in here.
Maybe the next owners of the IP will have better luck, but if Intel fails, think of it... all the OS work, all the drivers, all the f
Re: LOL! (Score:3)
I suspect if intel fail, then AMD is next, if they donâ(TM)t quickly pivot to designing ARM chips. Microsoft would see the failure of intel as a reason to drive windows for ARM much harder.
Re: (Score:2)
If x86 is to increase in speed, they will need to remove old codebase to reduce the architect footprint. That means base OS work. If they do, they will need to add an option of some type new slot or pcix slot that will contain that legacy code base for people to have as an option. Consumers may not like that, but its the only way to handle it while the architecture matures.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if Intel execs have looked at the trail of devastation left in Apple's wake every time they "partner" with someone else. Foxconn seems to be the exception.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple is just a customer of Corning and TSMC, a big customer but just a customer. Foxconn partnered with Apple on the iToy, and did very well. They're the only partner that I can remember Apple having that didn't end up an empty husk.
Its about making chips, not return to x64-64 (Score:4, Insightful)
Considering how Apple has been been progressing this seems like a desperate move by Intel.
Its about manufacturing Apple Silicon chips, not returning to the x86-64 architecture.
Face it, Microsoft is working with Qualcomm to move Windows to ARM as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Its about making chips, not return to x64-64 (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
There's nothing about modern x86 that makes it inferior to ARM (or vice versa). You may as well claim that they're both doomed because of RISC-V. Apple isn't interested in x86-64 and that's unlikely to change ever. Intel just wants a legit foundry customer. What Intel doesn't have (yet) is a process that anyone particularly wants, in volumes suitable for a company like Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple isn't interested in x86-64 and that's unlikely to change ever.
That is my point. It's not about x86-64 vs ARM. There is no plausible path there. It's about Intel being a second source for Apple Silicon CPU, that is plausible. And, like when Intel took on IBM/Motorola/Apple over PowerPC, throwing tons of engineers and money at a performance gap can effectively remove that gap. Today's gap with TSMC might limit would Intel could do as a second spruce, perhaps iPhone SE CPUs rather than top of the line iPhone CPUs. It's not a given TSMC can maintain that gap, it plausible
Re: (Score:2)
Far ahead is overstating things.
It's the main reason Intel is in trouble.
The fact remains the process/price is an area where Intel can be compete over time, x86-64 vs ARM is not. Even if TSMC currently has the lead, their fabs are heavily booked. A second manufacturing source for Apple could be useful.
Sure. But there is no evidence that giving them money will help them catch up, given Intel have been trying to catch up for years, burning their own money in the process.
But even if they could, we'd only be at the point where Apple invested in TSMC, when they had a process but needed money for production capacity.
Re: (Score:2)
Far ahead is overstating things.
It's the main reason Intel is in trouble.
I'd say the reason they are in trouble is the migration to ARM. Which is a battle they can't win. Unlike being a second source for manufacturing, that's a battle they could plausibly compete in. IBM/Motorola/Apple once underestimated Intel with the PowerPC CPUs. The PowerPC consortium had a reasonable plan, they delivered, where they failed is they never imaged Intel could come from behind and get the creaky x86 successfully competing against a brand new RISC design. Intel pulled off friggin miracles keep c
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you actually gonna pretend that Intel being behind with their processes and their x86 designs isn't their main problem?
You misunderstand my point. Being behind on a process is fixable. X86-64 vs ARM is not fixable. Being behind on a process is not a problem if you are making 2nd tier chips, like those going into an iPhone SE.
Re: (Score:2)
Its about manufacturing Apple Silicon chips
A) For the sake of argument, let's say Apple say, "screw power consumption, we'll use Intel". You should remember that Apple is a huge jerk, just like all other publicly traded companies. This means they would need to get a sweet deal on manufacturing prices and they would totally dump intel the moment that changed. Intel would make very little on such an arrangement.
B) I know TSMC is backlogged but I do not believe that Apple is in a rush. I could see them maybe* using Intel for advanced testing but it see
Re: (Score:2)
I don’t think Apple would say “screw power consumption”, given its history and that it was one reason for moving from PowerPC to Intel.
Apple is a priority customer for TSMC and I believe Apple has likely been organised and signed contracts ensuring that they keep those slots.
Intel needs to work out how TSMC is able to improve its fab process at such a high pace, while Intel seems to be failing to do so. Aren’t both companies getting their lithograph machines from ASML?
Re: (Score:2)
I don’t think Apple would say “screw power consumption”,
You do realize that I started that with "for the sake of argument," right? It should be clear that this was a hypothetical.
For now Intel should focus on being second source (Score:1)
Its about manufacturing Apple Silicon chips
A) For the sake of argument, let's say Apple say, "screw power consumption, we'll use Intel".
I think you are stuck on the idea TSMC leads here today. My point is that (1) this is an area where Intel could possible compete. (2) x86-64 vs ARM is an area that cannot compete. Don't underestimate Intel, the PowerPC consortium did. They though we have a nice clean new RISC architecture, how could Intel possibly get their old arch to compete with us. Well it turned out spending 10x the money is one way. The short answer, Intel did it, they did not let PowerPC get out ahead performance wise. Intel kept the
Re: (Score:2)
I think you are stuck on the idea TSMC leads here today. My point is that (1) this is an area where Intel could possible compete.
Seems REALLY unlikely consider the new CEO just ditched the process that they have invested billions into.
(2) x86-64 vs ARM is an area that cannot compete. Don't underestimate Intel, the PowerPC consortium did.
This is a weird mixed signal type thing. Are you saying they cant compete or that they can? The problem faced isn't computational power, it's energy efficiency. This is where x86_64 falls flat.
TSMC fabs are a limited resource. With higher demand comes higher prices.
This makes the assumption that capacity isn't already being sufficiently expanded. However, I'm sure with lower-end chips, that some would go with Intel's fab but Apple's stuff is rather high-end. I put it in the
Re: (Score:1)
(2) x86-64 vs ARM is an area that cannot compete. Don't underestimate Intel, the PowerPC consortium did.
This is a weird mixed signal type thing. Are you saying they cant compete or that they can?
I'm saying that assuming Intel is incapable of making technical progress, of overcoming a technical gap, if not a safe bet. IBM/Motorola/Apple once guessed badly. It's not about CPU architecture. It's about the gap between PowerPC and Intel never materializing, that Intel made technical progress that was a friggin miracle. It costs a ton of engineering time and money, but they pulled it off. Underestimate their abilit
Re: LOL! (Score:2)
I mean, if Intel were willing to fab apples designs, I can see Apple biting. It would give them leverage to get lower prices from TSMC at the least.
Re: (Score:2)
Trump isn't going to be in power much longer,
Over 1200 days left in his term. Do you know something that the rest of us don't?
Apparently. (Score:2)
I thought it was common knowledge but 3.25 years isn't very long in the terms of microfabrication. It takes a minimum of one year to get a new chip fabbed. Adapting to a new fab process is going to add another year simply for redesign, testing, optimization, etc. Presuming negotiations take until the end of 2025 and Apple agrees, it will be 2028 before the first Intel fabbed chip is ready. Which leaves only a single year of Trump being in office. I doubt Apple will see all that effort and expense as being t
Re:LOL! (Score:4, Informative)
Have you listened to him talk? He's less coherent than Biden was, for that matter he's less coherent than Reagan in his last year in the White House.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you listened to him talk? He's less coherent than Biden was, for that matter he's less coherent than Reagan in his last year in the White House.
Yes, and? GP was saying "Trump isn't going to be in power much longer". Trump's been rambling and incoherent for most of his political life. He was that way during the 2024 campaign, too, and yet he was elected all the same. It's possible he'll kick the bucket imminently, but the GP doesn't know that, no more than he could point to any driver on the road and declare "that's person's going to crash soon." People were predicting Castro's imminent death for decades, and yet he kept right on. It's just wi
Re: (Score:2)
If his ramblings get too incoherent they won't bother with the 25th Amendment, too messy and public. Keep in mind who these people are, they're the most amoral scum on the planet. They'll just set up some patsy, bring some of their Blackwater or Dyncorp buddies to take him out, and then use the opportunity to break the pitiful resistance that's left in this country. I rather wonder if that's why DeLay and Haley were passed over for the VP slot, their long associations with mercenary and terrorist groups
Re: (Score:2)
Trump isn't going to be in power much longer,
Over 1200 days left in his term. Do you know something that the rest of us don't?
I had an AI create a countdown clock for that reason. https://shanenj.tripod.com/cgi... [tripod.com] is the current location, though I should put it somewhere better. Or maybe you want to host your own version somewhere?
Re: (Score:2)
Wasn’t Intel exploring splitting fab and split design parts of the business at some point? No idea what happened to that strategy?
Re: (Score:2)
Considering how Apple has been been progressing this seems like a desperate move by Intel. They are throwing out FUD in hopes that Apple will cave. However, if TSMC goes dark then everyone is fucked. Trump isn't going to be in power much longer, so that's a not a winning argument either. I'm telling you, this smacks of desperation.
At this point, it may not matter, due the damage he’ll have caused. Also, there are a number of people who believe he’ll try to avoid an election in 2028. I don’t want to believe that, but given how much of Project 2025 is apparently being realised, I’m not sure.
Re: (Score:2)
American media has to throw in some Tawain stuff for the scare value. For Apple, Intel is just another supplier, especially now that they offer contract fabrication. If TSMC raises their prices, doesn't have capacity, or no longer supports a process Apple wants, they could use Intel. They've also just signed a deal with Samsung.
Approached my mom amid my financial struggles (Score:1)
Did get a slap in the face and was told to get my shit together.
*bummer*
A slap from Mom and Navy recruiter # from Dad (Score:2)
Did get a slap in the face and was told to get my shit together.
I can see my Mom doing that. My Dad, standing behind her wait his turn. He won't slap me, he'll just give me the phone number of the Navy recruiter and say good luck.
Throw money in the drain? (Score:2)
Wouldn't this be like throwing money in the drain?
Intel suffers from a decade of stagnation between 2010 and 2020 with a wakeup call around 2020 that they couldn't handle. "This parrot is dead"
Its about manufacturing process, not CPU arch (Score:4, Interesting)
Think about all the miracles Intel has accomplished over the decades with x86 and keeping it competitive. That was in part due to their advanced manufacturing processes. Apple Silicon architecture on an Intel manufacturing process could actually be interesting.
Second source, and not all Apple Silicon high end (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
And no one is going to use their "advanced" CPU manufacturing so long as that part of the business isn't spun off into a separate company. Otherwise why would companies want to help their competitor?
How is Intel an Apple competitor? They are just a potential second source for manufacturing. Windows is the competitor, not Intel. Intel in fact made Apple a lot of money post-PowerPC. Apple sales virtually doubled when Macs were essentially Intel based PCs that could dual boot macOS or Windows. It ended the entire MacOS or Windows question, you could have both. Running natively at full speed on the same hardware.
Re: (Score:2)
how are intel and apple not competitors?
It's obvious to anyone with half a brain that they clearly are.
I think the relationship is potentially more like that of Samsung where they are both competitor in one segment and supplier in another.
I’d imagine an “Intel Manufacturing” division being a supplier, while an “Intel Design” division being a competitor. If “Intel Manufacturing” got their shit together, then they could be a viable supplier. As for “Intel Design”, they’d need to accept that the writing is on the wall for the x86 architecture, unless t
Re: (Score:2)
too much focus on short term profits and not enough on long term growth.
And there you have just summarized the state of pretty much every major US corporation. Asia is eating our lunch because they'll sacrifice short term profit for long term growth.
Re: (Score:2)
Intel has not has an advanced manufacturing process in a long time. And their designs always sucked, sometimes badly. That is now catching up with them.
Re: (Score:2)
Intel has not has an advanced manufacturing process in a long time. And their designs always sucked, sometimes badly. That is now catching up with them.
TSMC having a lead today is not the issue. It is the that fighting TSMC in terms of process is plausible. While fighting an x86-64 vs ARM war is not.
IBM, Motorola, and Apple once had a lead with PowerPC, so they thought. Intel was able to pull miracles with x86 to erase any PowerPC lead. Intel overcame the assumption that a clunky old CISC architecture could not compete with a clean new RISC architecture by brute force and tons of money. It's plausible they could do the same with TSMC, through engineers
Re: (Score:2)
This is really just garbled nonsense with no resemblance to actual tech history.
IBM/Motorola/Apple underestimated Intel ... (Score:2)
This is really just garbled nonsense with no resemblance to actual tech history.
Not at all. The PowerPC consortium promised twice the performance for half the price. That was a realistic goal given a brand new RISC design vs the crusty more difficult to work on CISC design that was x86. The consortium failed, not because they failed to deliver performance in PowerPC. They failed because they underestimate Intel's ability to improve x86. Yes x86 would be harder to improve than PowerPC. But Intel made up for that by throwing tons more engineers and tons more money at the project. They pu
Re: (Score:2)
Intel isn't dead - it's merely pinin' for the fjords...
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
There are plenty of people who agree with you. Unfortunately there are no lean, mean smaller rivals in American silicon manufacturing eagre to take their place. So what to do? Additionally, the American government has no idea how to go about fabricating chips on cutting-edge nodes.
There are the remnant's of Intel's battered competition from years gone by: Globalfoundries, IBM, TI, and others still. Maybe they need some incentive to get back in the game. Right now, the capital costs to build out modern f
Re: (Score:2)
"This parrot is dead"
Indeed, it is. And everybody competent sees it, including Apple.
Re: (Score:3)
Intel has good technology. Maybe not quite world-leading - but still quite usable for many applications. Apple doesn't need world-leading manufacturing everywhere.
From Apple's perspective, it might make sense. It may be a cheap way to appease Trump a bit without direct contributions. They won't do the investment without getting something back but they don't need to get 100% of their investment back. Even if, say, they lose 50% on the investment, $2.5 billion is pocket change for Apple. This is likely the wo
Re: (Score:2)
Intel needs to improve their fabs quickly, irrespective of Trump. Apple could assign a minor chip to Intel with a three year contract, to appease Trump, but unless Intel improves, then Apple would fail to renew if Trump has left office.
Apple was once in a bad place and got money from Bill Gates, but since turned around. Maybe this is Intel’s turn, but they need more than money. They need good leadership and shareholders who aren’t looking for a short term fix.
Re: (Score:2)
It is a good point about Apple having problems and then making a big turnaround. Maybe Intel can do it too. I am sure they still have the internal talent - they just need the right leadership. Apple is known to demand high standards from their suppliers. I am sure they could actually help Intel do better.
I'm like a broken record at this point (Score:3)
No way do companies want to work with their direct competitors. US government should be working to split Intel down the middle. And only then, would Apple be be prepared to work with Intel fabs.
except (Score:1)
Trump is the only rational for this (Score:1)
Intel banks on Apple publicly saving an American trainwreck to butter up the orange utan for favors.
That's it. It's the only strategy here. None of this would happen absent Trump.
Why would Apple save the sinking ship? (Score:2, Informative)
They do not even use Intel CPUs anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
Why?
There's basically 3 chip fabs that are anywhere near close to the best, Intel, Samsung and TSMC. Apple are completely dependent on TSMC, presumably they don't want to be. Intel is behind, but not that far. If TSMC misstep, Intel could catch up. Or if TSMC gets booked out maybe Apple will decide to fab some of the less critical chips at Intel.
Re: (Score:2)
Samsung's SF2-family nodes may be significantly improved in yields from SF3 nodes (which are widely-regarded as being awful). Apple might do better to deal with them for a second source, even if they're still flawed.
Re: (Score:2)
Intel used to be. Not anymore and not anymore for a few years now. Claiming to be among the best does not place you among the best.
After AMD's Blunder, Intel Burned Karma like Wood (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
What are you on about? You don't replace AMD boards with Intel anymore. Intel sucks. Go on, try to take someone's 9800X3D and replace it with a 285k. See what happens. Same goes for Turin and Granite Rapids or Turin-dense and Sierra Forest. Intel is only for a few niche applications (maybe) or price/availability.
Re: After AMD's Blunder, Intel Burned Karma like W (Score:2)
I think they meant that AMD keeps a socket type alive long enough to make upgrading just the processor with it, while Intel switches sockets pretty much every generation, so you'll never upgrade the processor on an Intel motherboard.
For example, I upgraded the processor (December) in the motherboard (B350) I initially bought to hold a Zen 1 processor (Ryzen 5 2400g) with a Zen 3 (Ryzen 7 5700X). The original processor was released in early 2018, the upgrade was released early 2022... I got it nice and cheap
Re: (Score:2)
Intel always had a monopoly in all but name. The PC world had the Wintel nickname for a reason. Intel could have squashed AMD at any time until recently. The only reason for not having done so is to keep the government off its back.
What if TSMC manufactured its chips in US ? (Score:4, Interesting)
The iPhone was the turning point (Score:2)
It's a little late. The time they needed Apple was in 2007 but they didn't know it yet. Apple started with Samsung then moved to TSMC in a mutually beneficial relationship where iPhone sales allowed TSMC to invest which made better chips for Apple (and the industry) which sold well and allowed them to invest and so on. They not only passed Intel in terms of the fab process but proving out ARM chips to the point we see them now in laptops from both Apple and Microsoft. Who knows what the world would look lik