Apple, Intel Have Reached Preliminary Chip-Making Agreement (yahoo.com) 25
Apple and Intel have reportedly reached a preliminary agreement (paywalled; alternative source) for Intel to manufacture some chips used in Apple devices, after more than a year of talks and pressure from the Trump administration. It's still unclear which Apple products would use Intel-made chips, but the deal would mark a major potential win for Intel's foundry ambitions and give Apple another manufacturing option beyond TSMC.
Need SuperKendall's take (Score:1, Troll)
How great is it that Trump requires Apple to do business with Intel, the spin will be delightful.
Please, please, please let it be Apple's main processors. A hysterical black eye to Intel and a kick in the balls to Apple fanboys. Win win!
Let's hear from the "rosetta doesn't do emulation" crowd!
Re: (Score:1)
China will take over Taiwan and cold fusion is only 3 years away.
Re: The next day after invasion (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Need SuperKendall's take (Score:2)
Short the stock. They have so many supposed contracts and none will be delivered on time.
Second sourcing, multiple suppliers, etc. (Score:5, Insightful)
How great is it that Trump requires Apple to do business with Intel
Intel is one of the top three semiconductor manufacturers in the world. If a company wants to practice the sound engineering principle of second sourcing they are a top choice.
Please, please, please let it be Apple's main processors.
TSMC has a high volume process lead over Intel. Apple will probably use Intel for older CPUs going into lower end machines and devices.
Plus, CPUs are not the only chips that Apple needs. Not all chips need the latest process.
Finally, TSMC is heavily in demand so moving some of Apple's lower end orders to Intel help to make sure the higher end orders get fulfilled on time.
A hysterical black eye to Intel and a kick in the balls to Apple fanboys.
Not at all. Apple used Intel CPUs for 15 years. The great "PC vs Mac" debate is about the user experience, not the hardware architecture of the CPU behind it, and certainly not what foundry a CPU comes from.
Apple is quite pragmatic about who it does business with. Apple partnered with IBM (and Motorola) to produce the PowerPC CPUs it had used prior to Intel CPUs. The marketting and evangelism departments may like to brand IBM and Intel as enemies, but over on the engineering and manufacturing side they do engineering not religious dogma.
Re: (Score:3)
How great is it that Trump requires Apple to do business with Intel
Intel is one of the top three semiconductor manufacturers in the world. If a company wants to practice the sound engineering principle of second sourcing they are a top choice.
It's a good idea in principle. If Intel can actually catch up. Otherwise, it will be like the cellular modems, where Apple second-sourced from Intel, and the product was crap, so some devices had noticeably degraded performance compared with the ones that contained Qualcomm radios.
Please, please, please let it be Apple's main processors.
TSMC has a high volume process lead over Intel. Apple will probably use Intel for older CPUs going into lower end machines and devices.
Except that they would have to presumably reengineer the old silicon for Intel's process, which kind of defeats the purpose of reusing old designs to save money, I would think.
Plus, CPUs are not the only chips that Apple needs. Not all chips need the latest process.
I think you're on the right track with that one. Ap
Re: (Score:1)
Intel is one of the top three semiconductor manufacturers in the world. If a company wants to practice the sound engineering principle of second sourcing they are a top choice.
It's a good idea in principle. If Intel can actually catch up.
. I think Apple is using a 3 nm process for the Xeon 6. I am not suggesting that they have the manufacturing capacity at 3nm that Apple would need today.
Re: Second sourcing, multiple suppliers, etc. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except that they would have to presumably reengineer the old silicon for Intel's process, which kind of defeats the purpose of reusing old designs to save money, I would think.
Or more likely, Intel will have to adapt their processes to Apple designs and for other companies if Intel wants to do business as a chip foundry.
Apple also uses CPUs in things like the Apple Watch
Off the top of my head, here are the other processors Apple uses: Apple Watch, Homepod (S series), AirPods (H series), modems (C series). There are millions to tens of millions of these processors that Apple will need each year.
Re: (Score:2)
...modems (C series)
There would be some perverse irony if Apple ended up manufacturing cellular baseband hardware with designs from the cellular modem team that they bought from Intel, and did so using Intel's foundries.
Re: (Score:3)
Not at all. Apple used Intel CPUs for 15 years. The great "PC vs Mac" debate is about the user experience, not the hardware architecture of the CPU behind it, and certainly not what foundry a CPU comes from.
The main reason Apple left Intel was all on Intel for not making progress for years on chips. This was the same reason Apple left IBM. Apple thought that by using Intel they would not be in the same situation again. Little did anyone know how Intel would struggle at 10nm for years. It is unlikely that Apple will ever go back to using x86 for their main processors though.
Intel these days is more open to being a chip foundry like TSMC than before. Apple using Intel to fabricate their chips as a secondary supp
Re: (Score:2)
How great is it that Trump requires Apple to do business with Intel, the spin will be delightful.
And why is this "great"? The main reason Apple stopped sourcing chips from Intel had nothing to do with politics. It was due to Intel's stagnation in making chips. Intel was stuck for years while AMD passed them by. Apple finally had enough. Some would call that just business.
Please, please, please let it be Apple's main processors. A hysterical black eye to Intel and a kick in the balls to Apple fanboys. Win win!
Again the issue was entirely Intel's incompetence at making progress for years. Apple would probably keep buying chips from Intel if they were good chips. After all Apple bought Intel's entire modem business from them. More than likely
Re: (Score:2)
This announcement of an "agreement" sounds like PR. Is there a contract for N wafers? Is Apple paying for poor yield, or is Intel absorbing low-yield cost? Is this a real pre-contract agreement or just some raw meat to throw at Trump?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even more insane is depending on Taiwan when la Presidenta shot his wad on Iran and has little to help defend the island with, as if he ever planned to. The next deal he makes with China will be when he sells Taiwan to them for a great deal on producing his gewgaws and Bibles.
Re:Diversifying supply chain from single source (Score:4, Informative)
It is insane that major US companies are making trillion-dollar bets that a single-source provider will remain operational.
You are aware TSMC has built two chip fabs in Arizona and building a third one, right? You are also aware that Samsung built a chip fab in Texas over 20 years ago and is building a second one, right?
Ahem (Score:1)
Pressure? Unlike Chinese bureaucrats, American ones never resort to fisticuffs. A kick to the face would've been an interesting development during one of such "pressure sessions"
Have they swapped toothbrushes? (Score:2)