6 ms·

Big deal, smart for all parties, really. Apple standards will make Intel step up and become a better foundry partner. Apple will gain increasingly needed diver

Big deal, smart for all parties, really. Apple standards will make Intel step up and become a better foundry partner. Apple will gain increasingly needed diversification. US supply chain gets a boost. Should be fine for TSMC in the short to medium term. Apple not going to risk actual mainline iPhone SoC on Intel any time soon, so lion share of TSMC Apple revenue will be fine.

9cb14c1ec0 4mo ago
> Apple not going to risk actual mainline iPhone SoC on Intel any time soon Not to mention that Intel does not and will not any time in the next decade have the capacity for a product of that quantity.
- benced 4mo ago
  Next decade seems possibly false - if Intel starts getting deals and commitments now, it takes them about half a decade to build a fab. Agree it seems unlikely though.
  - aurareturn 4mo ago
    Intel doesn't even have enough capacity right now to make enough Xeon chips. CPU demand is absolutely booming but their Intel 18A and 3 nodes don't have great yields.
- aurareturn 4mo ago
  ASML is one of the bigger bottlenecks I hear. They're fully booked out years in advance so even if Intel wants to build many more fabs, they can't. There was a recent interview with Dylan Patel and he explained it pretty well. Basically, there are tiers of risks and how "AGI pilled" each tier is. The bottlenecks and supply constraints get worse and worse as you down down the tiers. Tier 1: OpenAI/Anthropic - extremely AGI pilled and think it's a sure thing. They want all layers underneath to prepare to make as many chips as possible and go all in. Tier 2: Nvidia/AMD/Broadcom - very bullish but doesn't think AGI is a sure thing Tier 3: TSMC, Samsung, SK Hynix, Intel, Sandisk, Micron - bullish but if they're wrong and overbuild, they can actually go bankrupt. Each fab can cost tens of billions. An N2 fab is estimated to be $30b each. Tier 4: Every supplier to T3 such as ASML, Applied Materials, other fab machines and suppliers - Less bullish, may even see this as just a super cycle rather than a permanent increase in demand so they're less inclined to take too many risks to scale up
aurareturn 4mo ago
The biggest reason to do this is because TSMC's N2 node and future nodes will be dominated by AI chips. Since AI chips have far bigger margins than most Apple chips, Apple will get outbid by companies like Nvidia, AMD, and Broadcom. Nvidia already became TSMC's biggest customer last year. Every TSMC advanced node from N5 to N2 is fully booked and running at max capacity. It's not really realistic to make Mac, Watch, iPad chips on TSMC's best node in the next 3-4 years - assuming there is no collapse in AI. Unfortunately, this might mean we will get inferior Intel chips for our Macs. Intel nodes, as it stands, are far more power hungry, less dense, and lower yielding. Intel's own Panther Lake CPU tile is on 18A and it's extremely disappointing in terms of perf/watt and raw perf. I still expect iPhone chips to be made on the best TSMC nodes though. I'm assuming Apple will design every future core for both TSMC and Intel, sort of like how they dual sourced with TSMC and Samsung in the past for the same generation.
- zitterbewegung 4mo ago
  Apple arguably are making AI workstations that can do inference and training by their Mac Studio and Macbook Pros to a lesser extent. The M6 generation is going to be interesting and before the memory pricing going up their products were competitive to the rest of the industry. Intel is still working with small and smaller process nodes.
  - aurareturn 4mo ago
    Yes, I want Apple to focus on Mac inference. It could be the return of laptops/desktops as a major revenue source for Apple. Macs have been ~10% of Apple's revenue for the last 10 years or so. I'd love to see Macs get up to 20-30%. I do expect personal AI machines to take off in a few years once local models and local hardware hit an inflection point. M5 Max is a major improvement for local inference due to the added matmul accelerators, but the RAM capacity and bandwidth bottleneck is huge. That said, enterprise AI chips will still take the cake in terms of margins.
    - bigyabai 4mo ago
      At any point in the last six years, Apple could have signed Nvidia's aarch64 BSD drivers and watched their revenue climb. It's a minuscule commitment that is fully supported by the higher-end Mac Pros, only disabled by software. That would have sent sales skyrocketing as far as the supply could handle it. But Apple is about B2C, and customers buy services. All of us know, deep down, that Apple Intelligence will be a subscription service offered as part of Apple One. The Mac won't become the magical backbone for your personal inference network, it's a product used to consume Apple Services first and everything else comes second.
GeekyBear 4mo ago
This is the third year in a row that Apple's most advanced chips have used a version of TSMC's 3nm node, with a transition to a more advanced node due in the next generation. Intel would only need to be on par with TSMC's older 3nm node to Fab Apple's entry level SOCs.
- Melatonic 4mo ago
  Intel just bought a ton of ASML's most advanced machines (way more than TSMC) so theoretically they should be able to manufacture stuff on an equivalent node or better. And given the kind of performance and battery life we have seen from their latest chips they definitely seem to be back in the game
  - ahartmetz 4mo ago
    "Big if true". That's surprising. More ASML machines = more capacity in the future. Do you have a source for that? Intel would need to have lots of (and / or very big) customers lined up or big plans to manufacture possibly more than CPUs of their own design to make use of that capacity.
    - GeekyBear 4mo ago
      They mention that Intel bought the initial production run in the page that introduced the new product. > can print transistors 1.7 times smaller – and therefore achieve transistor densities 2.9 times higher – than they can with NXE systems. https://www.asml.com/en/news/stories/2024/5-things-high-na-euv https://www.asml.com/en/news/stories/2024/5-things-high-na-e...
      - ahartmetz 4mo ago
        Nothing about the number of machines in that article though. I could well see Intel buying the first ones of the new series as a PR coup. I mean obviously they are going to use them, too.
signatoremo 4mo ago
It’s the main processor: Apple Inc. has held exploratory discussions about using Intel Corp. and Samsung Electronics Co. to produce the main processors for its devices in the US, a move that would offer a secondary option beyond longtime partner Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. [0] (paywalled) They wouldn’t need either Intel or Samsung if it wasn’t bleeding edge. I think it’s 14A for Intel. TSMC is still have the edge overall, but they are neck and neck in terms of node. TSMC will be more than fine. They are hardly able to meet the demands. [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-05-05/apple-explores-using-intel-and-samsung-to-build-main-device-chips-in-the-us https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-05-05/apple-exp...
- whynotminot 4mo ago
  What does “main” mean? Main processor for a flagship iPhone? Or main processor for a HomePod? There’s a lot of “main” processors for Apple’s devices at this point. I would be deeply skeptical of a brand new flagship iPhone <n> Pro having an Intel fab’d SoC until at least a few years into this arrangement.
  - ua709 4mo ago
    Also an “exploratory discussion” is not the same as a signed contract. Apple has tons of custom silicon now. There are many low risk ASICs Apple could kick the tires with.
baq 4mo ago
> Apple standards Apple hardware standards. Apple software could use some of these.
- carlosjobim 4mo ago
  What does this have to do with the subject at hand? Is the internet like this now, that in every message board there is just islands of content floating in oceans of snark?
  - baq 4mo ago
    Apple standards not being followed by Apple has nothing to do with the topic?
  - organsnyder 4mo ago
    Always has been.
y3ahd0g 4mo ago
Time will tell but with Ternus taking over, a hardware and engineering mindset, could be going for a long term learn and build together, and of Intel can get it together and go where Apple needs, later buyout Intel. Lip-Bu Tan is a year older than Tim Cook. Doubt he wants to run Intel for very long. Would be hard for me in the Ternus role to not have that in mind if Intel gets it together.
- twoodfin 4mo ago
  I don’t imagine Apple views fab technology as a potential differentiator worth the massive investment. This is about diversifying their supply chain as they have done all over the place for decades. Displays, for example.
  - y3ahd0g 4mo ago
    That's why I wrote time will tell. The uncertainty of political order in the near term could make having fabs on their home turf as worth the security. Learn now, collaborate as preparation in case certain criteria politically, financially, are met.
    - ua709 4mo ago
      TSMC fabs on home turf is just as good from a security point of view. But in reality for VLSI at this scale and volume it’s just single supplier in series with single supplier all the way down. You don’t really get security with such a vulnerable supply chain, regardless of ownership.

9cb14c1ec0 4mo ago

> Apple not going to risk actual mainline iPhone SoC on Intel any time soon Not to mention that Intel does not and will not any time in the next decade have the capacity for a product of that quantity.

benced 4mo ago
Next decade seems possibly false - if Intel starts getting deals and commitments now, it takes them about half a decade to build a fab. Agree it seems unlikely though.
- aurareturn 4mo ago
  Intel doesn't even have enough capacity right now to make enough Xeon chips. CPU demand is absolutely booming but their Intel 18A and 3 nodes don't have great yields.
aurareturn 4mo ago
ASML is one of the bigger bottlenecks I hear. They're fully booked out years in advance so even if Intel wants to build many more fabs, they can't. There was a recent interview with Dylan Patel and he explained it pretty well. Basically, there are tiers of risks and how "AGI pilled" each tier is. The bottlenecks and supply constraints get worse and worse as you down down the tiers. Tier 1: OpenAI/Anthropic - extremely AGI pilled and think it's a sure thing. They want all layers underneath to prepare to make as many chips as possible and go all in. Tier 2: Nvidia/AMD/Broadcom - very bullish but doesn't think AGI is a sure thing Tier 3: TSMC, Samsung, SK Hynix, Intel, Sandisk, Micron - bullish but if they're wrong and overbuild, they can actually go bankrupt. Each fab can cost tens of billions. An N2 fab is estimated to be $30b each. Tier 4: Every supplier to T3 such as ASML, Applied Materials, other fab machines and suppliers - Less bullish, may even see this as just a super cycle rather than a permanent increase in demand so they're less inclined to take too many risks to scale up

aurareturn 4mo ago

The biggest reason to do this is because TSMC's N2 node and future nodes will be dominated by AI chips. Since AI chips have far bigger margins than most Apple chips, Apple will get outbid by companies like Nvidia, AMD, and Broadcom. Nvidia already became TSMC's biggest customer last year. Every TSMC advanced node from N5 to N2 is fully booked and running at max capacity. It's not really realistic to make Mac, Watch, iPad chips on TSMC's best node in the next 3-4 years - assuming there is no collapse in AI. Unfortunately, this might mean we will get inferior Intel chips for our Macs. Intel nodes, as it stands, are far more power hungry, less dense, and lower yielding. Intel's own Panther Lake CPU tile is on 18A and it's extremely disappointing in terms of perf/watt and raw perf. I still expect iPhone chips to be made on the best TSMC nodes though. I'm assuming Apple will design every future core for both TSMC and Intel, sort of like how they dual sourced with TSMC and Samsung in the past for the same generation.

zitterbewegung 4mo ago
Apple arguably are making AI workstations that can do inference and training by their Mac Studio and Macbook Pros to a lesser extent. The M6 generation is going to be interesting and before the memory pricing going up their products were competitive to the rest of the industry. Intel is still working with small and smaller process nodes.
- aurareturn 4mo ago
  Yes, I want Apple to focus on Mac inference. It could be the return of laptops/desktops as a major revenue source for Apple. Macs have been ~10% of Apple's revenue for the last 10 years or so. I'd love to see Macs get up to 20-30%. I do expect personal AI machines to take off in a few years once local models and local hardware hit an inflection point. M5 Max is a major improvement for local inference due to the added matmul accelerators, but the RAM capacity and bandwidth bottleneck is huge. That said, enterprise AI chips will still take the cake in terms of margins.
  - bigyabai 4mo ago
    At any point in the last six years, Apple could have signed Nvidia's aarch64 BSD drivers and watched their revenue climb. It's a minuscule commitment that is fully supported by the higher-end Mac Pros, only disabled by software. That would have sent sales skyrocketing as far as the supply could handle it. But Apple is about B2C, and customers buy services. All of us know, deep down, that Apple Intelligence will be a subscription service offered as part of Apple One. The Mac won't become the magical backbone for your personal inference network, it's a product used to consume Apple Services first and everything else comes second.

GeekyBear 4mo ago

This is the third year in a row that Apple's most advanced chips have used a version of TSMC's 3nm node, with a transition to a more advanced node due in the next generation. Intel would only need to be on par with TSMC's older 3nm node to Fab Apple's entry level SOCs.

Melatonic 4mo ago
Intel just bought a ton of ASML's most advanced machines (way more than TSMC) so theoretically they should be able to manufacture stuff on an equivalent node or better. And given the kind of performance and battery life we have seen from their latest chips they definitely seem to be back in the game
- ahartmetz 4mo ago
  "Big if true". That's surprising. More ASML machines = more capacity in the future. Do you have a source for that? Intel would need to have lots of (and / or very big) customers lined up or big plans to manufacture possibly more than CPUs of their own design to make use of that capacity.
  - GeekyBear 4mo ago
    They mention that Intel bought the initial production run in the page that introduced the new product. > can print transistors 1.7 times smaller – and therefore achieve transistor densities 2.9 times higher – than they can with NXE systems. https://www.asml.com/en/news/stories/2024/5-things-high-na-euv https://www.asml.com/en/news/stories/2024/5-things-high-na-e...
    - ahartmetz 4mo ago
      Nothing about the number of machines in that article though. I could well see Intel buying the first ones of the new series as a PR coup. I mean obviously they are going to use them, too.

signatoremo 4mo ago

It’s the main processor: Apple Inc. has held exploratory discussions about using Intel Corp. and Samsung Electronics Co. to produce the main processors for its devices in the US, a move that would offer a secondary option beyond longtime partner Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. [0] (paywalled) They wouldn’t need either Intel or Samsung if it wasn’t bleeding edge. I think it’s 14A for Intel. TSMC is still have the edge overall, but they are neck and neck in terms of node. TSMC will be more than fine. They are hardly able to meet the demands. [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-05-05/apple-explores-using-intel-and-samsung-to-build-main-device-chips-in-the-us https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-05-05/apple-exp...

whynotminot 4mo ago
What does “main” mean? Main processor for a flagship iPhone? Or main processor for a HomePod? There’s a lot of “main” processors for Apple’s devices at this point. I would be deeply skeptical of a brand new flagship iPhone <n> Pro having an Intel fab’d SoC until at least a few years into this arrangement.
- ua709 4mo ago
  Also an “exploratory discussion” is not the same as a signed contract. Apple has tons of custom silicon now. There are many low risk ASICs Apple could kick the tires with.

baq 4mo ago

> Apple standards Apple hardware standards. Apple software could use some of these.

carlosjobim 4mo ago
What does this have to do with the subject at hand? Is the internet like this now, that in every message board there is just islands of content floating in oceans of snark?
- baq 4mo ago
  Apple standards not being followed by Apple has nothing to do with the topic?
- organsnyder 4mo ago
  Always has been.

y3ahd0g 4mo ago

Time will tell but with Ternus taking over, a hardware and engineering mindset, could be going for a long term learn and build together, and of Intel can get it together and go where Apple needs, later buyout Intel. Lip-Bu Tan is a year older than Tim Cook. Doubt he wants to run Intel for very long. Would be hard for me in the Ternus role to not have that in mind if Intel gets it together.

twoodfin 4mo ago
I don’t imagine Apple views fab technology as a potential differentiator worth the massive investment. This is about diversifying their supply chain as they have done all over the place for decades. Displays, for example.
- y3ahd0g 4mo ago
  That's why I wrote time will tell. The uncertainty of political order in the near term could make having fabs on their home turf as worth the security. Learn now, collaborate as preparation in case certain criteria politically, financially, are met.
  - ua709 4mo ago
    TSMC fabs on home turf is just as good from a security point of view. But in reality for VLSI at this scale and volume it’s just single supplier in series with single supplier all the way down. You don’t really get security with such a vulnerable supply chain, regardless of ownership.