U.S. Govt pushes Nvidia and Apple to use Intel's foundries — Department of Commerce Secretary Raimondo makes appeal for US-based chip production

News
By
published

It's in Washington's best interests that American tech giants use Intel for their chip supply.

US Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo
(Image credit: Reagan Foundation)

During a meeting with U.S. Department of Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger expressed frustration with America’s reliance on TSMC to produce advanced chips. After this, Raimondo (via CNBC) went on private meetings with some public market investors, including shareholders of tech giants Nvidia and Apple, encouraging them to push their companies to use U.S. foundries to produce AI chips.

The discussions between the investors and the Secretary were not publicly revealed. Still, sources say that the latter highlighted the growing geopolitical risk around Taiwan, especially as China is eyeing to invade the de facto country. Aside from this, Washington is also investing more on the American semiconductor industry than the last 28 years combined, so the White House is likely keen on pushing American companies to use locally produced chips.

Intel is gunning to become one of the top players in the foundry business, aiming to go head-to-head with TSMC and Samsung. However, recent developments revealed that Intel Foundry Services (IFS) is struggling to gain traction, causing the company to lose $1.6 billion and practically making its stock price fall by 30% overnight. Because of this, Intel is reportedly considering spinning off its manufacturing division and other non-crucial business units, similar to how AMD spun off GlobalFoundries in 2008.

However, it’s also in the interest of the Biden administration that Intel succeeds, especially as it is one of the biggest recipients of funds under the CHIPS Act. Although sources say that the federal government is delaying the disbursement of CHIPS Act money to Team Blue until it can get its act together, it seems that the government still wants to see them succeed. Furthermore, while Raimondo did not mention Intel during the meetings, its status as one of the foremost chipmakers in the U.S. has likely been discussed privately.

Many leading American tech companies, like Nvidia, AMD, Apple, Amazon, and Google, design their chips but use foreign foundries like TSMC for their supply despite the distance and geopolitical risk brought about by its location. 

However, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang said during the Goldman Sachs conference that the GPU maker could shift its fab if needed. “In the event that we have to shift from one fab to another, we have the ability to do it. We won’t be able to get the same level of performance or cost, but we will be able to provide the supply.”

Jowi Morales
Jowi Morales
Contributing Writer

Jowi Morales is a tech enthusiast with years of experience working in the industry. He’s been writing with several tech publications since 2021, where he’s been interested in tech hardware and consumer electronics.

53 Comments Comment from the forums
  • Marlin1975
    And if I was Nvidia or Apple I tell them why would we use intel when intel does not even use intel?
    Intels newest chip will be made at TSMC. Even intel knows it can't make cutting edge chips anymore.
    Reply
  • watzupken
    “Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger expressed frustration with America’s reliance on TSMC to produce advanced chips”

    Pat forgot he is also using TSMC for his chips. Who is he frustrated with? Himself? So if yield is poor, why would companies use Intel foundry.
    Reply
  • rluker5
    At least this article noticed that Intel has yet to receive payment of anything from that Chips act from around 3 years ago. But because of misinformation spreading journalists like this author it is common knowledge that Intel has already received tens of billions of dollars.

    Also "common knowledge" are the misconceptions that all Intel 13th and 14th gen chips are failing, low volt instability=high volt degradation, and Intel CPUs generally use 320w all of the time.

    This article is trying to spread another one: "Because of this, Intel is reportedly considering spinning off its manufacturing " is per one possibly short selling analyst and should not be portrayed as mainstream fact as it is not.

    The bias held by the author in some of these articles apparently completely justifies spreading misinformation. Are you more or less informed after reading them?
    Reply
  • rluker5
    watzupken said:
    “Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger expressed frustration with America’s reliance on TSMC to produce advanced chips”

    Pat forgot he is also using TSMC for his chips. Who is he frustrated with? Himself? So if yield is poor, why would companies use Intel foundry.
    He is for some. So are you saying that no use of TSMC by any American chipmaker should be allowed?
    Reply
  • bigdragon
    Why would Apple or AMD -- companies that also produce processors -- want to let Intel have access to their trade secrets and processor designs? Pat doesn't seem to recognize that the very customers he wants at Intel's fabs are also competitors who know of Intel's anti-competitive practices from the past. Diversifying away from TSMC makes sense given the geopolitical climate, but running into the arms of a competitor who has been known to use underhanded tactics is not smart.
    Reply
  • rtoaht
    Marlin1975 said:
    And if I was Nvidia or Apple I tell them why would we use intel when intel does not even use intel?
    Intels newest chip will be made at TSMC. Even intel knows it can't make cutting edge chips anymore.
    Then add tariffs on foreign subsidized chips. Taiwanese, Korean, Japanese, and of course Chinese governments have been subsidizing their domestic chip production for decades. It is time for the US to match their subsidies with CHIPS act and then add tariffs on foreign subsidized chips.
    Reply
  • DS426
    Marlin1975 said:
    And if I was Nvidia or Apple I tell them why would we use intel when intel does not even use intel?
    Intels newest chip will be made at TSMC. Even intel knows it can't make cutting edge chips anymore.
    Lots of absolutes here. "Intel does not even use Intel" -- Intel does, it just depends on the timing of chip releases, what part of a CPU package you're talking about (remember tiles?), and availability of advanced node production, e.g. Intel 18A won't be production ready for the 200 series chips but will be available someday, so CPU logic could and likely would come back in-house.
    "Even intel knows it can't make cutting edge chips anymore" -- again, 18A and beyond. Sure, there's a big loss of confidence as of recently, but until IFS fails to deliver on the upcoming nodes, both parties are still in the running.

    Beyond all of the rhetoric one way or another on Intel and IFS's business and products performance, we really do need another advanced node player in the game. TSMC has already talked about raising prices recently and especially charging more when customers specify "I want these chips made in the U.S. fabs." That pricing policy alone would in turn increase IFS' competitiveness.
    Reply
  • MacZ24
    "Think of the security/privacy" is the "think of the children" of tech.

    When Microsoft says you need new CPUs for its new OS, what it really means is "think of the Intel".
    Reply
  • Marlin1975
    DS426 said:
    Lots of absolutes here. "Intel does not even use Intel" -- Intel does, it just depends on the timing of chip releases, what part of a CPU package you're talking about (remember tiles?), and availability of advanced node production, e.g. Intel 18A won't be production ready for the 200 series chips but will be available someday, so CPU logic could and likely would come back in-house.
    "Even intel knows it can't make cutting edge chips anymore" -- again, 18A and beyond. Sure, there's a big loss of confidence as of recently, but until IFS fails to deliver on the upcoming nodes, both parties are still in the running.

    Beyond all of the rhetoric one way or another on Intel and IFS's business and products performance, we really do need another advanced node player in the game. TSMC has already talked about raising prices recently and especially charging more when customers specify "I want these chips made in the U.S. fabs." That pricing policy alone would in turn increase IFS' competitiveness.


    "someday..." Intel has been saying that for years now and is using TSMC instead.

    And "18a" is also having issues. Intel says its ok but 3rd parties have said its not ready yet on all the samples they have received.

    I don't care what intel says, I care what they can do. And right now they are using a outside vendor for their newest chips instead of their own. Does not get any clearer where they are at and what they think of their own manufacturing abilities.
    Reply
  • rluker5
    bigdragon said:
    Why would Apple or AMD -- companies that also produce processors -- want to let Intel have access to their trade secrets and processor designs? Pat doesn't seem to recognize that the very customers he wants at Intel's fabs are also competitors who know of Intel's anti-competitive practices from the past. Diversifying away from TSMC makes sense given the geopolitical climate, but running into the arms of a competitor who has been known to use underhanded tactics is not smart.
    AMD is the one that reverse engineered Intel's chips when they were fabbing them, then made and sold them as AMD chips.

    Intel has never done anything like this. AMD has patents on their designs. The components themselves I.E transistors, sram, etc are off the shelf bits. Intel is not allowed to just violate their patents and steal their designs.
    Reply