I work at Intel currently at Folsom. Everything I've sent to Chandler and they have sent to me were made in China or Taiwan.
BL.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why your iPhone & Mac will soon come with INTEL manufactured chips
- Thread starter gradi
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I work at Intel currently at Folsom. Everything I've sent to Chandler and they have sent to me were made in China or Taiwan.
BL.
From what I have sent and received from them, I can safely back that up. the last nine batch of 8260s that I received from them for the lab I maintain at FM2 were all made in Taiwan. Whatever was going on at OC isn't what is being observed here at FM.
Perhaps SK Hynix for the SSDs, but not CPUs.
BL.
It seems bizarre that you work for Intel, yet insist they don't have fab plants in Chandler, AZ. Just because you're not receiving the Chandler-produced CPU's in your lab doesn't mean they're not making them. I'd suggest checking with your colleagues when you get back to work on Monday.
Source:
List of Intel manufacturing sites - Wikipedia
See also this article from Anton Shilov, where he specifically mentions they are making CPUs:
Intel’s Long Awaited Fab 42 is Fully Operational
Intel’s Fab 42 joins fleet of Intel’s 10nm production facilities
Last edited:
It seems bizarre that you work for Intel, yet insist they don't have fab plants in Chandler, AZ:
View attachment 2118564
Source:
List of Intel manufacturing sites - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
See also:
Intel’s Long Awaited Fab 42 is Fully Operational
Intel’s Fab 42 joins fleet of Intel’s 10nm production facilitieswww.tomshardware.com
Like I said, I have not received any CPUs of any sort or kind from anything in Chandler, and I manage two data centers here at FM. What may be made in Chandler may be for SSDs, but they are not of any CPUs, as the data centers I manage there handle CPUs and GPUs primarily, especially when it comes to testing anything computing based (read: KAFKA, etc.) Nothing I have received from Chandler has been made in Chandler. All of the 6248s, 6252s, 8362s, and 8380s they have sent me have all come from overseas. I get them in between Chandler and Hillsboro on a consistent basis. Nothing CPU based has come from Chandler.
BL.
you do realize that "CPUs/GPUs/" etc are packaged parts, right? and yes, they are assembled usually somewhere in Asia, but, the chips that go into those packages can come from any of Intls' fabs, eg Hillsboro, Ocotillo, Ireland, Israel and such. There is also an Intel fab in China, but I am certain that they do not run the latest CPUs etc there because of political reasons/export restrictions and such.
packaged semiconductors typically with have the "made in ..." stamp, raw wafers (from a fab) do not have that.
This article mentions that TSMC is building plants in Arizona. Why are you so certain this vindicates MaxTech's speculation about Intel? I hate to break it to you, but they're really just bro-ey bros who know how to make slick looking clickbait youtube videos. You should not trust what they have to say just because they're loud and overconfident. They're clueless about a ton of things.Time will tell. Intel? TSMC? Who knows? Certainly not a single person who has replied in this thread and who are so sure about it.
Apple will buy processors from factory in Arizona, CEO Tim Cook reportedly says
Apple will buy processors from factory in Arizona, CEO Tim Cook reportedly says
If Apple were to buy processors manufactured in Arizona, it would represent a significant diversification in Apple's supply chain away from Taiwan.www.cnbc.com
“We’ve already made a decision to be buying out of a plant in Arizona, and this plant in Arizona starts up in ’24, so we’ve got about two years ahead of us on that one, maybe a little less,” Cook said, according to Bloomberg.
I'm not even saying I know. Given the current world political situation, Apple would be fools not to explore all viable options. They've made major switches before -- prior to A8 all their chips used to be fabricated by Samsung, A8 production was split between Samsung and TSMC, and A9 onwards have been TSMC-only. So they're not only capable of switching suppliers, they can use two at once (this is not easy, as you can't produce the same exact design in two different process nodes from different companies - the Samsung A8 was not the same design as the TSMC A8). But would they want to? Probably not, if they can avoid it, so the smart money's on them pushing TSMC to get a cutting edge TSMC process node online on US soil.
....
However, even though Intel has been a slow starter, it's now ramping up its own purchase of advanced ASML EUV machines:
Intel orders ASML system for well over $340 mln in quest for chipmaking edge
Intel has placed the first order with ASML for a new, advanced chipmaking tool that will cost "significantly" more than $340 million, as semiconductor manufacturers look to get ahead in a booming industry.www.reuters.com
Thus, while there is of course much more to small processes than owning an EUV machine, given Intel's general expertise they may catch up to TSMC within a few years.
I don't know why Intel was not more aggressive in acquiring these early on.
Why? The short answer is because Intel board and execs was more interested in boost the stock price than in making advance semiconductor wafers. They went 'cheaper' path to save the size of the dividend payments in an attempt to hold onto an inflated stock price.
Intel has two problems. The DUV '10nm family' of processes they had heavily leveraged multipatterning to make the fixed 10nm , SuperFin , and 7 (enhanced super fin) processes. That means they take longer to 'bake' (more passes through the fab machines). If Intel wanted to keep their higher volume production rates then they would need more machines than previous generations to produce at about the same rate. So Intel went out and bought billions in DUV machines as TSMC and Samsung stopped ordering as much ( because they has switched a good deal of their new equipment spend on EUV fab machines).
Intel could have bought smallish number of EUV machines and put some "less than breakeven" production on them. ( and burned money to stay in the game). But execs and board were also entertaining the notion of spinning out the fab portion of Intel in a "GlobalFoundries" style. ( under invest and hope the new owners would use some money Intel wasn't responsible for to fix the issue. Probably would have worked just as dubiously as it did for AMD. AMD is doing OK now , but they went through a dark period while pragmatically getting untangled from GF. )
What Intel did would do is to 'double down' (or 'triple down' if look at Intel GPU Max : Ponte Vecchio ) with dis-aggregation. They'd ship dies that extremely needed EUV fab process sooner off to TSMC and keep a large fraction for their own stuff.
With the under investment on EUV fab machines Intel was going to need to keep more product on Intel SuperFin-Intel 7 longer. ( and/or find other customers for it. ). Even if the Intel 4 (and Intel 3) processes work with good yields, Intel doesn't have the equipment to move the vast majority of the chip production over to it. Going to chiplets/tile allows Intel to make smaller chips on external TSMC or relatively (to 5-9 years ago) low wafer volume Intel 4. Or both (for example : for mainstream Gen 14: GPU tile TSMC N5 or N3 , CPU tile Intel 4 , 'SoC' (memory , infrastructure , etc) Intel 7 , I/O ( PCI-e , USB , etc) Intel 7 ) . The last two with off package I/O connections really don't buy much by moving to EUV sized fab nodes and leaves 'volume' for Intel to produce. So does all that chiplet/tile packaging production. By total die area of the dies inside the package the last two probably could be close to half the area. Which means that DUV investment has more chips to pay the equipment off onto.
The second problem is that Intel needs an large inflection point to do a 'catch up' on. Just incrementally making EUV fab processes better ... they would be unlikely to catch up. What they are betting the farm on is that the combination of next gen EUV-HA fab machines and leaving FinFet behind (moving to "gate all around" ) would be a enough of a inflection point transition to either slow both TSMC and Samsung down or perhaps stumble. It is certainly having that impact on Samsung. TSMC slow roll out on N3 shows they probably not totally immune either.
Pretty good chance Intel 4 (and 3) never do get to same volume levels that older Intel fab nodes get to. That Intel skips buying very large numbers of the first gen EUV fab machines. More of a shift to fabricating extremely high density chiplets (with higher and higher percentage of compute 'logic' ) for themselves and others. However, what Intel did for too long was dilly-dally with the notion with going fabless. That was dubious path. 'Wall St.' loved it , but 'Wall St.' doesn't manufacture anything (besides dubious volatility so they make higher profits. ) . What was best long term for Intel and 'Wall St' were two different things.
Tim Cook confirms Apple will use TMSC chips made in Arizona | AppleInsider
After Apple supplier TSMC announced it would increase its Arizona investment, Apple CEO Tim Cook confirmed that the company would use chips built in the state.
appleinsider.com
.....
Looks like still going to be the case for Intel 20A and 18A . [ "prepared for manufacturing" is closer to 'at risk production' in the following; ]
"...
For 18A, Intel originally planned to use EUV tools with 0.55 numerical aperture (NA) optics, which is set to provide an 8nm resolution (down from 13nm in the case of currently used EUV tools with a 0.33 NA). But ASML's production of High-NA EUV equipment will only be ready in 2025, whereas Intel targets its 18A to be prepared for manufacturing in the second half of 2025, ahead of its rivals.
Since it is possible to get to an 8nm resolution for post-3nm-nodes with multi-patterning using current-generation EUV tools (though this will lengthen production cycles and could potentially affect yields), Intel is willing to take some additional risks with 18A and use ASML's Twinscan NXE:3600D or NXE:3800E to make chips on this node as it believes that it will bring it undisputed market leadership. ... "
Intel: 4nm, 3nm-Class Nodes on Track, 1.8nm Technology Pulled in
Intel 4 process is manufacturing ready today, and Intel 3 is on track for H2 2023.
Pulling 18A 'in' (sooner) will help them get high end boutique fab clients looking for easier access to the bleeding edge. What more extensive multipatterning won't get them is extremely high volume production. ( e.g., going from 7 passes through a fab system to 14 passes with the same number of aggregate fab systems available will lower the number of 'final , finished' wafers coming out of the production pipeline. ) When the EUV-high NA tools finally do roll out in substantive numbers, then there will be a window for Intel to do better coupled "very high volume" to "bleeding edge" fab process. If Intel can do "decent size volume" Intel 4 in 2023 , Intel 3 in 2024 , Intel 20A in 2025 , and Intel 18A 2026 , that would be very helpful for them. They'd burn off a bit of that "intel has flakey execution" reputation.
Apple going to Intel for relatively very high volume production probably isn't coming any time soon; even if Intel has a good fab process. Intel could peel off a specialized chiplet though at around 18A. (e.g., if chop the VR/AR headset processing into 2 or 3 smaller, highly specialized units. Intel could snag one of those if 18A has some advantages for some specific task. )
Tim Cook confirms Apple will use TMSC chips made in Arizona | AppleInsider
After Apple supplier TSMC announced it would increase its Arizona investment, Apple CEO Tim Cook confirmed that the company would use chips built in the state.
Pretty good chance that is SoC dies for: AppleTV , Apple Watch , HomePod , 'entry plain' iPad , Studio Display , one of the AR/VR SoC. Plus some N-2 iPhone SoC production (where N is current leading edge version number).
It is a start. Way , way ,way better geographical distribution than what they have now. And in worse case scenario could ship N-2 iPhones if lost access to China and Taiwan production facilities for a long time. Again, specularly way better fall back disaster recovery than what they have now.
Tim Cook himself announced that buying American made chips from TSMC will be a great moment for Apple.
Intel is not even a thought in Apple’s mind anymore and Intel doesn’t produce arm chips?
I would love to see some competition in the Arm space and have an alternative to Mediatek and Qualcomm and Samsung. But Apple designs their own chips and uses TSMC to deliver them. It has been a very successful partnership and I highly doubt that is going to change anytime soon.
Intel is not even a thought in Apple’s mind anymore and Intel doesn’t produce arm chips?
I would love to see some competition in the Arm space and have an alternative to Mediatek and Qualcomm and Samsung. But Apple designs their own chips and uses TSMC to deliver them. It has been a very successful partnership and I highly doubt that is going to change anytime soon.
Don't count Intel out.
It's my understanding that a key part of the reason TSMC (and Samsung) have been able to produce chips with such small feature sizes is that they purchased several EUV photolithography machines from ASML, the only company that makes them (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASML_Holding). These machines produce extreme ultraviolet (EUV) light, whose wavelengths are sufficiently small to etch low-nm scale features. [ASML is a Dutch multinational. I recall reading these machines are designed principally in ASML's US offices, and assembled by their facilities worldwide.]
Intel, by contrast, has been slow in its purchase of these machines. Here's a summary of the installed EUV base as of April 2022 by Scotten Jones from https://semiwiki.com/semiconductor-services/ic-knowledge/311036-intel-and-the-euv-shortage/ . You can see the clear contrast between Intel, Samsung and TSMC:
[The bullet points are a direct quote from Scotten Jones.]
However, even though Intel has been a slow starter, it's now ramping up its own purchase of advanced ASML EUV machines:
- Intel currently has 3 development fabs phases that are EUV capable and 1 EUV capable production fab although only the development fab has EUV tools installed. Intel is building 8 more EUV capable production fabs.
- Micron Technology has announced they are pulling in EUV from the one delta node to one gamma. Micron’s Fab 16-A3 in Taiwan is under construction to support EUV.
- Nanya has talked about implementing EUV.
- SK Hynix is in production of one alpha DRAM using EUV for approximately 5 layers and have placed a large EUV tool order with ASML.
- Samsung is using EUV for 7nm and 5nm logic and ramping up 3nm. Samsung also has 1z DRAM in production with 1 EUV layer and 1 alpha ramping up with 5 EUV layers. Fabs in Hwaseong and Pyeongtaek have EUV tools with significant expansion in Pyeongtaek underway and the planned Austin logic fab will be EUV.
- TSMC has fab 15 phases 5, 6, and 7 running 7nm EUV processes. Fab 18 phase 1, 2, and 3, are running 5nm with EUV. 5nm capacity ended 2021 at 120k wpm and has been projected to reach 240k wpm by 2024. Fab 21 in Arizona will add an additional 20k wpm of 5nm capacity. 3nm is ramping in Fab 18 phases 4, 5, and 6 and is projected to be a bigger node than 5nm. Fab 20 phases 1, 2, 3, and 4, are in the planning stages for 2nm and another 2nm site is being discussed.
Intel orders ASML system for well over $340 mln in quest for chipmaking edge
Intel has placed the first order with ASML for a new, advanced chipmaking tool that will cost "significantly" more than $340 million, as semiconductor manufacturers look to get ahead in a booming industry.
Thus, while there is of course much more to small processes than owning an EUV machine, given Intel's general expertise they may catch up to TSMC within a few years.
I don't know why Intel was not more aggressive in acquiring these early on. Ironically, Intel has been involved with ASML since 1997, and purchased a 15% stake in the company in 2012.
BTW, here's a pic of their Twinscan NXE:3400B during final assembly:
View attachment 2117939
ASML: Deren Maschine produziert die leistungsfähigsten Mikrochips
Für die Digitalisierung braucht es Mikrochips. Und die leistungsfähigsten Halbleiter kann man nur mit Maschinen der niederländischen Firma ASML produzieren. Auf Druck aus den USA verhindert Den Haag nun, dass der Konzern seine beste Maschine nach China liefert.www.nzz.ch
From my understanding Intel did make an order a while ago and delivery is set of 2024 or 2025 and Intel will be the only one to get them for some time being. What they didn't count was that TMSC will have that much volume to deliver to pretty much everyone. I don't know if they tried to save money or they thought their dominance would be enough to bridge the gap and not to invest in current generation ... who knows.
Not technically true. They don't make smartphone arm chips. But they do make chips with Arm cores inside them
FPGA products.
"... Intel® SoC FPGAs are ARM* processor-based and inherit the strength of the ARM* eco-system. ... "
Altera® FPGA Products - FPGA and SoC FPGA Devices and Solutions
Altera® FPGA devices offer a wide variety of configurable embedded SRAM, high-speed transceivers, high-speed I/Os, logic blocks, and routing.
DPU products.
"...
- Up to 16 Arm Neoverse N1 Cores
- ..."
Intel® Infrastructure Processing Unit (Intel® IPU)
Discover IPUs from Intel and what IPUs are and how they improve compute needs. See how IPUs are helping CSPs increase data centers.
Networking products.
Intel's problem is closer to they do everything (trying to make everything for everybody) more so than than they haven't touched Arm at all. Intel product catalog breath is quite large (even after they are trimmed off just a few things in last year or so).
there is way, way , way more to Arm than just making phone SoCs. Those three and Apple aren't all of the players. They are the players in the common PC press, not really the full scope of Arm.
Intel bought Tower Semiconductor. When Apple gets to the point where they are building their own analog modem components TSMC isn't necessarily the only player than Apple will likely deal with. As Apple's chip portfolio gets broader just one vendor doesn't make much sense. Especially where there are different fabrication subspecialties. Apple is chasing 100% monolithic dies now, but at some point that isn't going to work so well for reasons that TSMC and Apple do not totally control.
Intel needs to evolve into being a much better , dependable fab partner , but TSMC doesn't necessarily have a long term lock on every chiplet that Apple will need.