1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

    Dismiss Notice

Intel in talks to buy GlobalFoundries for about $30 billion

Discussion in 'CPUs' started by sidthesexist, 16 Jul 2021.

  1. Hunterlit

    Gangster

    Joined: 7 Jul 2021

    Posts: 126

    Location: Warwickshire

    Would u be right in saying that AMD will be having the last laugh? I'm not too familiar with the Intel to AMD comparison, but AMD do look like they're ahead of their game compared to 10 years ago.
     
  2. jigger

    Capodecina

    Joined: 28 May 2007

    Posts: 15,120

    This isn’t about Intel getting better. It’s about taking away options from Nvidia and RTG while forcing them to compete for wafers. Intel can’t improve but they can produce lots of garbage and sell it at a loss.
     
  3. jigger

    Capodecina

    Joined: 28 May 2007

    Posts: 15,120

    If Intel do buy GloFlo, I hope they at least do the decent thing and flood the market with dirt cheap Intel graphics cards.
     
  4. smilingcrow

    Hitman

    Joined: 27 Apr 2007

    Posts: 947

    Obviously they wouldn't be primarily buying buildings.
    The cost of creating a large fab building even without the tools for a cutting edge node is still staggeringly high.
    I am sure it is much quicker to retool a working fab than to start from scratch or to bring a mothballed building up to speed.
    So this is another potential positive, but hardly the main reason.
     
  5. LePhuronn

    Soldato

    Joined: 26 Sep 2010

    Posts: 6,392

    Location: Stoke-on-Trent

    It's not quite that simple, but certainly a large part of it.
     
  6. 0h_no_not_again

    Gangster

    Joined: 29 Jun 2016

    Posts: 316

    Fabs require REALLY special environmental control to be put in. The kind that needs the building to be specifically designed for it.
     
  7. 0h_no_not_again

    Gangster

    Joined: 29 Jun 2016

    Posts: 316

    I think people are over-estimating the importance of cutting edge nodes outside of HUGE dies on CPUs, GPUs, FPGAs, etc.

    A hell of a lot of Intel's devices will be fabbed on nodes that are 2+ "generations" old, and will stay there for 10+ years. There are various reasons, but it often comes down to power consumption, robustness, safety and validation costs.

    For example, their Altera division are still offering Max V CPLD's (~FPGA) that are fabbed on 180nm. These devices are still heavily used throughout industry and is just one example of hundreds they manufacture.
     
  8. stuartam

    Gangster

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 381

    There is also the skilled workforce which I would think costs a lot to get up to speed
     
  9. KompuKare

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 31 Dec 2010

    Posts: 1,147

    Yes, this is often overlooked.
    Anandtech ran a TSMC Process Node By Revenue article:
    https://www.anandtech.com/show/16621/tsmc-q1-2021-process-node-revenue-more-7nm-no-more-20nm
    [​IMG]
    So leading nodes are usually less than 50% of TSMC's revenue.

    Pure foundries keep old nodes as long as they have customers (TSMC will move some stuff so if they have two 7nm lines, one of them might be re-tooled for 6nm as demand for 7nm tapers off).
    One of Intel's problem is that aside from Atom and chipsets, they never had any use of the old nodes and re-tool most (almost all?) their factories.
     
  10. Freddie1980

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 25 Sep 2009

    Posts: 7,615

    Location: Billericay, UK

    I believe Intel is still running 22nm foundry, there was talk in late 2019 moving it's chipset process to this older process to help free up capacity on it's 14nm line.
    You call it a problem for Intel having to re-tool it's existing fabs but equally it allows them to vertically algin all there business operations. Also in a down market they aren't beholdant to previously agreed wafer purchasing and can ramp production up or down when it suits them.

    $30b seems really high given the original AMD divestment was around several billion which included AMD's debt at the time.
     
  11. Dave2150

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 31 Oct 2002

    Posts: 8,043

    Good move by Intel, with Global foundries, they'd be able to outsupply AMD by 50 to 1, instead of the current ~20 to 1.

    AMD made a silly move to sell their foundries IMO, as it means they'll never be able to compete with Intel, as they simply can't produce enough CPU's. They have to beg TSMC for wafers.

    Zen 3 has been a fantastic product for AMD, though hampered by terrible stock for many months. Imagine how many extra sales they'd have had, if they'd had a few million more Ryzen 5000 series in stock, when it was all the hype.
     
  12. KompuKare

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 31 Dec 2010

    Posts: 1,147

    20:1 is a joke. So you're saying AMD have 5% of the market?
    And will head to 2%?
    You might want to look at marketshare figures rather than plucking figures out of the air.
    Besides, AMD's supply is almost totally dependent on how many TSMC 7nm wafers they can get.
    Consoles might be using as many as 120,000 wafers which is the equivalent of nearly 80 million Zen 3 CCDs.
    TSMC's annual 7nm is currently around 1,000,000 wafers, so Zen3 CCDs output is mainly depend on how much of TSMC's output AMD can buy.
    Obviously they'd never get 100% of the output, but there was a race between TSMC and Intel: can Intel produce 600 million Zen 3 CCDs equivalent dies?
     
  13. LePhuronn

    Soldato

    Joined: 26 Sep 2010

    Posts: 6,392

    Location: Stoke-on-Trent

    Well, since reporting Dave's post for the blatant trolling they are literally does nothing, I'm just going to call him out for it.

    Dave, stop trolling. It's really pathetic and getting REALLY tiresome. Enough, yeah?
     
  14. Freddie1980

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 25 Sep 2009

    Posts: 7,615

    Location: Billericay, UK

    Trolling or just ignorance? He talks about AMD making a mistake divesting it's fab business but forgets AMD only sold that off so they could raise some much needed working capital and clear their debts so they could avoid bankruptcy.
     
  15. 0h_no_not_again

    Gangster

    Joined: 29 Jun 2016

    Posts: 316

    Oh absolutely. There is literally noone who isn't highly trained. Think of cleaning a clean room :eek:
     
  16. 0h_no_not_again

    Gangster

    Joined: 29 Jun 2016

    Posts: 316

    Awesome data! I thought TSMC might have 30% of revenue in 5nm and 7nm, so lovely to get some firm numbers. I would guess this is because TSMC are undeniably the world leaders in cutting edge nodes, and that other fabs will have higher revenue from older nodes.
     
  17. Freddie1980

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 25 Sep 2009

    Posts: 7,615

    Location: Billericay, UK

    A remarkable turnaround given all the troubles that had moving on from 28nm which they seemed they were stuck on for an eternity
     
  18. LePhuronn

    Soldato

    Joined: 26 Sep 2010

    Posts: 6,392

    Location: Stoke-on-Trent

    Based on the general themes and tone of his posts, I'm going with the former. Literally every post is about how AMD is inferior to Intel in some capacity, and as each point he raises is proven false, some other spurious claim is made.
     
  19. Dave2150

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 31 Oct 2002

    Posts: 8,043

    The layman, this may look like the truth.

    Dig a litle deeper, you'll see Intel currenly out-supplies (and thus outsells) AMD by roughly 20:1. AMD have no manufacturing capacity of their own.

    This recent news of Intel buying Globalfoundries, for $30 billion - will let Intel out-supply (and out sell) by roughly 50:1.

    Intel have already won.

    AMD had a really god design with Zen. Ryzen 5000 series are the best choice of CPU currently for most people/uses, but AMD simply can't produce enough CPU/APU/GPU for all markets/segments worldwide to have any kind of long term impact.

    It doesn't matter how great a deisgn of CPU/GPU/APU you have, if you have to beg/compete with Apple, Nvidia and all the other companies for wafer allocation at TSMC. Apple will always get priority. AMD just can't produce enough to compete with Intel in terms of sales, supply.
     
    Last edited: 24 Jul 2021
  20. b0rn2sk8

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 9 Mar 2003

    Posts: 8,880

    I don't see this as a good thing and I doubt this will ultimately get past regulators. There are only a handful of companies with this capability and Intel swallowing up one of them has implications on the competitiveness of the market, particularly where there is a global shortage....

    If intel want to supply other companies, I'd rather they built up that capacity themselves rather than just swallowing up a competitor.

    Intel don't actually have the cash to buy them so this will be a share deal meaning they are just using their market value to effectively erase a competitor.
     
    Last edited: 24 Jul 2021