News Intel delays $100 billion Ohio site to next decade: First fab now coming online in 2030

[Admin]

Intel delayed launch of Ohio fabs from 2025 to 2027 – 2028, then delayed them again to 2030 – 2032.

Intel delays $100 billion Ohio site to next decade: First fab now coming online in 2030 : Read more

 

[DS426]

Maybe an acknowledgement that they won't have Ohio ready in time to ride the AI wave, eh? Just wait for the next opportunity?

Hoping and waiting for new CHIPS Act type funding and tax incentives?

 

[rluker5]

Intel is probably still waiting on old CHIPs act funding to be paid. The check will be in the mail as soon as all of the AI hype dies down.

 

[phead128]

The new CEO will likely spin off the Intel Foundry, so no point to rush into this project with so much risk and uncertainty.

 

[rluker5]

The new CEO will likely spin off the Intel Foundry, so no point to rush into this project with so much risk and uncertainty.

Yeah, think of all of the money Intel could make by selling off the foundry with the most advanced nodes in the world in 6 months, not even utilizing their best lithography machines. They could make a short term fortune if the US gov let them. Probably dwarf even Nvidias earnings. The shareholders would be rich. So long as they sold their shares quickly.

 

[Hooda Thunkett]

Oh! Oh! Can I be the pedantic one who points out the next decade starts in 2031, not 2030? Please? Pretty please? CanIcanIcanI? Pleeeeeeeese?

 

[TerryLaze]

The new CEO will likely spin off the Intel Foundry, so no point to rush into this project with so much risk and uncertainty.

Yeah, think of all of the money Intel could make by selling off the foundry with the most advanced nodes in the world in 6 months, not even utilizing their best lithography machines. They could make a short term fortune if the US gov let them. Probably dwarf even Nvidias earnings. The shareholders would be rich. So long as they sold their shares quickly.

And who thew heck do you think would buy not even finished fabs? At least at any price that would make intel a decent amount of money.
TSMC is already also building fabs so they don't have the money to spend right now, if they would even be able to use fabs build for someone else, and nobody else is a big enough company to deal with it, they would just buy it to chop it up and sell it peace meal, if even that is an option.

Also spin off that phead is mentioning means new company that still belongs to the old company so any cost and risk would still be on intel.

 

[endocine]

Intel isn't going to be around in 2030 at least in its current form. They had bad leadership that bankrupted it

 

[TerryLaze]

Intel isn't going to be around in 2030 at least in its current form. They had bad leadership that bankrupted it

Have you even any idea about financials?!
Intel is not even close to bankruptcy, they are expanding right now, that's the exact opposite of going bankrupt.

 

[rluker5]

And who thew heck do you think would buy not even finished fabs? At least at any price that would make intel a decent amount of money.
TSMC is already also building fabs so they don't have the money to spend right now, if they would even be able to use fabs build for someone else, and nobody else is a big enough company to deal with it, they would just buy it to chop it up and sell it peace meal, if even that is an option.

Also spin off that phead is mentioning means new company that still belongs to the old company so any cost and risk would still be on intel.

I was being sarcastic. Intel cutting financial ties with the part of the company that they have been spending a ton of money to update in half the time it took the rest of the industry just as they are about to claim a significant milestone with 18A only makes sense if you look at it from the point of chopping up and selling off the company in parts for whatever short term profit you can get before the leftover bits fall back to low value irrelevance.

Some points I've noticed that when you put them together support Intel keeping their in house fab for long term profitability:

The barrier to entry in the CPU design business is rapidly decreasing and seems like it will keep that trend.

The barrier to node improvement is rapidly increasing and seems like it will keep that trend.

In general, CPU performance improvements are tied to # of transistor increases and work per second per transistor increases (which increases heat density).

More profit can be made by better fitting manufacturing to chip design.

You can put those together however you want, but I'm pretty sure the conclusion you will get is it is better for Intel to keep their fabs in house if they don't want the company to fade away to irrelevance.

But thanks for pointing out that my previous post made no sense.

 

[Blastomonas]

They should ask nVidia for a loan. I heard that they can afford it.

 

[endocine]

"Intel delays $100 billion Ohio chipmaking site"

That's not the only thing they are delaying, except maybe going bankrupt. Thanks Pat!

 

[dalek1234]

For fun, I like to place a bet: "it will not happen by 2030. Intel won't have the money for it"

 

[Trake_17]

Oh! Oh! Can I be the pedantic one who points out the next decade starts in 2031, not 2030? Please? Pretty please? CanIcanIcanI? Pleeeeeeeese?

An annoying headline. Sooooo sick of manipulative headline titles. Next decade implies 10 years, which grabs your attention, only to find out they actually meant 5 years. That stuff backfires because you condition people to simply ignore your site.

 

[TerryLaze]

An annoying headline. Sooooo sick of manipulative headline titles. Next decade implies 10 years, which grabs your attention, only to find out they actually meant 5 years. That stuff backfires because you condition people to simply ignore your site.

No, 'a decade' would imply 10 years, 'next decade' would imply the time to the next decade.
I'm sick of manipulative titles as well but the reader not paying attention is a different thing altogether.

 

[phead128]

Also spin off that phead is mentioning means new company that still belongs to the old company so any cost and risk would still be on intel.

The CHIPS ACT allows for 100% ownership divestment of IFS contingent on approval from US Dept of Commerce, and if the new owners continues business strategy and capacity building. The 51% ownership provision does not require US Dept of Commerce approval. The new CEO is likely going for the former, not the latter.

 

[TerryLaze]

The CHIPS ACT allows for 100% ownership divestment of IFS contingent on approval from US Dept of Commerce, and if the new owners continues business strategy and capacity building. The 51% ownership provision does not require US Dept of Commerce approval. The new CEO is likely going for the former, not the latter.

This is a spin off.
https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-i...standalone-fpga-company-under-intel-ownership
Maybe you are talking about a spin off that will then be sold off, if you only say spin off though then it's just the above.