A significant transformation has reportedly been set in motion at Intel Corp under the leadership of its new Chief Executive Officer, Lip-Bu Tan, as the company attempts to reposition itself in the competitive semiconductor manufacturing landscape. According to sources familiar with internal discussions, major changes have been proposed within Intel’s contract chipmaking (foundry) business—changes that could carry substantial financial implications and mark a departure from the direction charted by former CEO Pat Gelsinger.
The focus of this potential overhaul lies in altering the chipmaking technology offered to external clients. It has been indicated that rather than continuing to promote the 18A and 18A-P process technologies—previously championed by Gelsinger—Intel may now pivot to emphasizing a more advanced generation of manufacturing processes, specifically the 14A node. This shift, it is believed, has been conceived to better align Intel’s foundry capabilities with the demands of large-scale clients such as Apple and Nvidia, both of which currently rely on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) for their production needs.
It has been noted that this strategic rethink arose shortly after Tan assumed control of the company in March. Within a few months, concerns began to be voiced internally regarding the commercial viability of 18A for external clients. While Intel itself remains the primary consumer of the 18A technology, the lack of uptake among other major tech firms has reportedly reduced the process’s long-term value. These revelations, disclosed by sources under the condition of anonymity, suggest that Intel’s management is evaluating the potential benefits of shelving further external marketing of the 18A platform.
Should such a decision be finalized, financial ramifications are expected. Industry analysts have assessed that discontinuing external support for the 18A and 18A-P processes could result in a significant write-off for the company—potentially in the hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars. These technologies were developed at a considerable cost over several years, with substantial R&D and infrastructure investments already sunk into the initiative. One of the individuals aware of Intel’s plans suggested that while abandoning 18A for external contracts might damage short-term financials, the company’s leadership seems more focused on long-term competitiveness.
Intel has declined to confirm or elaborate on these discussions, maintaining that its Panther Lake chips—expected to be produced using the 18A process and scheduled for release in late 2025—remain a top priority. A spokesperson reaffirmed that the Panther Lake products represent the most advanced processors ever designed and manufactured domestically, underscoring Intel’s continued investment in U.S.-based chip innovation and production.
Meanwhile, the broader strategic pivot to 14A has been described as an attempt to leapfrog the competition. Analysts have noted that while Intel has experienced delays with 18A, TSMC’s N2 (2-nanometer) process has remained on schedule. In order to regain traction and attract high-profile contracts, Intel is now being seen as channeling its efforts toward a manufacturing node that may offer superior efficiency and performance, with the hope of setting a new industry benchmark.
This recalibration of priorities is viewed as critical to Intel’s survival and success in the global foundry market. Unlike TSMC and Samsung, Intel has struggled in recent years to draw external clients to its contract manufacturing services. With companies such as Apple, AMD, and Nvidia committing billions to chip orders with TSMC, Intel’s foundry ambitions have yet to yield the kind of partnerships necessary to establish itself as a major third-party fabrication provider.
The implications of Intel’s new direction have also been reflected in market behavior. Following early reports of the strategic shift, Intel’s shares fell as much as 5% on the Nasdaq. While investors have previously responded positively to signs of cost-cutting and innovation, the prospect of a write-off and the uncertainty of a strategic overhaul have introduced fresh skepticism.
Still, Tan is said to be pressing ahead swiftly, confident that recalibrating toward the more promising 14A node will better position the company for the demands of future chip design and high-volume manufacturing. His urgency stems from an understanding that failure to win over external clients could render Intel’s foundry business increasingly dependent on internal product lines—an outcome that would severely limit its global influence.
In sum, a pivotal moment appears to be unfolding at Intel. Under Tan’s leadership, the company seems to be prepared to take bold, costly decisions in pursuit of long-term competitiveness. The success of this strategy may ultimately hinge on Intel’s ability to deliver on its next-generation technologies and lure high-value clients away from entrenched rivals in a fast-evolving semiconductor landscape.
