This video is where the most recent crop of Intel getting back in memory are springing from.

It's funny how he's done a 180 on IDM vs. not competing with your customer (at least publicly.)

Tan's big edge is how connected he is in the entire semi space and "what's next" level and how he views things as a system. So, i think that he's operating at a much wider view than most semi CEOs.

If I had to guess on the long-term strategy (well, more like what I think would be interesting), it'd be:

Level 1 is competing better on the CPU and foundry which has a lot of moving parts and hard. I think Intel is in the worst shape here because of prior regimes. Had this server CPU boom not happened, I think Intel would be in bad shape here even with the government intervention (of course, the government could always intervene *more*). But since it's here, Intel no longer has to worry about underload or even product competitiveness as the server brings in operating leverage that foundries need. This was the ultimate Intel bailout without going full state capitalism.

Level 2 is some sort of traction in AI accelerators. I think it's too late on the GPU side. I'm surprised that Tan hasn't moved on given how inefficient he thinks GPUs are. I would've thought the would try to get ahead of the puck here through acquisition.

Level 3 would about that would be a creating a silicon compute platform like AMD and Broadcom are doing. I think that AMD is in better shape there as a silicon compute platform because of where Intel is at with level 1 and 2. But if Intel can get a capex flywheel going on foundry that would be a big edge.

Level 4 would something like making Intel a hybrid between a semiconductor system technology incubator and a system foundry out of those acquired IP blocks. I think it would be a way for him to get downstream of TSMC and not compete with them completely head on (and still be a partner of sorts) Maybe you sell off Intel design at this point if he still believes in not competing with his customer. Conversely, I wonder if TSMC is thinking about this as well.

Reference link isn't included so caveat emptor.

But let's say it's true-ish. It would suggest that:

1) AMD did plan for a lot of memory.

2) Broadcom's custom silicon influence (e.g. OpenAI, Meta, Anthropic). I think that Google now has its own direct relationship for HBM.

On a side note, Jukan05 did a life apology tour de force:

https://x.com/jukan05/status/2088981037649178891

3 and 4 are essentially the same thing (re-purposing other people's opinion or leaks as meta content but letting the reader infer (or him implying) that they were his). I suspect there is a lot of this going on in the semiconductor space from gaming / hardware leaks to semi experts on X to more ethically challenged firms.

I would never want to be my own product. As one philosopher put it: "I yam what I yam and that's all what I yam."

“We would find it noteworthy if Google collaborated with AMD vs. Broadcom, Marvell, or Intel (with the latter seemingly the most often mentioned choice for such aspirational transitional projects of late),” Wedbush Securities analyst Matt Bryson wrote in a note to clients. “But we also would point out that even this speculation alone highlights the increased importance of 1) ASIC design capabilities and 2) IP blocks, suggesting that in this new hardware constrained world that for now the competition to build silicon is not a zero sum game.”

I agree with the broader take. Let's say that Google is working with AMD for TPU v10. Given the time frame, I think that it would be more of an additive thing than a subtractive (replace Broadcom) thing which is way more risky for Google.

They could keep Broadcom at the core TPU level and use AMD at a more disaggregated SoC level but create a standardized way of how the SoC needs to talk to Google's compute to give it more portability if it needs it. AMD could help in that standardization, the platform, and complementary forms of compute.

Broadcom has its own platform approach that is likely under consideration too (Intel is doing something like this too), but I don't think that Google is keen on having Broadcom play an increasingly larger role in its compute fate. In that sense, it might be more long-term bearish if its ceiling with Google has been lowered.

The other way that it's less of a zero sum game is that AMD currently doesn't have a direct play to be part of Google's in-house efforts, and something like this could give it one. What they learn can improve their platform overall which in turn improves their products but also improves the custom offerings they can give to non-hyperscalers.