I’m rooting for both Intel and Samsung. It sounds to me like Intel is ever so slowly getting back on track with Pat there (good interview on the Decoder podcast with him recently, if anyone is interested), but I’d guess we won’t really be able to see if Intel can get their crap together until ~2024-28, considering how long the lead time is for stuff like this. I don’t think Samsung had basically a failed decade like Intel did, but they haven’t been as quick or have as good yields on the last few nodes as TSMC has been, if I understand correctly.<p>TSMC being a node or 2 ahead has basically let them hold their customers by the balls, forcing them to take price increases and extreme lead times because there’s simply nowhere else to go for the same quality and performance. It would be great if we got to a place where we had 3 foundries on roughly equal footing, especially for national security and global supply chain robustness. But also because competition is good for us mere consumers as well, of course :)
1. Samsung ( Foundry ) has a culture and history of over promise and under deliver.<p>2. RoadMaps ( at least one like this ) are for investor only.<p>3. Samsung is also the reason why we have "nm" numbers that dont at least correlate to something. ( 99.9999% of the Internet blame TSMC for it ) And those numbers you see on roadmap means nothing.<p>4. But credit where credit is due Samsung is very serious about catching up to TSMC. Their total investment numbers dont lie.<p>IMO There simply isn't enough space for <i>three</i> leading edge Foundry. So either Samsung or Intel will have to let go. And Intel currently has the upper hand in terms of geopolitical and business backing. Which is what I think this article and PR to investor is all about. Samsung is not giving up without a fight. ( And why there are rumours about Samsung buying ARM from Softbank )
I'm so tired of these articles that regurgitate marketing claims as though they were guaranteed or representative of now. You can produce roadmaps all you want - Intel did so for years before finally acknowledging it was not actually achieving them.<p>It's no different from when some company gets articles saying "X will destroy Y!" when Y is shipping, and X is 6-12+ months out, assuming no schedule slippage.
It's time for Tim Cook to pick up the phone and start working with Intel and Samsung to fab their chips in the future. We ave to remember that TSMC were never going to leapfrog Intel without the help of Apple's iPhone money. Apple can prop up Intel and Samsung the same way.