Friday, November 1st 2024
Apple and Samsung in the Fray to Acquire Intel: Rumor
Apple and Samsung are reportedly in the fray to acquire Intel, according a spectacular rumor cited by Moore's Law is Dead. This would put the list of companies looking to acquire Intel at 3—Apple, Samsung, and Qualcomm. All three are Arm licensees, with unique characteristics. Apple currently has an Arm-based SoC hardware division that makes custom chips for all its devices, including Macs. Samsung would go on to be an overseas parent company for an American heritage company like Intel, but something like this is not unheard of when you consider examples such as Boston Dynamics being acquired by Hyundai Motors, or Westinghouse Nuclear's acquisition by Japan's Toshiba, before changing hands to Canadian Bookfield Partners. Then there's Qualcomm—the American company is having a bit of a falling out with Arm, and the prospect of owning the x86 IP should be tempting.
Intel retains large amounts of market-share in both the PC processor and server processor markets, however, the company's stock price has been on a downward trend for several quarters now, causing its valuation to drop to levels where any of the other big tech companies can afford to buy it out. The company spent close to $10 billion on a GPU architecture project spanning not just a contemporary graphics architecture to power the integrated graphics solutions of its PC processors, but also discrete gaming GPUs; and most importantly, an AI GPU architecture under the "Ponte Vecchio" project. Intel's Xe-HP AI GPU missed its performance targets or was too late to the market, leaving Intel with a gaping hole that it could only fill with a slew of cost-cutting measures. It doesn't help that Intel Foundry is losing its edge, and none of the logic tiles of Core Ultra "Arrow Lake" processor is made on an Intel foundry node.
Sources:
Moore's Law is Dead (YouTube), Tom's Guide
Intel retains large amounts of market-share in both the PC processor and server processor markets, however, the company's stock price has been on a downward trend for several quarters now, causing its valuation to drop to levels where any of the other big tech companies can afford to buy it out. The company spent close to $10 billion on a GPU architecture project spanning not just a contemporary graphics architecture to power the integrated graphics solutions of its PC processors, but also discrete gaming GPUs; and most importantly, an AI GPU architecture under the "Ponte Vecchio" project. Intel's Xe-HP AI GPU missed its performance targets or was too late to the market, leaving Intel with a gaping hole that it could only fill with a slew of cost-cutting measures. It doesn't help that Intel Foundry is losing its edge, and none of the logic tiles of Core Ultra "Arrow Lake" processor is made on an Intel foundry node.
123 Comments on Apple and Samsung in the Fray to Acquire Intel: Rumor
Non-tech people tend to not see anything past "Ryzen 7" or "Core 7", and have no idea that Intel has more models. So it's not hurting anyone and it helps people who want a more exact outcome from their purchase.
I just don't see any company being allowed to buy Intel, I wouldn't expect shareholders or the US govt to allow it. Apple has no use for Intel, but if Apple were allowed to buy Intel it wouldn't be good for the consumer.
Intel is no more immune to buyout, bankruptcy, etc than ANY other company.Intel has about 2-3 desktop chips that they split into 20-30 SKUs (35W, 65W, 125W and 170W). AMD also has about 2 desktop chips and they split them into about 10 SKUs. I prefer the latter.The past cannot be easily used to determine the future as too much has changed. For about 30 years (1985-2015), Intel and Microsoft held about 90% of all computing devices and computing software. Now there are dozens and dozens of players with just about as much power if not more than Intel. It's true that AMD could have failed anytime but the purchase of ATI saved them. Intel had no idea how important the GPU and mobile (smartphones) would become. Not competing in those markets is very bad for Intel regardless of their current products and node access.
All those years of stock buy backs and short sighted management have come to bite intc in the ass.
I"m not a stock analyst or a computer engineer so I don't really have much foresight into this. It seems weird that Qualcomm isn't interested in buying them
In other words, all of the above named companies have plenty of both, so IF there is a buyout/takeover actually in the works in some high-level exec suite somewhere, it will basically boil down to 'HOW MUCH' and "What's in it for me/us"....
And regardless of which company does what, I'm certain good ole Patty boi will want to take his gazzilion $$ share right off the top, then run & hide in some dark, dreary cavern somewhere, never to be heard from again, which IMHO, would be a good thing ....
But is it worth buying a giant, expensive, inefficient company, with products that are outdated compared to its competitors and that generates US$ 16 billion in losses per quarter like Intel? Is it worth spending a LOT of money to buy this company that doesn't generate profits (it only generates US$16 billion in losses per quarter)?
How much would the purchase cost? 1 US dolar? (seriously, I'm not kidding)
Intel have a large amount of products outside of CPUs (despite the sell offs), and are primary members of many of the standards groups.
To be honest I'd be more concerned about Broadcom than Qualcomm trying to buy it.
Apple
Alphabet
Amazon
Meta
Nvidia
TSMC
Broadcom
Oracle
Samsung
AMD
Cisco
Qualcomm
Texas Instruments
IBM
Ultimately Gelsinger is fighting against the inertia of an engineering company that hasn't done real engineering for at least a decade. That sort of rot takes time to clean up and while that's going on there is guaranteed to be pain. It's a delicate balancing act between not changing too much too fast (so that continuity is retained) while also not changing too slowly (so that the turnaround takes too long). Personally I think Gelsinger is doing just fine.Please educate yourself on what "intellectual property" is before making such ignorant statements.
- That Intel and AMD basically share x86-related stuff like patents and promise to not pursue litigation for any potential patent infringements (Agreement was made in 2009)
- AMD licences x86 from Intel and Intel does the same to AMD for x86-64
- if the cross-licence agreement was to be nullified by a buyout of Intel or AMD then either side could theoretically sue the other one and halt all sales of any CPU that uses x86 or x86-64 patents since the agreement is no longer in place.
The original patents from late 90s early 2000s are "expired" afaik but that would mean most of the stuff made to optimize x86 or x86-64 will still be protected under IP/patents and each optimization of both instruction sets just extends the patents anyway.Basically if my armchair non-SME reading of it means that theoretically if one side was bought out then there is a possibility that until a new agreement is made no x86(-64) related CPUs could be manufactured by either company without the possibility of litigation occurring between them.
Intel/AMD cross-license Agreement:
www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2488/000119312509236705/dex102.htm
I regret to see that TechPowerUp ( TPU ) continues to spread rumours from so questionable "sources" like Moore's Law is Dead.
Seriously, just take a look at a history of "news" from Moore's Law is Dead.
TPU, please continue to make us think by providing us with interesting topics even if it goes against our feelings and thoughts about what's happening in the tech world. Your reputation as one of the best online tech news and review sources is secure and I for one continue to want to have all the possible information and not just what I want to hear.
All I'm saying is that Intel needs serious help, and I feel that with how much effort Apple has put into their consumer chips, that they would stand to benefit if Apple were to acquire them.
The Apple M series is a phenomenal feat of engineering even if it doesn't play nicely with some of the apps we PCMR enthusiasts enjoy. However, I will say that it seems unlikely that Apple would provide products to the Windows DIY world or want to license x86 to other companies. They would be most interested in the fabs and some of the IP.
Again, we are not in any situation in the past. In the very, very beginning of tech (let's say 1960's to 70's) no players were very well established and chips were just being considered for different applications. As things played out, Intel and Microsoft rose to domination from the mid 80's to the mid 2010's. Now for the FIRST time since the unestablished beginnings of the tech market, there are numerous powerful players (some with market caps over ONE TRILLION DOLLARS!!!). Intel's entire business strategy was based on unchallenged market dominance. Intel executives do not have the requisite skills to navigate an ever-changing competitive landscape. It's the very reason why we are having this conversation. It's the very reason these rumors are getting spread (some true, some false). Intel' future is uncertain and it's currently on the wrong path.Nice vague reply. I guess I'm just not familiar with the US governmental power that says Intel is forever free from acquisition. But please send me the law, constitutional clause or regulation that gives Intel such powerful protections. I would really like to read it.
One example that comes to mind is AuthenTec who were making fingerprint sensors for lots of laptop vendors... well until Apple bought them... that didn't last long. It would really have made little difference for Apple to keep that company going as a component supplier in the space they were in, but no f**k everyone else.
Apple would more than likely break it up and sell bits off; maybe networking to HP, maybe some of the core logic stuff to any other interested parties, whatever's left of the FPGA business to whoever is in that field, fabs to someone (maybe keep one), etc.