Not all handouts. Also the FABS they are building in the US will also benefit the US economy. There some US companies that will use their FABS instead of using china etc. Or would you rather Intel takes money from the US gov and gives nothing back? What does AMD give back? do they have FABS for US companies to make use of? Intels FABS might not be running perfectly now, but it won't always be that way, and like I have said before, at least they are not totally FABless like AMD are, which could bite them on the bum at some point.
Why is it not possible to critique Intel without someone pulling a whataboutism concerning AMD? Secondly, what is Intel "giving back" to this country? Because it seems to me that intel is a NET negative for consumers and the x86 industry as a whole. They constantly try to engage in monopolistic and anti competitive tactics...for example, who knows where the x86 industry would be or AMD's partnership with Global Foundries had Intel not engaged in an ILLEGAL campaign of bribing OEMs in the 2000s like Dell to NOT carry AMD products (this has been proven in court in several jurisdictionsand is an undeniable fact)?
Intel is still doing it to this day, they bribe OEMs....sorry, not bribery, but or "joint development funds" (although I dont know how it isnt bribery when youre basically paying a company to NOT use your competitor)to keep AMD chips out of the majority of laptop models....that's not competition or innovation, that's cartelism and monopoly and it comes at the consumers expense. For the past several years AMD has had superior products, but Intel has been able to stave that off through basically bribery and selling chips at cost which creates a situation where the superior product DOESNT succeed. How can anybody cheer for that or that behavior?
The bottom line is this: in a defacto duopoly, the best situation for consumers is a 50%/50% split in marketshare to promote thr most competition and the lowest prices..that is OBJECTIVELY true. Therefore, since Intel has the majority of marketshare in all segments of x86, it is also OBJECTIVELY true that any increase in that marketshare is BAD for consumers....so I ask again, why cheer for Intel? All these reasons are exactly why I do not understand why people are excited for Intel to make dGPUs...all Intel will do is take marketshare from AMD because it's been proven that Nvidia fans will never buy anything other than Nvidia, and we'll be in the exact same spot we were in befofe....only this time, Intel can use their dGPUs to turn the screws on OEMs even more: "Bundle your prebuilts with our CPU and dGPU and we'll give the dGPU at cost....just as long as you ensure that AMD CPUs are only used in a single, budget model with the lowest sales figures". Yes, Intel will use any success in dGPU to put even more pressure on AMD in x86....not with innovation or along the superior product, but through corporation and cartelism.
P.S. The fact that x86 is a duopoly and the American government gave billions to only one side of that duopoly is crazy, it destroys any sense of a free and fair market, and no, I'm not saying they should have given money to AMD too, no corporation with billions of dollars should get taxpayer money. What tje government should have done is say to Intel: "If you don't build some fabs here, we're going to start a monopoly investigation against you...."
P.S.S. I'm not an "AMD fan", I'm a fan of what is objectively best for me, the consumer, and it is NEVER in the consumer's interest for a monopolistic company to extend that monopoly. If the day ever came where AMD captured 51% of the market, I'd be cheering for Intel to take that 1% back.
