Intel Abandons In‑House Glass Substrate R&D, Leans on External Suppliers

[AleksandarK]

Under its new CEO, Lip-Bu Tan, Intel is stepping back from building its glass substrate technology in favor of sourcing ready-made solutions from specialized vendors. Driven by Tan's strategy to concentrate resources on Intel's primary lines, CPU/GPU development, and foundry, Intel's operations are becoming leaner. By outsourcing glass substrates, Intel can significantly reduce development timelines and mitigate the financial risk associated with pioneering novel substrate manufacturing. Crucially, this model grants Intel the freedom to evaluate multiple suppliers, pivot quickly if performance or cost benchmarks change, and integrate advanced packaging more rapidly than if it continued to develop substrates internally. Just as the company is focusing on 14A and 18A-P(T), abandoning in-house glass substrate development is a step in the right direction to reduce costs and achieve profitability.

Meanwhile, the glass‑substrate sector is gathering momentum, particularly among South Korean firms. SK Hynix, in partnership with Applied Materials, has been trialing its Absolics pilot line for some time, while Samsung has recently scaled up its efforts in this niche. JNTC celebrated the opening of its first glass‑substrate plant in May, announcing sixteen prospective clients and projecting revenues to climb from $14.7 million this year to $147 million in 2026, and ultimately hitting $735 million by 2028. A complementary facility under construction in Vietnam will triple the original plant's output, targeting a combined annual production of roughly 500,000 substrates. Intel hasn't yet named which suppliers it will partner with. Still, the company plans to tap into this growing network, potentially joining JNTC's customer roster, to support its advanced packaging roadmap and accelerate product rollouts.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[john_]

More good news about Intel

 

[Daven]

More good news about Intel

View attachment 406231

Your post reminded me of the Itanic. When I went to look for a good Itanic graphic, I found this gem with sinking ships in the logo. Lol!

Edit: The AMD and Intel test platform notes are hilarious!

 

[Chaitanya]

More good news about Intel

View attachment 406231

And we dont want AMD-TSMC monopoly either.

 

[Daven]

And we dont want AMD-TSMC monopoly either.

The reason Intel is going out of business is because the industry is SUPER competitive right now and they have been unable to provide solutions that beat these competitors (consoles, smartphones, data center, crypto, AI, cellular communications, SoCs, GPUs, etc). Remember, the tech industry is not just large desktop RGB gaming rigs that run X86 Windows. Even when Intel is gone, all players will still have to compete like crazy.

 

[BoxCutter]

The way Intel is going I hope they stop giving them subsidies, they really should stop giving those period. If Intel can't manage without them it should be allowed to die or shrink.

 

[tommo1982]

The reason Intel is going out of business is because the industry is SUPER competitive right now and they have been unable to provide solutions that beat these competitors (consoles, smartphones, data center, crypto, AI, cellular communications, SoCs, GPUs, etc). Remember, the tech industry is not just large desktop RGB gaming rigs that run X86 Windows. Even when Intel is gone, all players will still have to compete like crazy.

There were many opportunities to be part of that market and Intel didn't wish to do so. They were so focused on record high profits, they took a nap and are now surprised everyone else is ahead. This is not good news. Intel had really good manufacturing technologies. It's their implementation what was lacking.

 

[Daven]

There were many opportunities to be part of that market and Intel didn't wish to do so. They were so focused on record high profits, they took a nap and are now surprised everyone else is ahead. This is not good news. Intel had really good manufacturing technologies. It's their implementation what was lacking.

"There were many opportunities to be part of ANY market and Intel didn't wish to do so."

Fixed that for ya.

 

[dyonoctis]

The reason Intel is going out of business is because the industry is SUPER competitive right now and they have been unable to provide solutions that beat these competitors (consoles, smartphones, data center, crypto, AI, cellular communications, SoCs, GPUs, etc). Remember, the tech industry is not just large desktop RGB gaming rigs that run X86 Windows. Even when Intel is gone, all players will still have to compete like crazy.

Super competive in HPC and the datacenter market, but the mainstream PC marketshare still put Intel in a very dominant position, with the third competitor being a footnote still dealing with various compatilibity issues.

Arm still got a very tough road ahead of them before we see them in profesionals/heavy duty computers. Thin and light for people who don't much beside browinsg and office stuff sure, but the other segement? AMD will just become the de facto replacement for intel without having to do anything beside existing. It's going to be a very unbalanced market for a long time if Intel kick the bucket without ARM windows becoming at least as good the Mac lineup both in formfactors, and software compatibility.

 

[Panther_Seraphin]

... beat these competitors ....

I would say they are stuggling to compete in equal terms which is the bigger problem.

Their chips are more expensive to produce, inferior in terms of Perf/Watt and their only distinct benefit is slightly superior IPC/Single threaded performance which matter in certain areas but again is niche in comparison to everywhere else that is benefiting from AMDs superior MT advantages.

 

[Daven]

Super competive in HPC and the datacenter market, but the mainstream PC marketshare still put Intel in a very dominant position, with the third competitor being a footnote still dealing with various compatilibity issues.

Arm still got a very tough road ahead of them before we see them in profesionals/heavy duty computers. Thin and light for people who don't much beside browinsg and office stuff sure, but the other segement? AMD will just become the de facto replacement for intel without having to do anything beside existing. It's going to be a very unbalanced market for a long time if Intel kick the bucket without ARM windows becoming at least as good the Mac lineup both in formfactors, and software compatibility.

The way you are thinking is the reason Intel is failing. Doing what you say will lead to AMD going out of business as well. Haven’t we all learned by now that taking any competitor for granted leads to failure. Intel learned this lesson the hard way starting with the loss of Apple to ARM.

Some of you are STILL not getting it.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

The way you are thinking is the reason Intel is failing. Doing what you say will lead to AMD going out of business. Haven’t we all learned by now that taking any competitor for granted leads to failure. Intel learned this lesson the hard way starting with the loss of Apple to ARM.

Some of you are STILL not getting it.

I think that they produce negative comment with hope Intel stocks to go low and to buy many. After that will make silence or positive hype to make stocks expensive for big profit.

 

[john_]

And we dont want AMD-TSMC monopoly either.

AMD is NOT a monopoly. They are at 10% in GPUs and Intel still sells more CPUs in servers, laptops and desktops.
Nvidia is a monopoly. TSMC is a monopoly.

Obviously TSMC being a monopoly is not good. Unfortunately Samsung keeps rising the bar trying to beat TSMC not create a long lasting profitable node. They jump from one node to the next. Intel unfortunately under it's new CEO seems to have as a goal to try to do the same. Instead of focusing on 18A to start building competitive CPUs and GPUs and gaining experience, they try to rush to the next node to beat TSMC, hoping to secure Apple and Nvidia as customers. Because trillion-dollar companies like Nvidia and Apple will happily take the risk on investing in Samsung or Intel manufacturing, because both Samsung and Intel have perfect manufacturing records. This CEO that the morons in Intel board chose, is playing Intel's future the same way someone would be playing someone else's house in the roulete. He probably thinks "If I secure Apple or/and Nvidia I will gain the CEO title of the year, maybe even for the decade. If I don't and Intel goes bankrupt, who cares? I'll find work elsewhere."

Tan and Intel's board of directors are right now the biggest threat to Intel's future, in my opinion.

Edit: The AMD and Intel test platform notes are hilarious!

Indeed. A 500MHz Athlon? LOL. That's 1999, while Itanium 2 was 2002. AMD had 3-4 times faster CPUs than that in 2002. Not to mention the rest of the specs. The slowest IDE driver vs faster and bigger SCSI drives (in RAID I suppose). Is this real or a hoax?
I love that "Don't do at home" in the end.
I am also not surprised to see "Tom's Hardware" and "contract" in the same sentence.

 

[Daven]

Indeed. A 500MHz Athlon? LOL. That's 1999, while Itanium 2 was 2002. AMD had 3-4 times faster CPUs than that in 2002. Not to mention the rest of the specs. The slowest IDE driver vs faster and bigger SCSI drives (in RAID I suppose). Is this real or a hoax?
I love that "Don't do at home" in the end.
I am also not surprised to see "Tom's Hardware" and "contract" in the same sentence.

I'm pretty sure the whole thing was mean to be a joke at Intel's and Tom's Hardware's expense. I found the graphic in a posting on quora.com.

 

[dyonoctis]

The way you are thinking is the reason Intel is failing. Doing what you say will lead to AMD going out of business as well. Haven’t we all learned by now that taking any competitor for granted leads to failure. Intel learned this lesson the hard way starting with the loss of Apple to ARM.

Some of you are STILL not getting it.

I merely stated that the market, who's finally somewhat balanced interm of choice after more than a decade of massive unbalance, will become unbalanced again if Intel quit in the very near future. I would rather have Intel dip once the heat get real in the mainstream market, with a very strong third player, than them quitting right about now as you have suggested many times. It's never been an issue when a player had to dip from a market because they've been kicked by a stronger competitor in that market. What's happening now seems to be a bit different:

It's looks like that massive HPC or phone revenue is pretty much mandatory to stay in the mainstream chip market wich sounds kind of scary. Even if Intel manage to make a good client CPU in the next few years it won't prevent them from having to leave the market if they can't get more money from HPC/datacenter. And look at zen 5, meager gains for the client, but great arch for the datacenter. So still a money maker either way.

It's insane to think that the company who still got over half of the marketshare in client CPU might not be able to stay in that market. Their client revenu alone was bigger than the total revenue of AMD the last that time I checked. Having the biggest client CPU revenu in the market isn't enough to stay in that market. Imagine still massivelly outselling your competitors, but having the futur looking dire because you don't do as well in other sectors. The client segment doesn't super healthy from a conssumer pov, since it doesn't seem to be a sector sustainable as a standalone.

Its turning into the digital camera market: none of the players who survived to this day in that segment have that market as their sole breadwinner. Its their other activities that pays for it. Wich explain how brands like Nikon managed to stay afloat even though they've been so complacent, people really thought that they gave up on competing in the camera sector at some point.

 

[Daven]

I merely stated that the market, who's finally somewhat balanced interm of choice after more than a decade of massive unbalance, will become unbalanced again if Intel quit in the very near future. I would rather have Intel dip once the heat get real in the mainstream market, with a very strong third player, than them quitting right about now as you have suggested many times. It's never been an issue when a player had to dip from a market because they've been kicked by a stronger competitor in that market. What's happening now seems to be a bit different:

It's looks like that massive HPC or phone revenue is pretty much mandatory to stay in the mainstream chip market wich sounds kind of scary. Even if Intel manage to make a good client CPU in the next few years it won't prevent them from having to leave the market if they can't get more money from HPC/datacenter. And look at zen 5, meager gains for the client, but great arch for the datacenter. So still a money maker either way.

It's insane to think that the company who still got over half of the marketshare in client CPU might not be able to stay in that market. Their client revenu alone was bigger than the total revenue of AMD the last that time I checked. Having the biggest client CPU revenu in the market isn't enough to stay in that market. Imagine still massivelly outselling your competitors, but having the futur looking dire because you don't do as well in other sectors. The client segment doesn't super healthy from a conssumer pov, since it doesn't seem to be a sector sustainable as a standalone.

Its turning into the digital camera market: none of the players who survived to this day in that segment have that market as their sole breadwinner. Its their other activities that pays for it. Wich explain how brands like Nikon managed to stay afloat even though they've been so complacent, people really thought that they gave up on competing in the camera sector at some point.

I understand what you are saying. But you can bring a horse to water but you can't make it drink. As much as you might want otherwise, the board, the executives, the shareholders, the corporate culture, the project teams, etc., almost none of the internal structure at Intel wants to try and compete. And you know what, I can't even say why it's that way. Maybe they think they are better than everyone else. Maybe they can never get the votes to move in any other direction. Maybe there is just too much in fighting. But whatever the reason, there will be no Intel in the very near future and NO action they have taken in the last five years or the next five years is going to stop that. And it won't be anyone's fault but their's.

 

[Panther_Seraphin]

Intel had the best part of a decade with little to no competition. Now that there is valid competition they are collapsing from the ground up.

Its going to take a hell of a rework from the top down to get back to being competative IMO.

 

[iameatingjam]

The way Intel is going I hope they stop giving them subsidies, they really should stop giving those period. If Intel can't manage without them it should be allowed to die or shrink.

It is shrinking, this thread is literally about that.

 

[Crackong]

The way I look at this news

 

[SRB151]

I merely stated that the market, who's finally somewhat balanced interm of choice after more than a decade of massive unbalance, will become unbalanced again if Intel quit in the very near future. I would rather have Intel dip once the heat get real in the mainstream market, with a very strong third player, than them quitting right about now as you have suggested many times. It's never been an issue when a player had to dip from a market because they've been kicked by a stronger competitor in that market. What's happening now seems to be a bit different:

It's looks like that massive HPC or phone revenue is pretty much mandatory to stay in the mainstream chip market wich sounds kind of scary. Even if Intel manage to make a good client CPU in the next few years it won't prevent them from having to leave the market if they can't get more money from HPC/datacenter. And look at zen 5, meager gains for the client, but great arch for the datacenter. So still a money maker either way.

It's insane to think that the company who still got over half of the marketshare in client CPU might not be able to stay in that market. Their client revenu alone was bigger than the total revenue of AMD the last that time I checked. Having the biggest client CPU revenu in the market isn't enough to stay in that market. Imagine still massivelly outselling your competitors, but having the futur looking dire because you don't do as well in other sectors. The client segment doesn't super healthy from a conssumer pov, since it doesn't seem to be a sector sustainable as a standalone.

Its turning into the digital camera market: none of the players who survived to this day in that segment have that market as their sole breadwinner. Its their other activities that pays for it. Wich explain how brands like Nikon managed to stay afloat even though they've been so complacent, people really thought that they gave up on competing in the camera sector at some point.

Here's a number to tell you how bad it it......Intel now has 62% of datacenter market to AMD's 33%, but AMD's revenue is more than Intel's in the same market. Yes, they're still moving chips, but at steep discounts. Core Ultras are now hitting 40% off of list just to move them, and it's still not working.

I wonder if Tan's scrapping of Intel marketing includes their IDF marketing slush fund. It's probably waht's keeping them alive with the OEM's.

 

[Six_Times]

dumbest move this new guy has done yet.

 

[sLowEnd]

Glass substrate's neat. Here's a short video from Intel last year highlighting the perks of it

 

[Prima.Vera]

Oh, how the mighty had fallen....

 

[Rightness_1]

How the mighty has fallen.