How Intel’s TSMC Venture Could Reshape Chip Supply Chains

Reading Time: 5 minutes

Prefer watching instead of reading? Watch the video here. Prefer reading instead? Scroll down for the full text. Prefer listening instead? Scroll up for the audio player.

P.S. The video and audio are in sync, so you can switch between them or control playback as needed. Enjoy Greyhound Standpoint insights in the format that suits you best. Join the conversation on social media using #GreyhoundStandpoint.

---

Intel is reportedly in advanced discussions with TSMC to form a joint venture that could potentially reshape the future of the x86 platform and the global semiconductor landscape.

Analysts say the move marks a turning point for Intel and its enterprise customers. Once seen as a vertically integrated leader, the company has struggled in recent years to maintain that position.

“Intel’s foundry business has struggled to meet expectations – most notably failing to deliver the level of technical service, predictability, and yield quality that external customers expect,” said Sanchit Vir Gogia, chief analyst and CEO at Greyhound Research. “Several deals have seen missed milestones and failed test runs, particularly when benchmarked against TSMC’s operational excellence.”

However, for enterprise buyers, this changes the calculus, Gogia said, pointing out that many chose Intel precisely because of its internal alignment between design and manufacturing – a one-stop shop that offered tighter integration and faster troubleshooting.

Data from Greyhound’s research indicates that 62% of enterprise technology leaders continue to value tight integration between Intel’s chip design and manufacturing. However, that support is weakening amid growing concerns over Intel’s manufacturing performance.

“We’re still loyal to Intel, but we’ve learned to build fallback scenarios. We can’t afford surprises anymore,” one US-based CIO told Greyhound in a recent fieldnote.

“But this benefit comes with layers of complexity,” Gogia said. “For one, Intel’s foundry operations are still in recovery mode. The business posted a $7 billion operating loss in 2023 – the first such loss since 1986. Attempts to scale it for external customers have struggled, largely due to inconsistent service delivery and a lack of maturity in handling complex customer requirements.”

As quoted in ComputerWorld.com

Additional comments by Greyhound Research analyst:

This is a moment of reckoning for Intel and its enterprise customers. While the company has historically positioned itself as a vertically integrated powerhouse, the reality in recent years has been far messier. Intel’s foundry business has struggled to meet expectations—most notably failing to deliver the level of technical service, predictability, and yield quality that external customers expect. Several deals have seen missed milestones and failed test runs, particularly when benchmarked against TSMC’s operational excellence.

The strategic concern here is less about a design-only future, and more about whether Intel is retreating from a manufacturing role it could no longer competitively fulfil. For enterprise buyers, this changes the calculus. Many chose Intel precisely because of its internal alignment between design and manufacturing—a one-stop shop that offered tighter integration and faster troubleshooting.

According to Greyhound Pulse 2025 | Global CIO Priorities Tracker, 62% of enterprise technology leaders still value that tight integration. But that number has been softening as cracks in Intel’s manufacturing capability become harder to ignore. One CIO in the U.S. we recently spoke with in a Greyhound Fieldnote said it plainly: “We’re still loyal to Intel, but we’ve learned to build fallback scenarios. We can’t afford surprises anymore.”

At Greyhound Research, we believe this shift may ultimately benefit customers—if it leads to better products, faster cycles, and a more competitive Intel. But that outcome is not guaranteed. It hinges on Intel building new strengths in ecosystem coordination, supplier management, and customer transparency—skills it historically didn’t need to exercise.

The JV between Intel and TSMC is entering sensitive territory. The CHIPS Act was passed not just to increase chip output, but to ensure U.S. control over semiconductor infrastructure. That includes where fabs are located, who runs them, and what supply chain risk they expose.

Tweet

TSMC operating Intel fabs—even on U.S. soil—introduces a legal and strategic wrinkle. TSMC is headquartered in Taiwan, which makes the White House understandably cautious given ongoing geopolitical tensions. There’s also the uncomfortable optics: billions in U.S. subsidies potentially enabling a foreign company to manage infrastructure considered foundational to national security.

At the same time, we must acknowledge the reality: TSMC is the global gold standard in chip manufacturing. If the U.S. wants to accelerate domestic chip production and fix Intel’s execution gaps, partnering with TSMC might be a pragmatic compromise. But it’s a compromise that won’t go unnoticed in Washington.

At Greyhound Research, we believe this deal—should it go ahead—will require strong regulatory guardrails. The White House will have a say. So will the Department of Commerce. Enterprise customers aligned to federal contracts or operating under U.S. compliance regimes should expect increased scrutiny and additional supplier disclosures. This is not just about who runs the fabs—it’s about the legal and geopolitical boundaries that enterprises must now map onto their chip supply chains.

There’s no doubt TSMC brings clear advantages—better yields, faster time-to-market, and greater process maturity, particularly on advanced nodes. If Intel can tap into that capability, customers could benefit from stronger, more competitive chips in areas like AI acceleration and high-performance computing.

But this benefit comes with layers of complexity. For one, Intel’s foundry operations are still in recovery mode. The business posted a $7 billion operating loss in 2023—the first such loss since 1986. Attempts to scale it for external customers have struggled, largely due to inconsistent service delivery and a lack of maturity in handling complex customer requirements.

Outsourcing to TSMC might resolve some of those pain points. But it also fragments ownership. Buyers will now need to trace their supply chains across multiple corporate and national boundaries. If something goes wrong—supply crunch, node defect, delivery delay—who owns the fix? Intel? TSMC? Both? Neither?

In one Greyhound Fieldnote, a VP of Infrastructure at a global cloud platform headquartered in the EU said, “We’d love to see Intel step up their game, but we can’t afford to be stuck in a three-way finger-pointing match when something breaks.” This is not an isolated sentiment—our Greyhound Pulse 2025 | Infrastructure Investment Tracker shows a rising demand for simplified, accountable supply models in AI infrastructure planning.

At Greyhound Research, we believe the key risk isn’t outsourcing—it’s governance. Intel must rebuild enterprise trust by providing transparent operating models, service-level clarity, and single-point escalation paths. If it can do that while leveraging TSMC’s excellence, this could be a turnaround story. If not, it’s just reshuffling the risk.

Copyright Policy. All content contained on the Greyhound Research website is protected by copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published, or broadcast without the prior written permission of Greyhound Research or, in the case of third-party materials, the prior written consent of the copyright owner of that content. You may not alter, delete, obscure, or conceal any trademark, copyright, or other notice appearing in any Greyhound Research content. We request our readers not to copy Greyhound Research content and not republish or redistribute them (in whole or partially) via emails or republishing them in any media, including websites, newsletters, or intranets. We understand that you may want to share this content with others, so we’ve added tools under each content piece that allow you to share the content. If you have any questions, please get in touch with our Community Relations Team at connect@thofgr.com.