한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina

from the implementation of the chip act to kissinger’s public remarks, we can see that intel is at a critical moment of decision. faced with tsmc’s geographical advantages and the support of the us government, intel must make a difficult decision: continue to rely on the foundry model, or seek a breakthrough?

intel's predicament stems from its own needs, but its development is also closely related to the global technology landscape. intel's chip business is its core, but it also faces pressure from global competitors. kissinger's views clearly show this situation: the us government must support the establishment of a sustainable semiconductor supply chain and play the advantages of the internal control console.

he believes that relying solely on tsmc cannot guarantee long-term development. only by establishing a strong technology supply chain around the world can intel's future be guaranteed. he advocated "idm 2.0" and encouraged the development of american manufacturing through pre-order commitments and other means. the success of this model requires the joint efforts of the government and technology companies to provide support for emerging companies and enhance the market competitiveness of intel's foundries.

however, this is not a simple business issue, but also a political and technological challenge. the degree of dependence of the us national security agencies on intel is closely related to the degree of control over the semiconductor industry. in order to ensure national security, the united states has to pay a price to support intel's transformation and upgrading, so that it can achieve independent development in the long run.

such an opportunity also means re-examining the operating model of the technology industry and enterprises. whether intel's foundry can break away from dependence in the future is a major challenge facing the world's technology industry.