Can Intel Reclaim Its Throne?

Apr 15
Intel, once the undisputed king of semiconductors, is now in the midst of an epic transformation. Can CEO Lip-Bu Tan's ambitious turnaround plan restore Intel to its former glory, or will the company continue to struggle in an increasingly competitive landscape?

Share this article:

Intel: The Silicon Struggle?

Intel's journey from industry pioneer to semiconductor giant—and now a company fighting to reclaim its technological edge—presents a compelling narrative of innovation, dominance, complacency, and attempted reinvention. Since assuming the role of Intel’s CEO on March 18, 2025, Lip-Bu Tan has outlined a comprehensive strategy to revitalize the struggling semiconductor giant, focusing on manufacturing overhauls, AI innovation, and organizational restructuring. His plans aim to address Intel’s $19 billion loss in 2024, regain market share from rivals like TSMC and Nvidia, and reposition the company as a leader in advanced chip fabrication and artificial intelligence.

From Memory Pioneer to CPU King

Intel's story begins not with processors but with memory. In 1968, Gordon Moore and Robert Noyce left Fairchild Semiconductor to found Intel (short for "Integrated Electronics"). Their initial vision was to create semiconductor memory chips as an alternative to the magnetic core memory dominant at the time. Success came quickly as their innovative memory products established Intel as a technological leader.

The pivotal moment in Intel's history came in 1971 when engineer Ted Hoff designed the 4004—the world's first commercial microprocessor. Initially created for a Japanese calculator company called Busicom, the 4004 represented a revolutionary concept: a general-purpose programmable chip that could be used across various applications. Recognizing the potential beyond calculators, Intel bought back the rights from Busicom for $60,000—perhaps one of the greatest business deals in technology history1.

This shift from memory to processors accelerated with the 8080 microprocessor in 1974, but Intel's destiny was truly sealed in 1978 when IBM selected the 8086 processor for its personal computer. This single decision effectively standardized Intel's x86 architecture as the foundation for the PC industry, creating the "Wintel" duopoly with Microsoft that would dominate computing for decades to come.

The Grove Era: "Only the Paranoid Survive"

While Intel's founders established its innovative foundation, it was under Andy Grove that Intel transformed into a global powerhouse. Grove, who started as the company's third employee and rose to become CEO in 1987, revolutionized Intel through his legendary management approach and strategic vision.

Grove's business philosophy, captured in his book title "Only the Paranoid Survive," emphasized constant vigilance against competitive threats. This mindset proved crucial when Japanese memory manufacturers began flooding the market in the 1980s, selling DRAM chips at prices Intel couldn't match. In what became one of the most significant pivots in business history, Grove and then-CEO Gordon Moore made the painful decision to exit the memory business—the very foundation of Intel—and focus entirely on microprocessors.

Under Grove's leadership, Intel launched the successful 386 and 486 processors, followed by the Pentium series that became a household name. Perhaps equally important, Grove pioneered the famous "Intel Inside" marketing campaign—a revolutionary concept that transformed an invisible component most consumers never saw into a recognized and trusted brand. This campaign fundamentally changed how tech components were marketed and created tremendous value for Intel, allowing it to command premium prices for its processors.

Manufacturing Dominance and the Innovation Engine

For nearly three decades following Grove's pivotal strategy shift, Intel's dominance in the processor market seemed unassailable. The company's massive scale allowed it to invest billions in manufacturing technology, staying ahead of competitors through what became known as "Moore's Law"—the observation by co-founder Gordon Moore that the number of transistors on a chip would double approximately every two years.

Intel's integrated model of designing and manufacturing its own chips—known as IDM (Integrated Device Manufacturer)—became its key competitive advantage. While competitors like AMD struggled with manufacturing issues, Intel's superior production capabilities allowed it to deliver higher performance, better yields, and more reliable products year after year.

The company expanded its reach beyond desktop processors to servers, where its Xeon processor line commanded premium prices and exceptional margins. Intel's server dominance proved particularly lucrative, as these chips sold for multiples of consumer processor prices while offering higher profit margins and less price sensitivity from customers.

The Missed Mobile Revolution

As successful as Intel was in PC and server markets, it made one of the most consequential strategic errors in tech history: missing the mobile revolution. In 2006, Intel sold its ARM-based processor division to Marvell for $600 million—a decision that would look increasingly shortsighted as smartphones exploded in popularity beginning with the iPhone in 2007.

Intel's x86 architecture, optimized for performance over power efficiency, proved ill-suited for battery-powered mobile devices. Meanwhile, chip designs based on ARM architecture, which emphasized energy efficiency, became the standard for smartphones and tablets. Companies like Qualcomm, Apple, and Samsung built their mobile processors around ARM designs, effectively shutting Intel out of the fastest-growing segment of computing.

Intel did attempt to enter the mobile market with its Atom processors, but these chips never gained significant traction despite billions in investment. The company eventually exited the mobile processor market in 2016—a rare and costly defeat for the semiconductor giant.

This wasn't just a temporary setback; it represented the first major crack in Intel's dominance and revealed that the company's competitive advantages in one computing paradigm didn't necessarily translate to others.

The Manufacturing Stumble

For decades, Intel maintained leadership in semiconductor manufacturing technology, consistently being first to market with smaller, more efficient transistors. This manufacturing edge was central to Intel's competitive advantage, allowing its chips to outperform rivals while maintaining higher profit margins.

However, beginning around 2015, Intel began to stumble. The company's transition to 14nm manufacturing technology faced delays and yield issues. More significantly, the move to 10nm became a multi-year struggle that damaged Intel's reputation for manufacturing excellence. While competitors like TSMC and Samsung successfully advanced to smaller process nodes, Intel remained stuck on 14nm much longer than planned, forcing it to release multiple generations of processors on the same manufacturing technology.

These delays had profound consequences. For the first time, Intel lost its manufacturing leadership position to TSMC, which successfully produced 7nm chips (roughly equivalent to Intel's 10nm) for clients like AMD and Apple. This allowed AMD, using TSMC's manufacturing, to release processors that matched or exceeded Intel's performance—something previously unthinkable.

The Rise of Rivals: AMD's Comeback and ARM's Advance

Intel's manufacturing difficulties coincided with a remarkable resurrection of its longtime rival AMD. After struggling for years, AMD made two critical moves: hiring talented chip designer Jim Keller and adopting a chiplet-based architecture with its Zen microarchitecture. This approach allowed AMD to maximize yields and performance while leveraging TSMC's advanced manufacturing processes.

The result was AMD's Ryzen and EPYC processors, which delivered performance comparable to or better than Intel's offerings, often at lower prices. After years of holding less than 20% of the x86 market, AMD began steadily gaining share in both consumer and server segments, putting unprecedented competitive pressure on Intel.

Simultaneously, ARM-based designs began expanding beyond mobile devices. The watershed moment came when Apple announced in 2020 that it would transition its Mac computers from Intel processors to its own ARM-based Apple Silicon. The resulting M1 chips demonstrated that ARM designs could deliver both performance and power efficiency superior to x86 processors in many applications.

Amazon also developed its own ARM-based Graviton processors for AWS cloud services, while Microsoft worked on ARM-based chips for its servers and Surface devices. This expansion of ARM into traditional Intel strongholds represented a fundamental threat to Intel's business model and dominance in personal computing.

Gelsinger's Return: The IDM 2.0 Strategy

Intel's struggles led to leadership changes. CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, and after a period under interim CEO Bob Swan, Intel announced in January 2021 that Pat Gelsinger would return to the company as CEO. Gelsinger had previously spent 30 years at Intel, rising to become the company's first Chief Technology Officer before leaving in 2009. His return was widely viewed as an attempt to restore Intel's engineering-focused culture and manufacturing excellence.

Upon returning to Intel, Gelsinger unveiled an ambitious strategy called "IDM 2.0" (Integrated Device Manufacturing). This plan had several key components:
Doubling down on manufacturing by investing $20 billion in two new fabrication plants in Arizona, followed by additional investments in Europe and Ohio, totaling over $43 billion.
Creating Intel Foundry Services (IFS) to manufacture chips for other companies, directly competing with TSMC and Samsung in the foundry business.
Increasing Intel's use of external foundries like TSMC for certain products while maintaining internal manufacturing for core technologies.

Accelerating innovation with a new process technology roadmap aimed at regaining leadership by 2025.

Restructuring the company around new business units and cutting costs through layoffs and operational changes.

Perhaps most significantly, Gelsinger embraced a more open approach to Intel's business model. Rather than insisting that all Intel products be manufactured internally, he acknowledged that using external foundries for some components made strategic sense. This represented a profound shift in Intel's philosophy and culture.

Geopolitics and the CHIPS Act

Gelsinger also strategically positioned Intel to capitalize on growing geopolitical concerns about semiconductor supply chains. With most advanced chip manufacturing concentrated in Taiwan (TSMC) and South Korea (Samsung), governments in the US and Europe became increasingly eager to build domestic semiconductor capacity for economic and national security reasons.

Intel positioned itself as the Western champion of semiconductor manufacturing, securing substantial government subsidies and incentives for its new manufacturing facilities. The CHIPS Act in the United States provides approximately $52 billion in funding for domestic semiconductor manufacturing, with Intel expected to be a major beneficiary. Similar initiatives in Europe have promised additional support for Intel's expansion plans there.
This geopolitical angle represents a new dimension of Intel's strategy—leveraging national security concerns and government support to help fund its massive manufacturing investments and turnaround plan.

Current Challenges and Financial Realities

Despite its ambitious plans, Intel faces significant challenges in executing its turnaround. The company continues to generate substantial revenue—approximately $54 billion in 2023—but this represents a decline from previous years. Profit margins have compressed significantly as Intel invests heavily in new manufacturing while facing intense competition from AMD, Nvidia, and ARM-based solutions.

In a move that shocked many long-term investors, Intel cut its dividend by 65% in February 2023—the first dividend cut in decades. This decision underscored the financial pressures facing the company as it commits to massive capital expenditures while dealing with declining revenues. Gelsinger has asked investors for patience, describing the turnaround as a five-year journey that will require substantial investment before showing results.
Intel's stock has largely underperformed compared to semiconductor peers like AMD, Nvidia, and TSMC over the past five years. While these competitors have seen their valuations soar on the back of AI, cloud computing, and general semiconductor demand, Intel has struggled to convince investors that its turnaround plan will succeed.

Pat Gelsinger left Intel after the company’s board of directors lost confidence in his ability to execute a turnaround amid mounting financial and strategic challenges. Although officially described as a retirement, multiple reports confirm that Gelsinger was given the choice to resign or be dismissed following a board meeting in late November 2024.

The board was dissatisfied with the slow pace and high cost of his ambitious plans to revitalize Intel, particularly as the company failed to capitalize on the AI boom and continued to lose market share to competitors like Nvidia and TSMC.

Under Gelsinger’s leadership, Intel posted significant financial losses—$16.6 billion in the most recent quarter—and suspended its long-standing dividend. The company’s stock price dropped by about 60% during his tenure, and Intel was removed from the Dow Jones Industrial Average, replaced by Nvidia. Gelsinger’s strategy focused on expanding Intel’s foundry business and investing heavily in new manufacturing facilities, but these efforts did not deliver results quickly enough to satisfy the board or investors

Competitive Landscape: The AI Challenge

Beyond its traditional competition with AMD in CPUs, Intel faces new challenges in the rapidly growing market for AI accelerators. Nvidia has established near-complete dominance in training hardware for artificial intelligence with its GPU technologies, while companies like AMD and various startups are competing intensely for the inference side of AI processing.

Intel has attempted to enter the AI acceleration market through multiple avenues, including its acquisition of Habana Labs and development of various AI-specific products. However, it has yet to gain significant market share against Nvidia's dominant position. The AI computing market represents both a threat and opportunity for Intel—a massive new growth area in computing where Intel must establish relevance or risk being marginalized in one of tech's most important trends.

The Path Forward: Execution Is Everything

Intel's future hinges on successfully executing Lip-Bu's vision who took over as CEO in March 2025. The company's massive investments in new manufacturing facilities will take years to fully come online, and their success depends on Intel solving its persistent process technology issues. The goal of regaining manufacturing leadership by 2025 represents an enormous technical challenge given TSMC's continued advancement.

The Intel Foundry Services business faces the daunting task of competing with established players like TSMC, which has decades of experience serving diverse customers. Building a successful foundry operation requires not just manufacturing expertise but also a comprehensive ecosystem of design tools, intellectual property, and customer service capabilities that Intel is still developing.

Yet Intel retains significant advantages: decades of x86 software compatibility, strong relationships with major computer manufacturers, substantial financial resources despite recent pressures, and a vast pool of engineering talent. Under Gelsinger, the company has demonstrated a willingness to make difficult decisions and embrace change in ways that were previously unthinkable.

The Innovation Pipeline

Intel's recent product roadmaps show a renewed focus on innovation. The company has announced ambitious plans for future processor architectures, including a new performance core (P-core) design called Redwood Cove and efficiency core (E-core) called Crestmont for its upcoming "Arrow Lake" processors. The company is also investing heavily in graphics technology with its Arc discrete GPUs and integrated graphics solutions.
Beyond traditional CPUs, Intel is developing specialized accelerators for AI, including its Gaudi processors from Habana Labs acquisition. The company's Ponte Vecchio GPU for high-performance computing represents another attempt to diversify beyond its core CPU business and capture growing workloads in scientific computing and AI.

Tan's strategy seeks to restore Intel’s engineering ethos and competitive edge. Success hinges on executing the 18A node rollout, securing foundry clients, and delivering AI-centric solutions—a daunting yet pivotal roadmap for the company’s future

Conclusion: Intel's Silicon Struggle

Intel's story is far from over. The company that helped create the digital age now fights to remain relevant in a computing landscape it helped build but no longer dominates. For investors, customers, and the broader tech ecosystem, Intel's reinvention effort represents one of the most consequential business transformations of our time.

The semiconductor industry's increasing strategic importance also works in Intel's favor. As governments prioritize domestic chip production for economic and national security reasons, Intel positions itself as the champion of Western semiconductor manufacturing—a position that may prove valuable as geopolitical tensions persist.

Will Lip-Bu succeed in returning Intel to its former glory? The challenges are immense: rebuilding manufacturing excellence and foundry ambitions, accelerating AI chip development and restructuring the organization to be more cost efficiency will definitely take time before investors are convinced.

The next chapter of Intel's story will determine whether the company can once again reinvent itself for a new era of computing—or whether the semiconductor pioneer will remain caught in its silicon struggle, watching as more agile competitors reshape the future of technology.

Spot Value Stocks Now

In this live session, you'll see a step-by-step company analysis demonstrated by Cayden Chang, founder of Value Investing Academy. 

Write your awesome label here.

Presented by Cayden Chang

Founder of Value Investing Academy and Award-Winning International Speaker, Lifelong Learner Award 2008, Personal Brand Award 2017


You will learn:

  • A deep dive into a fast-growth company case study.
  • The key financial metrics used when evaluating whether a stock has strong growth potential
  • Step-by-step guide on how to apply the Value Investing Methodology on real-life companies
  • The exact criteria that successful investors use when evaluating any company
  • How to determine the intrinsic value of a stock so you will know exactly when to enter or exit the market
  • How ViA Atlas Intrinsic Value (IV) Directory can get you started on building your own portfolio of superhero stocks, even for busy professionals without much time to spare.


Click the button below to reserve your spot now.