sorry, I was rambling on slightly offtopic from chip manufacturers to chip designers, but the point still stands that, whether you have a monopoly or oligopoly, nowadays really doesn't make much difference anymore. The advantages for private customers have long been gone...

QuoteIntel's roadmap suggests that 14A isn't scheduled to enter risk production until 2027 and mass production until 2028 ... these rumours aren't new, with an earlier one purporting Apple would use Intel 18A for some chips.

Exactly. We've heard the same story for 18A, and yet all potential customers jumped off the ship. Why should it be different next time? Let's be realistic: Apple and Nvidia are only interested, if Intel can deliver 14A on time, mass produce on time, and achieve a somehow convincing track record on time (e.g. by first using it themselves in some products). And if Intel can't do all that, Nvidia and Apple will jump off the ship - again - and use TSMC as usual.

Everyone with a sane mind can see that Intel will not be able to achieve that goal within the estimated period. It's too much behind TSMC.

It would probably better for Intel to become a pure chip designer. Although some people are afraid of TSMC becoming a monopoly... we once again have to be honest: the existing market and competition is a charade anyways. If you look closely at major companies (e.g. Intel, AMD, Nvidia), you can see that each one of them fµcks you over with their product line. Each one does it, and each one in their own ways. They just look at each other's tricks and adapt it to their own product line. And you as a customer can now choose between 3 ways of getting fµcked. What a choice...... just saying it really doesn't matter anymore if you have a 1-a$$hole monopoly or a 3-a$$holes oligoply.

Aw man Intel's rushed 18A node turned out to be a flop? Imagine that! And they think rushing 14A is going to help?