What if the chips for the new iPhones were made by Intel?

According to recent rumors spread by analyst Jeff Pu of GF Securities, Apple would be seriously considering entrusting Intel with the production of a portion of the processors destined for the iPhone, with a time horizon set for 2028.

This move would mark a partial but historic diversification from the current almost exclusive dependence on the Taiwan-based foundries of TSMC.

TSMC and Intel, diversification of base iPhone chips

The heart of the speculation concerns specifically the use of the Intel 14A manufacturing process. Obviously, it would not be a return to processors designed by Intel, but a pure manufacturing agreement.

The Cupertino giant would continue to maintain total control over the chip architecture, autonomously defining performance goals, the integration of features and the logical design.

Intel, in this scenario, would operate exclusively as a foundry, making its production lines available to manufacture Apple-branded designs.

According to Pu’s predictions, this partnership would not involve the entire range of the Apple smartphone lineup. The strategy would seem to be aimed at the iPhone “non-Pro” models, leaving TSMC with the task of handling high-end processors where extreme performance demands do not allow compromises.

At the same time, there are whispers that future M7 chips, destined for entry-level Mac and iPad, could also use the 18A manufacturing node from Intel, suggesting a plan of progressive and cautious integration.

The efficiency challenge and production risks

Producing mobile-device processors is a task that presents engineering challenges that are markedly different from the world of desktop computers. The absolute priority for an iPhone is not just peak speed, but the performance-per-watt ratio.

Every slightest loss of efficiency inevitably translates into a shorter battery life or overheating issues, forcing designers to make structural compromises or the so-called “thermal throttling”.

Apple is known for its risk-averse approach when it comes to volumes of such high sales. The need to guarantee impeccable production yields is the reason why the company has so far maintained such a close relationship with TSMC, which has over the years demonstrated strict discipline in packaging and manufacturing technologies.

For Intel, entering Cupertino’s supply chain would represent a crucial test: the American company will have to demonstrate that it can replicate the same predictability and quality Apple is used to, especially in a context where tolerances are minimal.

Diversification and geopolitics

Beyond the technical aspects, the move proposed by the analyst makes sense from sound business logic: diversification.

Relying on a single supplier, for all its excellence, exposes a global company to risks related to raw material shortages, bottlenecks in production and geopolitical instability.

Having Intel as a “second source” would offer Apple greater operational flexibility and a stronger bargaining power.

However, it is worth noting that at the moment there are no reports of signed contracts or official capacity bookings for production capacity. Jeff Pu’s analyses are based on forecasts and industry trends rather than binding agreements.

The road to 2028 is still long and the success of this hypothetical transition will depend entirely on Intel’s ability to meet the draconian quality standards imposed by Apple, ensuring that the end-user experience remains unchanged, regardless of who has physically stamped the silicon.