Here’s what’s on our plate today:

• 🧠 Intel’s comeback meets reality—missteps, market shifts, and DC pressure.

• 🏛️ White House heat on Lip-Bu Tan tests CHIPS Act politics.

• 🧮 Why x86 missed the AI wave while Nvidia + TSMC sprinted.

• 🛠️ Try today’s prompt + a hardware-agnostic deployment tip.

Let’s dive in. No floaties needed…

The Laboratory

How missteps, market shifts, and politics threaten Intel’s comeback

Historically, companies that have adapted to market fluctuations and technological advancements have managed to sustain long-term growth. But often, refusal to adapt to changes has resulted in big corporations either going out of business or accepting a much smaller role within the industries they once dominated. Take the example of Nokia. It was once the biggest smartphone manufacturer, but it is now struggling to remain relevant.

One of the biggest challenges for companies in the tech ecosystem came in 2022 when OpenAI introduced the world to the power of Large Language Models (LLMs) and the artificial intelligence models they power. For many tech companies, AI led to skyrocketing market valuations, but for many it brought fresh challenges undermining their businesses, and threatening long-term viability. The biggest beneficiaries of the AI age included names like Nvidia, AMD, Google, TSMC, Qualcomm, Microsoft, OpenAI, and more. However, this rapid change also intensified challenges faced by long-standing organizations like Intel. The company that once helmed the chip market, controlling 90% of it in the 1980s, was struggling to hold on to its dominance by 2024 and was even removed from the Dow Jones Industrial Average and replaced with Nvidia. This slide was the result of strategic blunders, faster rivals. And now, political headwinds from the White House could further increase its difficulties for Intel.

A chip giant under fire

Today, what was once a behemoth of the chip world is facing increasing pressure from investors and the government to realign itself and regain its status. Recently, U.S. President Donald Trump demanded the immediate resignation of Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan, marking a rare instance of a president publicly calling for the ouster of a CEO. The demand comes a year after Intel received $8 billion in subsidies, the largest outlay under the 2022 CHIPS Act, to build new factories in Ohio and other states.

What angered Trump is that Tan himself and through venture funds he has founded or controls, invested in Chinese firms, including contractors and suppliers for the People’s Liberation Army between 2012 and 2014.

The Malaysian-born CEO of Intel was at one point also the CEO of Cadence Design, a company that makes chip-design software. According to a Reuters report, during his tenure, the company sold its products to a Chinese military university believed to be involved in simulating nuclear explosions. Trump called Tan “highly conflicted” in a post on Truth Social. However, for Intel, the accusations could not have come at a worse time. So, how did Intel land itself in this situation?

From monopoly to missed opportunities

As we mentioned earlier, Intel had a near-monopolistic control over the chip-design and manufacturing market. This dominance was built on the back of the vertically integrated business model. The company controls its entire supply chain from chip architecture and manufacturing to packaging and testing. While the approach worked to ensure high profits, it made it difficult for Intel to move away from its chip-design architecture, focus on new devices, and explore emerging avenues like AI and Machine Learning (ML). The result was that companies that were more nimble and agile in their business philosophy were able to close the gap and eventually leave Intel struggling to catch its breath.

Intel’s chips use the x86/x86-64 instruction set, which is great for general-purpose computing, but makes it unsuitable for use in AI training and development. Along with the design, Intel also had to invest in manufacturing and packaging the chips, making it difficult to switch architectures.

Nvidia, on the other hand, early on invested in  AI and ML tooling (CUDA and AI‑optimized GPUs). While in the initial days, Nvidia chips were known mostly for improving graphics performance in computer games, they were also better suited for use in running LLMs. Nvidia also outsourced manufacturing to TSMC, allowing it to focus on fine-tuning weaknesses in its architecture and make rapid advancements in design.

Intel, meanwhile, stuck to its architecture, which led to developers moving away from its chips. In its defense, outsourcing manufacturing would have made it reliant on an external competitor. However, the list of mistakes only grew from here.

Between 2014 and 2016, under CEO Brian Krzanich, Intel delayed the adoption of extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography. This proved to be critical to the manufacturing of next-generation chips. Analysts estimate this mistake set Intel’s design and manufacturing business back by five years.

Another remarkable example of Intel failing to understand shifts in the consumer market was when it failed to shift strategies, as tablets and smartphones drew more and more users away from PCs. The company failed to make its presence felt in the smartphone market, and companies like Qualcomm and Apple established themselves in chip design. They also adopted Nvidia’s model and outsourced manufacturing to TSMC and Samsung.

By the time Krzanich stepped down as the CEO in 2018, Samsung had overtaken Intel as the world’s largest chipmaker by revenue. The company had also ceded its manufacturing lead to TSMC, which was by now serving major companies, including Apple.

In the coming years, the company also tried shifting toward a foundry model, manufacturing chips for others while still designing its own. But its past mistake of not adopting EUV lithography meant it would cost billions and sap its cash flow and margins.

Though Intel continued to be a major player in the computer market, even here it was facing stiff competition from AMD. And by 2022, AMD had overtaken Intel.

Inside Intel’s $100 billion bet on redemption

Intel’s share value peaked in 2020, when it reached $77.87 billion. However, since then, the company that once launched the world’s first programmable microprocessor has been struggling to bring back its golden age.

In 2024, in its first year without profits since 1986, the company faced multiple class-action lawsuits over instability issues with its 13th and 14th-generation Raptor Lake processors. The same year, Intel unveiled plans to invest $100 billion to build and expand factories, after securing federal grants and loans. The very same year, the company also cut 17,500 jobs, 15% of its workforce, and suspended its dividends. At the time, the company’s share value slipped by 20%, setting up the chipmaker to lose more than $24 billion in market value.

In March 2025, Intel appointed Tan as its new CEO. He was chosen for his experience in the chip industry, and Intel hoped he would be able to restore the chipmaker’s position as a world-class products company.

In response to the demands made by Donald Trump, Tan said the chipmaker is engaging with the U.S. administration to clarify concerns and ensure accurate information is provided to the president. Tan is reportedly expected to visit the White House for an extensive conversation with Trump to explain his personal and professional background.

Tan’s appointment came at a time of geopolitical uncertainty. Some industry analysts and investors say that Tan’s earlier association with Chinese organizations is what makes him so valuable as CEO.

But for the U.S. administration under Donald Trump, the main goal is to bring manufacturing back to the country. The current President has even accused Asian countries, including Taiwan, the home of TSMC, of having snatched away the United States' edge in chipmaking. Increased tensions between the U.S. and China have led to strict export restrictions on semiconductors and tariffs.

At this juncture, calls by the American President for Tan’s resignation may spell more trouble for the already struggling chipmaker.

Can Intel escape its past?

Not many companies have had the kind of impact on their fields as Intel has had on chip design and manufacturing. The company paved the way for modern computing to be programmable and more accessible for millions. On its way, Intel made many mistakes. It refused to change with the times and even said no to investing in OpenAI at one point. Had Intel invested in OpenAI, it would have been powering the AI boom.

However, since no one can foresee the future, it is futile to look back at missed opportunities. Intel’s future may hinge not just on engineering breakthroughs, but on navigating a White House that wants chips made in America by leaders it trusts. The question is whether the company’s next move will finally close the gap or write the final chapter of a once-unshakable empire.

Roko Pro Tip

Prompt Of The Day

Bite-Sized Brain

• Firms Recruit AI Agents For Cyber Defense: Security teams are piloting autonomous responders to triage alerts, isolate hosts, and block attacks.

• Grief Tech Goes Mainstream: Startups offer AI avatars of the deceased, raising thorny questions about consent, trauma, and digital remains.

• Altman On GPT-5 Stumbles: OpenAI addresses rollout hiccups, restores 4o options, and responds to “chart crime” criticism.

Quick Tuesday Poll

Meme Of The Day

Rate This Edition