Intel is in a spot of trouble. Actually, that's an understatement. The semiconductor giant is currently navigating one of the most tumultuous periods in its fifty-year history. While the headlines usually focus on quarterly losses or the delay of manufacturing nodes, the real drama often happens behind closed doors in the boardroom. That brings us to Lip-Bu Tan.
If you follow the chip industry, you know the name. Tan is a legend. He's the guy who turned Cadence Design Systems around and founded Walden International. When he joined the Intel board in 2022, investors breathed a collective sigh of relief. Finally, they thought, a "chip guy" with actual operational experience is in the room to help Pat Gelsinger steer the ship.
Then, in August 2024, he quit.
He didn't just leave; he left at a moment when Intel was reeling from a disastrous earnings report and a massive restructuring plan that included cutting 15,000 jobs. The departure of Lip-Bu Tan from Intel wasn't just a routine board shuffle. It was a signal fire.
The Friction Nobody Wanted to Admit
Why did he leave? The official filing cited a "personal decision to prioritize other commitments," but anyone who has spent ten minutes in Silicon Valley knows that's code for "we didn't see eye-to-eye."
Reports from Reuters and other outlets eventually pulled back the curtain. It turns out, Tan was frustrated. He's a man used to agility. At Cadence, he streamlined. At Walden, he picked winners. Intel, however, is a massive, bureaucratic beast. Sources suggested Tan grew weary of the slow pace of decision-making and the sheer scale of Intel's middle management.
Think about the culture clash here. You have a venture capital-minded turnaround specialist sitting at a table with a company that has historically been very set in its ways. Tan reportedly wanted Intel to focus more on its foundry business and cut back on non-core projects. He wanted a leaner, meaner Intel.
But Intel is trying to do everything at once. They want to be the world's best designers, the world's best manufacturers, and the world's go-to AI chip foundry. That’s a lot of plates to spin. Tan seemingly felt that the strategy was spread too thin.
The AI Miss and the Nvidia Shadow
Intel missed the AI boat. There’s no kinder way to put it. While Nvidia was building the H100s that currently power the entire generative AI revolution, Intel was still trying to find its footing with the Gaudi line.
Tan knows this space better than almost anyone. He saw the shift toward specialized silicon and accelerated computing years ago. When he looked at Intel's roadmap, he likely saw a company still too tethered to the legacy of the CPU. The x86 architecture is still a cash cow, sure, but it's not the future of the data center in the way it used to be.
The irony is thick. Lip-Bu Tan's Intel stint was supposed to be the bridge to this new era. Instead, his exit highlighted just how difficult it is to change a company’s DNA.
Intel’s stock price reflected this reality almost immediately. When news of the friction between Tan and the board leaked, it reinforced the narrative that Intel was resistant to the radical changes needed to compete with the likes of TSMC and Nvidia. Honestly, it’s a bit tragic. You have the right expert in the room, but the room itself is too noisy to listen.
Manufacturing: The $100 Billion Gamble
Let's talk about IDM 2.0. This is Pat Gelsinger’s grand plan to open Intel’s doors to outside customers. They want to build chips for Apple, Qualcomm, and even Nvidia. To do that, they are spending astronomical amounts of money—tens of billions—on fabs in Ohio, Arizona, and Germany.
✨ Don't miss: Why 660 South Figueroa Street Still Matters in the Heart of DTLA
Tan’s background is deeply rooted in the ecosystem that supports this. Cadence, the company he led, provides the software (EDA tools) used to design these chips. He understands the customer's perspective. He knows what a designer at a startup needs from a foundry.
The friction reportedly stemmed from Intel's inability to move at "foundry speed." TSMC is successful because they are a pure-play foundry; their entire culture is service-oriented. Intel, historically, has built chips for itself. Shifting that mindset is like trying to turn an aircraft carrier in a bathtub.
Tan likely saw the mounting costs and the slow customer acquisition and felt the urgency wasn't high enough. You can’t just build the factory; you have to build the trust. And in the semiconductor world, trust is built on hitting schedules—something Intel has struggled with lately.
What This Means for the Future of Silicon
So, where does Intel go now? They’ve recently signaled a more aggressive "belt-tightening" phase. They are spinning off the foundry business into a more independent subsidiary, which is something many analysts—and likely Tan himself—advocated for. This move is designed to give the foundry its own balance sheet and, perhaps more importantly, its own culture.
Is it too little, too late?
Maybe not. Intel still has incredible IP. Their Lunar Lake chips are actually looking quite good in the laptop space, offering the kind of power efficiency that finally rivals Apple’s M-series. But the data center is where the money is, and that’s where the battle is being lost.
The departure of a guy like Lip-Bu Tan is a wake-up call. It tells us that the "intellectual" part of the Intel turnaround is the hardest part. It’s not about the machines or the cleanrooms; it’s about the philosophy of the business.
Intel is currently a company caught between two worlds. One world is the glorious past where they dominated every PC on the planet. The other is a future where they are just one of many players in a fragmented, AI-driven landscape.
Actionable Insights for Investors and Tech Watchers
If you're looking at Intel today, don't just look at the P/E ratio. That’s a trap. Look at the people.
- Watch the Foundry Spin-off: The degree of independence given to Intel Foundry is the most important metric for the next two years. If it remains "Intel with a different name," it will fail. It needs to be able to tell Intel’s design team "no" if a third-party customer like Amazon or Microsoft takes priority.
- Keep an Eye on the Board Composition: Since Tan left, the board lacks that specific "foundry and VC" edge. Look to see if they appoint a replacement with actual semiconductor manufacturing or EDA experience. If they appoint another career CFO or a generic "big tech" executive, it’s a bad sign.
- The 18A Node is Everything: Everything Intel is doing right now hinges on the 18A process node. If they hit their marks in 2025 and 2026, they have a chance. If there are more delays, the Lip-Bu Tan exit will be remembered as the moment the last best hope for a quick turnaround walked out the door.
- Monitor External Foundry Customers: Until a major player like Apple or Nvidia commits to a high-volume run on Intel’s 18A, the foundry business is just a very expensive hobby. Announcements of "agreements" are not the same as "wafer starts."
Intel is a massive piece of American infrastructure. It’s "too big to fail" in a literal sense, given the CHIPS Act and national security interests. But being "too big to fail" doesn't mean you'll be profitable or relevant. The Lip-Bu Tan saga is a reminder that in the tech world, expertise is plenty, but the willingness to listen to that expertise is rare.
💡 You might also like: What Really Happened With Capitalism: Why the System Feels Broken Today
Moving forward, the focus shifts to execution. No more white papers. No more five-year plans. Just silicon. If Intel can't deliver the chips on time, no amount of board reshuffling will save them. The era of Intel's dominance ended years ago; the era of its survival is just beginning.