[News] Intel Reportedly Starts Glass Substrate Licensing, Offering Potential Boost to Samsung and Absolics

[u/imaginary_num6er]

https://www.trendforce.com/news/2025/08/22/news-intel-reportedly-starts-glass-substrate-licensing-offering-potential-boost-to-samsung-and-absolics/

[u/imaginary_num6er]

As the report highlights, this marks a strategic shift in Intel’s glass substrate business. Rather than prioritizing in-house production, the company is now expected to rely more heavily on external suppliers.
...

In the meantime, with mass production not anticipated until 2030, Intel appears to be turning to licensing as a way to monetize its technology. As the report points out, the company’s ongoing struggles in foundry operations are widely viewed as a key factor behind this shift.

[u/Helpdesk_Guy → u/imaginary_num6er]

At last, yes. Hopefully they finally leave their everlasting grandstanding behind (to have another costy sideshow just because) and start to concentrate working out the actual basics again, which is mostly why Intel sucks balls and loses way too much money because of it.

[u/darksamus8 → u/Helpdesk_Guy]

Not sure why you're getting downvoted. It's true. They've lost sight of the basics and have been resting on their laurels for a decade now

[u/Helpdesk_Guy → u/darksamus8]

Not sure why you're getting downvoted.

Since /hardware has a boner for everything Intel and won't let reality come in-between their beloved delulu.

The joke is, the very same money of tens of billions of US-dollars being spend over decades on the industry's single-largest marketing-campaign ever (to hammer home, who in town would allegedly make the best CPUs; "Intel inside!"), actually created a illusion, which has manifested itself so thoroughly, that everyone influenced by it, these days still helps to shield Intel from actual reality …

Kind of ironic, if you think about it – Intel wanted to make a infamous brand, yet dug their own grave by making people everywhere prone to shield themselves from actual reality, to correct course for betterment.

So in a sense, their whole brand and campaign brilliantly worked (and the money looks to have been well spend), except with unintended consequences and with a outcome, which set their downfall in stone from the beginning.

It's true. They've lost sight of the basics …

That's what I'm saying …

What the actual f—k is this shop even talking never mind fidgeting with any glass-substrate as another prominent and costy sideshow for hundreds of millions USD again?! — Intel can't even prevent releasing new generations which either are regressing before the last one, or their chips dying within weeks to months and turn into useless overcooked glorified potatoes …

Get your OWN sh!t together for once, iron out the basics, and in the meantime, keep your arrogant mouth shut, it's really that simple! – Leave specialities and special specifics to SPECIALists, who actual KNOW their sh!t.

… and have been resting on their laurels for a decade now.

It's actually even worse than that. Intel not only stagnated the whole market into a years-long downturn (while at the same time arrogantly lamenting over people's refusal to upgrade, they themselves caused in the first place!), when releasing quad-cores for a decade straight from 2006–2016.

Intel even went so far, to spend their money, time and energy on everything ELSE but their core-business …

They build up a million other sideshows, to cover up the fact, that they lost the plot on the core-business.

Like spending tens of millions into drones (incl. a $400m sponsor-ship contract with the International Olympic Committee for drone-shows), tried to step into the single-board computer-market to kill Raspberry Pi, Rock Pi, Orange Pie, Banana Pi and alike (only to establish x86-only in that space with their Intel Curie, Edison, Galileo, Quark et al.), trying the same for years while fighting everything ARM in the mobile-space and so on.

Or pumping their Optane into the market at massive losses, to fight Samsung, SanDisk and others on Flash.

Everything else BUT their actual core-market CPUs. Already at a time, when its CPU-architectures, chip-designs and manufacturing was already massively eroding anyway to begin with …

[u/Lakku-82 → u/Helpdesk_Guy]

Intel does the basics and that’s all they do these days. That’s why every corporation, governments, hospitals, and others all use Intel, as they have a top to bottom stack of hardware and software for IT departments to use. It’s what’s keeping Intel afloat. AMD doesn’t do that or have that and why you don’t see them anywhere in the corporate world outside of servers.

[u/One-End1795]

Why is AI slop tolerated here? This "report" simply squashes together reports from a few asian websites that are known to be inaccurate.

[u/Helpdesk_Guy]

Kind of a joke and p(r)etty irrelevant to care about such minor sideshows of glass-substrates, when they still haven't figured out the bottom line of their actual manufacturing and solved their fundamental process-problems.

Since a secondary theater of war like glass-substrates, is surely NOT the reason why they lost the Corean War War on Cores™ with AMD and are still largely behind on core-count, or why their designs suck way too much power.

Also, despite Intel claiming to have *allegedly* worked on their tiled-designs already for years when presented in 2018, they still needed about seven years to implement their Tiles as a comparable Chiplet-design and approach of a universally usable architecture of modular building-blocks (which today has become pretty much inevitable to have), only to basically come up with berely more than a worse copycat of AMD's chiplets itself.

Nor has Intel come up with a actually new architecture as a replacement of their fundamentally broken Core-µarch.

[u/varateshh → u/Helpdesk_Guy]

Since a secondary theater of war like glass-substrates, is surely NOT the reason why they lost the Corean War War on Cores™ with AMD and are still largely behind on core-count

Maybe I am misunderstanding the technology, but isn't the main purpose of this technology to reduce the distance between cores/IO/GPU? Thus allowing Intel to pack on more cores/chiplets/tiles per mm² ?

[u/Exist50 → u/varateshh]

The benefits of glass substrate are mostly higher interconnect density and being much stiffer (less warpage) than PCB.

[u/Helpdesk_Guy → u/Exist50]

… which still doesn't help preventing CPUs from dying by being cooked to death over overdrive-voltage, releasing uncompetitive architectures, high power-draw or better the standing on security-vulnerabilities, yes.

[u/Helpdesk_Guy → u/varateshh]

No, the usage of glass-substrates may have a bunch of upsides in itself. Yet its mainly intentions to be sought after, is rooted to overcome the supply bottle-neck of substrates limiting the industrial output.

In any case, glass-substrate still does not solve *any* of the fundamental underlying architectural problems or the ones on process-technology Intel has been struggling with since over a decade.

As said, it took Intel about seven years to even realize some disintegrated modular approach …