When it comes to fab, AMD didn't beat intel, they gave up and went with TSMC. Now they have to compete with TSMC's other customers, including Intel, for access to the kingmaking process. That's not foul play, it's the bed they made, and now they get/have to lie in it.
The current high end AMD parts are multi chip modules. The CPU dies are made at TSMC in 7nm but the IO dies that glue multiple CPU dies together is made in the Global Foundries 14nm process.
GF has basically given up on 10nm and smaller nodes.
Didn't AMD have contractual obligations to use Global Foundries for their high end chips from when they split, or something along those lines? I guess that turned out really well for them, though, since that might have led to the necessity of chiplet designs.
GF has given up on research and pioneering smaller nodes. Their current process is based on tech they licensed from Samsung. I would not be surprised if they licensed another process from TSMC or Samsung in the future.
Maybe not legally, but if their (partial) intention is to retard AMD's design success, it's at least what is considered "a dick move".
Intel is strong-arming AMD on many fronts AFAIK, I sincerely hope they vanish into insignificance for their dick-locomotion nature. And I also hope the EU succeeds at spinning up their own fabs. And that ancaps one day see the light of regulation.
I want fancy tech and scifi and wealth for everyone, and the free-market doesn't deliver. It's all monopolies and patent wars...
Intel (and NVidia for that matter) don't owe AMD uncontested access to TSMC's kingmaking process, no matter how much AMD fanboys wish it were so.
> AMD's design success
The market is showing us that the value center isn't design, it's fab. Which AMD gave up on. The lack of competition that's squeezing them is the very pile of dung they created by dropping their foundries.
