Apple has reached a preliminary agreement with Intel to manufacture some of the chips used in Apple devices, according to a Wall Street Journal report citing people familiar with the matter. If the deal advances to full production, it would rank among the largest external foundry contracts Intel has ever secured and mark a turning point in the chipmaker’s expensive, years-long bet that it can build semiconductors for other companies.
The agreement follows weeks of exploratory talks in which Apple approached both Intel and Samsung about shifting some processor production to the United States, Bloomberg reported in early May 2026. That Apple evaluated competing offers before landing on Intel for at least a portion of its needs suggests the decision was deliberate, not a response to a single pitch.
Neither Apple nor Intel has publicly confirmed the arrangement. No financial terms, volume commitments, or chip types have been disclosed.
What the deal would mean for Intel’s foundry ambitions
Intel has spent tens of billions of dollars retooling its factories to serve outside chip designers, a strategic pivot launched under former CEO Pat Gelsinger in 2021 and continued under current CEO Lip-Bu Tan. The foundry-services unit, now called Intel Foundry, has struggled to attract marquee customers willing to bet production runs on Intel’s newest manufacturing technology, known as the 18A process node. Microsoft is widely reported to be Intel Foundry’s first major 18A client, but beyond that, the public customer roster has been thin.
In public remarks during Intel’s first-quarter 2026 earnings call, Tan described the foundry pivot as central to Intel’s long-term strategy, emphasizing that the company is focused on building a credible pipeline of external customers and that early 18A yields have been encouraging. He has also stated in multiple 2025 and 2026 appearances that Intel Foundry is targeting more than $10 billion in annual external foundry revenue by 2030, a figure that underscores the scale of ambition behind the unit’s buildout.
Landing Apple, the world’s most valuable company and the designer of some of the industry’s most advanced mobile and laptop processors, would send a powerful signal to the rest of the market. It would also help fill capacity at new U.S. fabrication plants that Intel justified in part through a funding agreement with the U.S. Department of Commerce under the CHIPS and Science Act. That agreement ties billions in federal subsidies to expanded domestic manufacturing, creating both an incentive and an obligation for Intel to book outside orders.
Intel’s quarterly filing for the period ended March 28, 2026, offers the clearest public window into the foundry unit’s progress. The report breaks out external foundry revenue as a separate line item and notes that margins in the foundry segment remain under pressure as Intel absorbs the high initial costs of ramping the 18A node, including equipment depreciation and low early utilization rates. As a legal document subject to securities-law liability, the filing does not name specific customers, but it is the most reliable public data on Intel Foundry’s commercial traction to date.
What it would mean for Apple
Apple currently depends on Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company for essentially all of its custom silicon. TSMC fabricates every A-series chip in iPhones, every M-series chip in Macs and iPads, and the processors inside Apple Watch and Apple Vision Pro. That level of concentration on a single supplier, headquartered on an island at the center of U.S.-China tensions, has become a growing strategic vulnerability.
TSMC holds roughly 60% of the global foundry market and has begun producing chips at its new Arizona facility. But even with TSMC building on American soil, Apple’s supply chain remains overwhelmingly routed through a single company. Adding Intel as a second manufacturer, even for lower-volume or peripheral chips, would give Apple a hedge it currently lacks.
There is also a political dimension. The CHIPS Act created financial incentives for companies that produce semiconductors domestically, and Apple faces persistent pressure from U.S. policymakers to anchor more of its high-value hardware production stateside. A manufacturing relationship with Intel, an American company operating American fabs, would strengthen Apple’s position in those conversations.
What we still do not know
The preliminary nature of the agreement leaves the most commercially meaningful questions unanswered. No public source has specified which process node Apple’s chips would use, whether the work involves Intel’s 18A technology or an older generation, or when volume production might begin. The financial value and duration of any supply commitment remain undisclosed.
Critically, it is unclear which chips are covered. Apple’s flagship processors, the ones that define the performance of iPhones and Macs, represent the crown jewels of its silicon design operation. Moving those to a new manufacturer would require extensive qualification, testing, and risk analysis. The preliminary deal could instead involve modem chips, connectivity components, or other parts that carry less performance sensitivity. No source has confirmed that Apple intends to shift its highest-end designs to Intel.
Samsung’s status adds another variable. Bloomberg’s reporting established that Apple held parallel discussions with Samsung, which operates its own advanced fabs in Texas. No subsequent reporting has indicated whether those talks produced a separate agreement or went nowhere. If Apple split orders between Intel and Samsung, the volume and pricing dynamics would look very different than if Intel won the work exclusively.
The direct connection between CHIPS Act funding and this specific deal also remains unconfirmed. Intel’s federal subsidy agreement requires expanded U.S. manufacturing, and an Apple contract would help justify that capacity. But no filing or statement draws a documented causal link between the subsidy terms and Apple’s vendor selection.
Checkpoints that will clarify the deal’s trajectory
Preliminary agreements in the semiconductor industry collapse more often than outsiders might expect. Pricing disputes, technical qualification failures, shifts in trade policy, or simply a change in strategic priorities can derail deals before a single wafer is processed. Apple has a well-documented history of evaluating manufacturing alternatives without always following through, using parallel negotiations to pressure incumbents like TSMC or to preserve optionality in its supply chain.
For investors and industry watchers, the next concrete checkpoint is Intel’s upcoming quarterly filing. If the Apple deal progresses, its financial impact should surface in external foundry revenue figures and potentially in capital-expenditure guidance tied to capacity reserved for outside customers. A meaningful Apple order would likely require Intel to dedicate specific production lines, and that commitment would show up in the numbers before any formal announcement. Analysts will also be parsing any commentary from Tan on customer mix or long-term foundry agreements for indirect signals.
On Apple’s side, the clearest tell would be a supply-chain shift visible to component analysts: new chip part numbers, changes in packaging suppliers, or procurement patterns that point to a second fabrication source. Those breadcrumbs tend to surface months before either company is ready to talk publicly.
Whatever the outcome, the talks themselves reveal how deeply geopolitics and industrial policy have penetrated semiconductor supply-chain decisions. Apple, Intel, and Samsung are all responding to the same pressures: anxiety over Taiwan’s vulnerability, tightening export controls, and billions in subsidies tied to domestic investment. This deal, if it holds, would be one of the most tangible results of that realignment so far.
More from Morning Overview
*This article was researched with the help of AI, with human editors creating the final content.
