President Trump has always had a knack for steering the conversation, and a new report suggests that talent may have helped nudge Apple toward a major shift in its chip strategy. According to the Wall Street Journal, Apple has reached a preliminary chip fabrication deal with Intel—an agreement that could deliver meaningful cost advantages, diversify Apple’s manufacturing options, and reduce its reliance on a single dominant foundry.
While the full details haven’t been made public, the arrangement is expected to look familiar: Apple would continue designing its own custom silicon using ARM-based architecture, and Intel would manufacture those chips using its most advanced production technologies. In other words, Apple keeps control of chip design and performance goals, while Intel handles the heavy lifting on the manufacturing side.
Which Apple devices could use Intel-made chips?
At this stage, it’s not confirmed which products will be first in line for Intel fabrication. However, recent industry chatter points to Intel’s 18A-P process as a likely candidate for some upcoming Apple silicon. The expectation is that Intel’s advanced node could be used for lower-end M-series chips that may arrive in 2027, followed by non-Pro iPhone chips potentially in 2028.
Apple has also reportedly obtained PDK samples (process design kits) from Intel to evaluate the 18A-P process—an important step because it allows Apple’s engineers to test how their chip designs behave on Intel’s manufacturing rules, tools, and performance characteristics before committing to full production.
Another notable detail involves Apple’s reported upcoming ASIC, said to be codenamed “Baltra” and expected around 2027 or 2028. That chip may reportedly use Intel’s EMIB packaging technology, a method designed to connect chip components efficiently, potentially improving performance and flexibility for advanced designs.
Why this deal could be a big win for Apple
Even without knowing every product roadmap detail, the business case for Apple is easy to understand.
1) Better margins through lower wafer costs
One of the biggest drivers is pricing. Intel’s 18A wafer costs are reportedly about 25% lower than what TSMC is charging for its 2nm wafers. If those numbers hold up at scale, Apple could protect or even improve hardware margins—especially important in premium devices where silicon costs can significantly influence profitability.
2) A pressure release valve amid “chipflation”
With component prices under pressure—particularly memory—any savings in leading-edge chip manufacturing can give Apple more flexibility. Lower fabrication costs could help offset rising bills of materials without forcing changes to pricing strategy or product positioning.
3) Reduced supply chain and tariff exposure
Manufacturing more chips in the United States can help Apple hedge geopolitical and trade-policy risks. Diversifying away from a single region or supplier base can also reduce the impact of disruptions, from logistics shocks to sudden policy changes.
4) Less dependence on one dominant foundry
TSMC remains the world’s most important advanced foundry, but heavy reliance on a single manufacturing partner can limit negotiating leverage. Bringing Intel into the mix could weaken the ability of any one supplier to dictate pricing and capacity terms—especially during times of tight supply.
5) A strategic bet—if Intel’s process delivers
The major “if” in all of this is execution. Apple’s benefit depends on the stability, yields, and performance of Intel’s 18A family in real-world, high-volume production. If Intel delivers on schedule and at competitive quality, Apple gains a second high-end manufacturing lane. If not, Apple could keep Intel in a limited role or reserve it for specific chips and volumes.
Trump’s reported role in the Intel-Apple talks
The Wall Street Journal also reports that President Trump may have played a direct part in selling the idea to Apple CEO Tim Cook. In a meeting, Trump reportedly expressed that he liked Intel and highlighted that the government had made “tens of billions of dollars” from its stake in the company. Whether that was the deciding factor or simply helpful momentum, the implication is clear: politics, industrial policy, and supply chain security are increasingly intertwined with big-tech manufacturing decisions.
What happens next
For now, this remains a preliminary deal, and Apple’s final product plans will depend on technical validation, commercial terms, and Intel’s ability to execute its roadmap. But if the partnership progresses, it could become one of the most consequential shifts in Apple’s silicon supply chain in years—potentially delivering lower costs, reduced risk, and a more competitive manufacturing landscape for next-generation iPhones and Macs.
