Tho that said Intel doesn't want to morph into a Fab as a service company, they just don't want to leave money on the table if they can't fill their 14nm and 10nm Fabs with their own IP/silicon they build it for some one else. It's even more so important now since Intel's dies are pretty darn big even as it comes to 14/10nm optimizing processes on smaller dies can be quite valuable to them. And considering they are dropping their "Tick Tock" methodology or at least altering it somewhat their Fabs can outrun their product line which is never good.
However, I expect Intel to try and shoot itself in its own foot in this business, for the same reason they killed Xscale previously. Because Intel is at a cross-point now (pun intended). They have to make a choice - either they "go big" with ARM chip manufacturing, or they try to protect the interests of the x86 division. They may put all sorts of caveats on ARM chip customers that want to buy Intel's manufacturing, so their chips can't compete directly with Intel's own x86 chips. But that will significantly hurt the potential of its ARM chip manufacturing business - so then may have to ask themselves, why are they even bothering with ARM chip manufacturing, if they're not going to go all-in on it?
So either Intel repeats its Xscale mistake by protecting the x86 chip business, and risks being completely left out of the mobile/IoT markets forever (in any capacity), while also losing a few more billions of dollars with this "ARM manufacturing experiment". Or it goes all-in with ARM chip manufacturing, manufacturing anything from IoT ARM chips to Xeon ARM competitors for anyone from MediaTek to Qualcomm, and then its x86 risks a severe decline over the next decade.
Either way, Intel has to make a choice. They can't have their cake and eat it, too, no matter how much they'd wish that to happen right now.
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2013/05/01/microsemi-emerges-as-...
In fact one can argue about the brilliant move Intel made here, Intel opens up it's Fabs to 3rd parties, various companies including the leading FPGA designers jump onto it. 3-4 Years later Intel starts exploring integrating FPGAs into it's Xeon CPU's and SOCs, that's not coincidence when you fabricate something you have technology transfer even if it's completely "unintentional", furthermore Intel gains a lot of experience in fabricating and optimizing FPGAs silicon and they do it on some one else's dime while being paid heftily for it.
So I don't really think your conclusion of Intel's strategy is correct, Intel can very well keep the cake and eat it, Intel makes ARM CPUs and SOCs Intel gains experience and knowledge in producing and testing new silicon, Intel gains access to technologies that it could later implement in its own line of X86 CPUs to further optimize their microarchitecture for multiple cores, asymmetrical CPU designs, power efficiency etc.
So I don't see Intel being at a crossroads, they don't have to go big with ARM or go home, they just need to get enough ARM chips out the door to be profitable and considering Intel's fab efficiency it's not hard for them to do, and in the meantime gain enough knowledge and experience to improve their own IP and designs. Intel has made the bet once that I would take ARM just as long to get to X86 performance levels as it would take Intel to get X86 down to ARM's power levels and they made the right bet at the time, and I'm pretty sure they also made the right bet this time around also.
Of course, I don't want to sacrifice competition. It'd be awesome to see Intel and ARM competing in features, performance, power, and price on a simple target for compilers and programmers.
(Yes, I know as a practical matter x86-64 will never go away; it's simply that I like the direction the market is going.)
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-16/intel-lice...