Elon Musk reiterates control of Tesla and SpaceX’s proposed Terafab AI chip complex, while Intel remains involved, according to Yahoo Finance

Elon Musk has reaffirmed that Tesla and SpaceX will control the proposed “Terafab” AI chip complex, even as Intel remains involved, according to comments carried by Yahoo Finance. The remarks keep the focus on who holds decision-making power for a cutting-edge chip venture that, if realized at scale, could affect how major AI systems are supplied with compute hardware.

The discussion, as described in the Yahoo Finance-linked report, underscores Tesla and SpaceX’s role in shaping the chip strategy. While details about ownership structure, governance, and the extent of Intel’s technical or operational participation were not laid out in the brief market-news framing, the report characterizes Intel as still part of the effort.

Intel, the company named as remaining involved, is a central player in semiconductors and has pursued multiple avenues to serve AI compute needs, including manufacturing capabilities and specialized chips. Even without additional specifics about Terafab in the reported comments, the mention of Intel points to an ongoing relationship between the chipmaker’s capabilities and the broader race to secure AI hardware supply.

In parallel with the Terafab discussion, the same report references market performance metrics for Intel. It cites an approximately 92% stock price move over the previous six months, an Intel stock price around $113.52 as of Oct. 7, and a 52-week range that includes a high around $142 and a price target near $118. Those figures are presented as part of the report’s stock snapshot rather than as a response to any single corporate disclosure.

The Terafab framing also highlights a broader industry dynamic: large technology companies are looking to translate AI demand into vertically coordinated supply chains, where chip design, manufacturing partnerships, and production scheduling can be synchronized. In that environment, the question of control and responsibility can matter as much as the technology itself, since it determines which party can prioritize capacity and change plans as AI workloads evolve.

What is not clear from the reported account is the precise nature of Intel’s involvement. The market-news framing does not specify whether Intel’s role is advisory, manufacturing, equipment procurement, software and validation, or another form of participation, nor does it describe any timetable, binding commitments, or contractual terms tied to Terafab.

Intel has not been shown in the provided material making a corresponding, detailed public statement about Terafab, and no additional terms were described beyond the general characterization that Intel remains involved. As a result, investors and industry watchers will likely look for formal disclosures, such as statements from the companies involved or any filings that spell out partnerships, milestones, and the economics of the project.

Next, the key developments to watch are any clearer project documentation, including governance arrangements between Tesla, SpaceX, and Intel, as well as any timeline for building or commissioning “Terafab.” Additional clarity on Intel’s role could also help market participants assess how much of the chip effort is likely to rely on Intel’s manufacturing and platform capabilities versus the operational control implied by Musk’s comments.