Exhibit 1.01

CONFLICT MINERALS REPORT

INTEL CORPORATION

IN ACCORD WITH RULE 13P-1 UNDER THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

This Conflict Minerals Report (Report) of Intel Corporation (Intel or we) for the year ended December 31, 2019 is presented to comply with Rule 13p-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Rule). The Rule was adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to implement reporting requirements related to “conflict minerals,” defined by the SEC as columbite-tantalite (coltan), cassiterite, gold, wolframite, and their derivatives, which are currently limited to tantalum, tin, and tungsten.

The Rule imposes certain reporting obligations on SEC registrants whose products contain conflict minerals that are necessary to the functionality or production of their products (referred to as “necessary conflict minerals”). For products that contain necessary conflict minerals, the registrant must conduct in good faith a reasonable country of origin inquiry designed to determine whether any of the necessary conflict minerals originated in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) or an adjoining country (collectively, the “Covered Countries”). If, based on such inquiry, the registrant knows or has reason to believe that any of the necessary conflict minerals originated or may have originated in a Covered Country and may not be solely from recycled or scrap sources, the registrant must conduct due diligence to determine if the necessary conflict minerals directly or indirectly financed or benefited armed groups (as defined by the SEC in Form SD) in the Covered Countries.

Overview of Intel’s Responsible Minerals Program and Commitment to Responsible Sourcing

As set forth in our Responsible Minerals Sourcing Policy, Intel is committed to the responsible sourcing of minerals, which we define as sourcing done in an ethical and sustainable manner that safeguards the human rights of everyone in our global supply chain. Intel’s responsible minerals program continues to expand in scope to include additional minerals, such as cobalt, and to examine human rights risks in Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas (CAHRAs) globally, as defined by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas, Third Edition, and related Supplements on Tin, Tantalum and Tungsten and on Gold (collectively, “OECD Guidance”). While the focus of this Report is on conflict minerals and the Covered Countries, we are electing to also describe the proactive due diligence we began several years ago around cobalt. Cobalt is used in our next-generation microprocessor manufacturing technology; in following through with our commitment to pursuing responsible minerals sourcing, we have included a separate section discussing our program’s efforts to address cobalt.

As we expand our program, we also continue to strengthen our approach for responsible sourcing of conflict minerals and to support the improvement of conditions of the mining communities in the Covered Countries. Many of our hardware products contain tantalum, tin, tungsten, and/or gold necessary to the functionality or production of those products. Conflict minerals are obtained from sources worldwide, and our desire is not to eliminate those originating in the Covered Countries and other CAHRAs, but rather to obtain conflict minerals from sources that do not directly or indirectly finance or benefit armed groups or contribute to human rights abuses. We believe that it is important for us and other companies to support responsible in-region mineral sourcing from the Covered Countries and other CAHRAs, in order to not negatively affect the economies of such countries.

We have worked extensively for over a dozen years on the issue of conflict minerals, as part of our work on responsible mineral sourcing. We recognize that broad collaborative efforts among governments, non-governmental organizations, civil society experts, and industry are needed to identify and mitigate the risk of contributing to serious human rights abuses and conflict related to mineral extraction in the Covered Countries. Intel is a steering committee member of the Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI), unique member code INTC, and active contributor to multiple RMI sub-teams.

1

Intel is also an active member of the OECD Multi-Stakeholder Steering Group, which advises on implementation for the OECD Guidance, and the European Partnership for Responsible Minerals, where we collaborate with companies in the electronics and other industries (e.g., jewelry, automotive, medical instrumentation, and others) and other stakeholders, such as public authorities and civil society groups, to address responsible mineral sourcing issues. Additionally, we are members of, and provide support to, the International Tin Association’s International Tin Supply Chain Initiative (iTSCi) and the Public-Private Alliance for Responsible Minerals Trade (PPA), which promote responsibly sourced minerals from the Covered Countries. We are also part of the CRAFT Code Committee, which assisted in the development of the Code of Risk-mitigation for Artisanal and Small-Scale Mining engaging in Formal Trade (CRAFT).

Additionally, in 2019, Intel participated in a PPA-organized delegation visit to the DRC and Rwanda to provide a customer voice and collaborate with key partners and stakeholders in strengthening due diligence and credible traceability measures. This delegation included meetings with government leaders and human rights advocates as well as visits to several mine sites and direct interaction with miners. Intel believes that maintaining a connection to upstream actors, local communities, and regulating bodies is important in refining industry-wide processes and standards as well as in setting strategies that aim to improve conditions in the region.

Products and Supply Chain Description

The Intel products we manufactured or contracted with others to manufacture that may contain necessary conflict minerals, and which are covered in this Report, are our microprocessor and chipset products, including Celeron^®, Pentium^®, Intel^® Core^™, Intel^® Xeon^®, Intel^® Quark^™, and Intel Atom^® processors; Intel^® Agilex^™, Intel^® Stratix^®, Intel^® Arria^®, Intel^® Cyclone^®, and Intel^® MAX^® FPGAs; Intel^® eASIC^™ ASICs; Intel^® Enpirion^® Power Solutions and Mobileye EyeQ^® family of system-on-chip (SoC) devices; and our other server products, networking products, boards and kits, memory and storage products, and our other Mobileye products.

Most of our hardware products, primarily microprocessors, chipsets and their packages, are manufactured in our own network of fabrication facilities (fabs). Intel also sells products that are manufactured for us by other companies and products that include ready-made component parts that we purchase from third parties. Although many of our hardware products contain conflict minerals, we do not purchase ore or unrefined conflict minerals from mines. We are many steps removed in the supply chain from the mining of minerals and are therefore considered a “downstream” purchaser. We purchase materials used in our products from a large network of suppliers; some of those materials contribute necessary conflict minerals to our products. The origin of minerals cannot be determined with any certainty once the ores are smelted, refined and converted to ingots, bullion or other derivatives. The smelters and refiners (referred to as “facilities”) are consolidating points for ore and are in the best position in the total supply chain to know the origin of the ores. We rely on our suppliers to assist with our reasonable country of origin inquiry and due diligence efforts, including the identification of smelters and refiners, for the minerals contained in the materials which they supply to us.

Design of Responsible Minerals Program

The design of Intel’s responsible minerals program is in conformity with the OECD Guidance specifically as it relates to our position in the minerals supply chain as a “downstream” purchaser. Summarized below are the design components of our responsible minerals program as they relate to the five-step framework from the OECD Guidance. While our program encompasses a broader scope of minerals and regional areas, the summary of Steps 2 through 5 below focuses on the application of our program to conflict minerals and the Covered Countries.

2

3

The content of any website referred to in this Report is included for general information only and is not incorporated by reference in this Report.

Description of Reasonable Country of Origin Inquiry Efforts

For 2019, our reasonable country of origin inquiry (RCOI) efforts for conflict minerals included conducting a supply chain survey of our direct suppliers (referred to as “surveyed suppliers”) using the CMRT. The supply chain surveys requested our suppliers to identify the smelters and refiners and countries of origin of the conflict minerals in products they supply to us. We compared the smelters and refiners identified in the surveys against the lists of facilities which are conformant to a responsible mineral sourcing validation program, such as the RMAP or RMI cross-recognized programs. We also proactively attempted to contact smelter and refiner facilities identified by our surveyed suppliers where we did not have mineral country of origin information and requested each facility contacted to identify the types of raw materials processed by the facility and the mineral country of origin for ore processed by that facility. We documented country of origin information for the smelter and refiner facilities identified by surveyed suppliers as provided from sources including the supply chain survey, responsible mineral sourcing validation programs, direct contact with smelters and refiners, and from publicly available sources such as smelter and refiner websites, if we determined such publicly available sources to be reliable.

Results of Reasonable Country of Origin Inquiry Efforts

For 2019, Intel conducted a supply chain survey of 200 suppliers that we determined may contribute necessary conflict minerals to our products.

The results of our RCOI as of March 3, 2020 are as follows:

4

Of the 200 surveyed suppliers, 51 were suppliers specific to Mobileye, an Intel subsidiary, that were not otherwise part of the Intel supply chain (“Mobileye-unique” suppliers). As of March 3, 2020, 43 of the 51 Mobileye-unique suppliers, approximately 84%, had provided a CMRT in response to our supply chain survey request. Our response rate for Mobileye-unique suppliers is not meeting the overall goal that Intel expects from its supply chain (excluding Mobileye-unique suppliers, our supplier response rate was 100%). Intel’s supplier due diligence with these remaining suppliers is ongoing and we are continuing work on our escalation paths to increase the response rate.

Conclusion Based on Reasonable Country of Origin Inquiry

We have concluded in good faith that during 2019:

As a result of the above conclusion and pursuant to the Rule, we undertook due diligence measures on the source and chain of custody of the necessary conflict minerals in our products which we had reason to believe may have originated from the Covered Countries and which may not have come from recycled or scrap sources. There is significant overlap between our RCOI efforts and our due diligence measures performed.

Description of Due Diligence Measures Performed

Below is a description of the measures performed for this reporting period, as of March 3, 2020, to exercise due diligence on the source and chain of custody of the necessary conflict minerals contained in our products:

5

Results of our Due Diligence Measures

Inherent Limitations on Due Diligence Measures

As a downstream purchaser of products which contain conflict minerals, our due diligence measures can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance regarding the source and chain of custody of the necessary conflict minerals. Our due diligence processes are based on the necessity of seeking data from our direct suppliers and those suppliers seeking similar information within their supply chains to identify the original sources of the necessary conflict minerals. We also rely, to a large extent, on information collected and provided by responsible mineral sourcing validation programs. Such sources of information, as well as our smelters and refiner facility visits and publicly available sources, may yield inaccurate or incomplete information and may be subject to fraud.

Another complicating factor is the unavailability of country of origin and chain of custody information from our suppliers on a continuous, real-time basis. The supply chain of commodities such as conflict minerals is a multi-step process operating more or less on a daily basis, with ore being delivered to smelters and refiners, with smelters and refiners smelting or refining ores into metal containing derivatives such as ingots, with the derivatives being shipped, sold, and stored in numerous market locations around the world and with distributors and purchasers holding varying amounts of the derivatives in inventory for use. Since we do not have direct contractual relationships with smelters and refiners, we rely on our direct suppliers and the entire supply chain to gather and provide specific information about the date when the ore is smelted into a derivative and later shipped, stored, sold, and first entered the stream of commerce. We directly seek sourcing data on a periodic basis from our direct suppliers as well as certain smelters and refiners. We ask that the data cover the entire reporting year, and we seek to use contract provisions requiring the suppliers to promptly update us in the event the sourcing data changes. Our due diligence processes are ongoing throughout the year.

Surveyed Supplier Due Diligence Results

Intel evaluated the accuracy and completeness of the responses to our supply chain surveys by our surveyed suppliers. We identified 22 surveyed suppliers whose initial survey response contained incomplete or potentially inaccurate information. We used various methods to identify the incomplete or inaccurate information in the surveyed supplier’s response, including verification checks conducted by third party software or by members of our internal Responsible Minerals team. When an incomplete or inaccurate response was identified, we contacted the applicable surveyed supplier, identified the incomplete or inaccurate information, and requested that the surveyed supplier correct the incomplete or potentially inaccurate information and provide an updated response. 19 of these 22 surveyed suppliers provided an updated CMRT which we determined, using the same evaluation criteria, to be complete and accurate. We continue to work with the remaining suppliers on capacity building to ensure accuracy of future declarations.

Upon receiving a survey response identified to be complete and accurate based on our evaluation criteria, we further evaluated each response for conformity with our Responsible Minerals Sourcing Policy or contractual requirements. These requirements include that our surveyed suppliers must maintain a publicly available conflict minerals sourcing policy, provide a CMRT upon our request, and use smelters and refiners which are either conformant to a responsible mineral sourcing validation program or have begun participating in such a program. We identified surveyed suppliers which were not fully compliant with all applicable requirements and monitored and tracked these suppliers’ progress in meeting the applicable requirements. We performed risk mitigation efforts by contacting each supplier, identifying actions items which we requested the supplier complete, and asking the supplier to provide an updated CMRT. Our risk mitigation efforts are specifically related to meeting our Responsible Minerals Sourcing Policy or contractual requirements, with the goal of bringing each surveyed supplier into compliance with such requirements.

As a result of these supplier due diligence activities, Intel determined that approximately 95% of the surveyed suppliers that had provided a CMRT as of March 3, 2020 (183 out of 192) are in compliance with our Responsible Minerals Sourcing Policy or contractual requirements. Of the nine suppliers not meeting our requirements, two met requirements subsequent to March 3, and we are continuing to work with the other seven suppliers to drive compliance.

Smelter and Refiner Due Diligence Results

As a result of the supply chain survey, our surveyed suppliers identified an aggregate of 227 operational smelter and refiner facilities which may process the necessary conflict minerals contained in the products these surveyed suppliers provided to Intel.

6

Intel conducted due diligence on these smelters and refiners. Our due diligence activities are dominated by a continual process to determine and monitor whether the identified smelters and refiners are operational and therefore may contribute necessary conflict minerals to our final products, and whether they are conformant to a responsible mineral sourcing validation program or have begun participating in such a program. We sought reliable information on the source and chain of custody of the conflict minerals processed by such facilities, including from publicly available sources, with the goal to determine if any of these facilities processed conflict minerals that may have originated from the Covered Countries and other CAHRAs, and may not be solely from recycled or scrap sources. We also visited two conformant smelters and refiners in our supply chain to better understand their due diligence and procurement practices.

If a smelter or refiner in our supply chain was not yet conformant to a responsible mineral sourcing validation program or had not yet begun participating in such a program, Intel and other RMI member companies proactively attempted to contact such facilities to request country of origin information for the conflict minerals the facilities processed, as well as to encourage and assist their participation in a responsible mineral sourcing validation program and, in some cases, visited such facilities on-site. We monitored and tracked smelters and refiners which we identified as not being conformant to a responsible mineral sourcing validation program or not having begun participating in such a program.

During this reporting year, we identified 23 smelter and refiner facilities that were not conformant to a responsible mineral sourcing validation program. These facilities were the focus of our smelter and refiner due diligence activities for this reporting period and, as a result of our activities, we reasonably concluded that as of March 3, 2020:

As result of our due diligence activities summarized above, we determined the following as of March 3, 2020:

Below is a summary of the mineral country of origin information collected as of March 3, 2020 as a result of our due diligence activities:

Table 1

7

8

9

10

Summary of Smelter and Refiner Status

The charts below summarize, by mineral, the numbers of operational smelter and refiner facilities, identified by our surveyed suppliers, that as of March 3, 2020:

Status of Identified Smelters and Refiners

The table below (Table 2) lists the facilities which, to the extent known, processed the necessary conflict minerals in our products based on responses received from our surveyed suppliers as of March 3, 2020. Intel conducts no direct transactions and has no contractual relationship with these smelter and refiner facilities nor their sources of ore.

11

Table 2

12

13

14

15

16

Conclusion and Future Due Diligence Measures

The facilities reported in Table 2 processed the necessary conflict minerals in our products based on responses received from 96% of our surveyed suppliers as of March 3, 2020. As of March 3, 2020, 99.6% of the reported smelter and refiner facilities are conformant or are participating in a responsible mineral sourcing validation program. Based on our due diligence, we have no reason to believe the sole remaining facility sources conflict minerals from the Covered Countries, and we are working to remove this facility from our supply chain. All smelters and refiners that we know or have reason to believe may source conflict minerals from the Covered Countries which may not be solely from recycled or scrap sources are conformant to a responsible mineral sourcing validation program as of March 3, 2020. We have no reason to believe that any of the reported smelter and refiner facilities directly or indirectly finance or benefit armed groups in the Covered Countries. We are continuing to engage in the activities described above in “Design of Responsible Minerals Program” and we are continuing to follow up with suppliers that are not meeting our requirements as well as contacting smelters and refiners that are not yet conformant to a responsible mineral sourcing validation program. We are encouraging and assisting such smelters and refiners to participate in a responsible mineral sourcing validation program, thus supporting our efforts to build ethical and socially responsible supply chains for our company.

Our efforts to determine the mine or location of origin of the necessary conflict minerals in all our products with the greatest possible specificity consisted of the due diligence measures described in this Report. In particular, we relied on the information made available by responsible mineral sourcing validation programs for the smelters and refiners in our supply chain because such programs review and audit whether sufficient evidence exists regarding the mine and/or location of origin of the conflict minerals that the audited smelter or refiner facilities have processed. We also sought source and chain of custody information directly from smelters and refiners and from publicly available sources and, if we determined such information to be reliable, we used the information to make reasonable conclusions on the source and chain of custody of the conflict minerals processed by facilities which were not conformant to or participating in a responsible mineral sourcing validation program.

Additionally, Intel’s responsible minerals program is evolving to address a broader range of minerals originating from CAHRAs. We are assessing the risks of other minerals in our products and have updated our due diligence practices to address CAHRAs when conducting country of origin analysis in our supply chain. We also have updated our minerals sourcing policy to reflect this expansion in scope. Intel is continuing to partner with the RMI and other key industry associations to expand and improve responsible mineral sourcing.

Efforts Pertaining to Cobalt

Intel continues to evaluate and expand upon the framework of our due diligence programs as material use and risk profiles emerge. Cobalt has been identified as a mineral of concern due to reports of child labor and other social impacts in CAHRAs. Aligned with our approach to conflict minerals, our desire is not to eliminate sourcing from CAHRAs, but rather to identify and mitigate risks in our supply chain to obtain only minerals that are sourced responsibly.

17

We use cobalt in our next-generation microprocessor manufacturing technology and have taken steps to pursue its responsible sourcing. Since 2017, we have conducted a survey of our direct suppliers that provide materials contributing cobalt to Intel-manufactured microprocessor products to identify cobalt smelters and refiners in our microprocessor supply chain and have reported our results in our Corporate Responsibility Report. We conducted risk mitigation in our supply chain, including smelter outreach, which included a visit to one cobalt refiner in 2019, and country of origin assessments, as well as working with direct suppliers to facilitate alternative sourcing where appropriate.

In 2019, Intel began using the newly established RMI-developed Cobalt Reporting Template (CRT) and expanded the survey process to include suppliers of product components in addition to our manufactured products. We identified and surveyed 55 suppliers whose products may contain intentionally added cobalt contributing to our in-scope products. Out of these 55 surveyed suppliers, 44 responded with a completed CRT and another four submitted a timeline for completion to give us an 87% overall response rate. We will continue to work on education and capability building with our suppliers to improve our response rate and data accuracy. We are using the information obtained to conduct due diligence on the identified refiners and actively focus our outreach efforts to encourage RMAP involvement. Participation in such a program verifies these facilities have management systems in place to ensure the cobalt they process is responsibly sourced in alignment with OECD Guidance.

Intel strongly believes that collaboration among industry, government, non-governmental organizations and civil society experts is the best way to effectively create positive change in our supply chain. Intel is participating in developing industry-wide standards to better align, and thus strengthen, the collective approach to responsible cobalt sourcing. Accordingly, we collaborated with RMI to establish industry standards, including the Cobalt Reporting Template (CRT) and the RMAP Pilot Cobalt Due Diligence Standard. These efforts further our pursuit to ensure that cobalt in our products is responsibly sourced.

On our website at www.intel.com/conflictfree, we publish a smelter and refiner list that includes the facilities that, to the extent known, may have processed the cobalt in our products based on responses received from our surveyed suppliers.

Independent Private Sector Audit of this Report

We obtained an independent private sector audit of the conflict minerals assertions contained in the “Design of Conflict Minerals Program” and “Description of Due Diligence Measures Performed” sections in this Report by Ernst & Young LLP, which is set forth as Exhibit A to this Report. The “Efforts Pertaining to Cobalt” section is excluded from the private sector audit in this Report.

Intel and the Intel logo, Intel Atom, Intel Core, Xeon, Celeron, Pentium, Quark, Stratix, Arria, Cyclone, MAX, Agilex, eASIC, and Enpirion are trademarks of Intel Corporation or its subsidiaries in the U.S. and/or other countries.

Other names and brands may be claimed as the property of others. The “Efforts Pertaining to Cobalt” section is not required by the Rule and is furnished as a supplement to this Report.

18

Exhibit A

Report of Independent Accountants

To the stockholders and The Board of Directors of Intel Corporation

We have examined whether the design of Intel Corporation’s (the “Company”) due diligence framework as set forth in the Design of Responsible Minerals Program section of the Conflict Minerals Report for the reporting period from January 1 to December 31, 2019, is in conformity, in all material respects, with the criteria set forth in the Organisation of Economic Co-Operation and Development Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas, Third Edition 2016, (“OECD Due Diligence Guidance”), and whether the Company’s description of the due diligence measures it performed, as set forth in Description of Due Diligence Measures Performed section of the Conflict Minerals Report for the reporting period from January 1 to December 31, 2019, is consistent, in all material respects, with the due diligence process that the Company undertook.

Management is responsible for the design of the Company’s due diligence framework and the description of the Company’s due diligence measures set forth in the Conflict Minerals Report, and performance of the due diligence measures. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the design of the Company’s due diligence framework and on the description of the due diligence measures the Company performed, based on our examination. Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and the standards applicable to attestation engagements contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the design of the Company’s due diligence framework and the description of the due diligence measures the Company performed, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination was not conducted for the purpose of evaluating:

Accordingly, we do not express an opinion or any other form of assurance on the aforementioned matters or any other matters included in any section of the Conflict Minerals Report other than the design of the Company’s due diligence framework as set forth in the Design of Responsible Minerals Program section and the Company’s description of the due diligence measures it performed as set forth in the Description of Due Diligence Measures Performed section referenced in the first paragraph above.

In our opinion, the design of the Company’s due diligence framework for the reporting period from January 1 to December 31, 2019, as set forth in the Design of Responsible Minerals Program section of the Conflict Minerals Report is in conformity, in all material respects, with the OECD Due Diligence Guidance, and the Company’s description of the due diligence measures it performed as set forth in the Description of Due Diligence Measures Performed section of the Conflict Minerals Report for the reporting period from January 1 to December 31, 2019, is consistent, in all material respects, with the due diligence process that the Company undertook.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

San Jose, California

May 14, 2020

19