Intel ousted CEO Pat Gelsinger over the weekend, capped a tumultuous nearly four-year tenure at America’s top semiconductor company before its stock and market share collapsed.

The company announced Gelsinger’s resignation Monday morning. A person familiar with the matter said it came after a contentious board meeting last week over Gelsinger’s alleged inability to respond to Nvidia’s competitive advantage and a lack of confidence in Gelsinger’s turnaround plans.

Intel CFO David Zinsner and Intel Products CEO MJ Holthaus have been named interim co-CEOs. Long-time board member Frank Yeary will act as interim chairman. Shares of Intel fell 2% on Monday afternoon.

“We are working to create a leaner, simpler and more agile Intel,” Yeary said. Yeary was a key reason for Gelsinger’s ouster, said the person, who requested anonymity to freely discuss confidential board negotiations. Intel did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the board meeting.

Yeary, Intel’s longest-serving board member, will now have to lead another CEO search process. Gelsinger, 63, had an illustrious career at Intel, rising to become the company’s first chief technical officer at the turn of the century before taking a senior role at EMC. Gelsinger returned to the company from VMware, where he was CEO, to stabilize Intel in 2021, succeeding then-CEO Bob Swan.

“It has been a challenging year for all of us as we have made difficult but necessary decisions to position Intel for current market dynamics,” Gelsinger said in a press release.

The board meeting that led to Gelsinger’s ouster was first reported by Bloomberg.

Upon his arrival in 2021, Gelsinger laid out a bold plan to transform the struggling company into a chip manufacturing juggernaut. He aimed to catch up with the two leading chipmakers, Samsung and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. He pursued major expansions in the United States and around the world, a costly undertaking that placed a severe strain on Intel’s free cash flow and increased the company’s debt load.

He also courted government investment and positioned Intel as the single largest beneficiary of the US CHIPS and Science Act. Government money has been flowing to Intel in recent weeks and will support the company’s chip factories in Arizona and Ohio. Gelsinger’s resignation comes a week after Intel and the CHIPS and Science Act Office finalized a $7.86 billion grant.

Gelsinger also positioned the company as vital to U.S. national security. He won a multibillion-dollar contract from the Defense Department to build secure chips and emphasized in meetings with analysts and potential customers that Intel was a trusted partner of the U.S. government.

But none of that was enough to reassure investors, who increasingly viewed Intel’s aggressive spending as folly.

Investors grew increasingly wary of Intel’s prospects, especially as the wave of artificial intelligence buoyed the rival Nvidia and left Intel in the dust. The company’s market cap is less than half of what it was in 2021 and was briefly below $100 billion earlier this year. The company’s shares have fallen 52% since the beginning of the year.

In August, Intel reported disappointing quarterly results that triggered its biggest selloff in 50 years and said it would lay off more than 15% of its workforce as part of a $10 billion cost-cutting plan. CNBC reported that Intel has hired consultants to defend itself against activist investors.

So far, there is no indication that any activist has taken a significant stake in the company’s stock, nor is there any indication that overtures have been made to Intel’s board. It is not clear what agenda an activist would pursue within the company.

Intel announced plans in September to convert the company’s foundry business into an independent subsidiary, which would allow for external financing opportunities. That same month, Qualcomm made overtures to a possible acquisition.

Gelsinger’s successor, once found, will take the helm of a company that is smaller and more demanding than ever before. Many of the problems Gelsinger faced were inherited: Failing to pursue a chip-making mandate for Apple’s mobile devices and passing on an acquisition of Nvidia were just two of the reportedly conscious decisions made by Intel’s previous leadership that put the company at a competitive disadvantage.

These decisions were made by Intel’s board of directors and previous CEOs. But Gelsinger’s fall over the weekend raises new questions about corporate governance. Lip-Bu Tan resigned from Intel’s board earlier this year, leaving the company with no directors with semiconductor expertise. In the weeks since, numerous reports have emerged detailing a dysfunctional corporate acquisition strategy and boardroom resentment.

—CNBC’s Jordan Novet contributed reporting.