Chiplets are the microservices of the semiconductor world. It’s good in that smaller individual chips are cheaper to produce, and the whole package is more scalable, but it’s bad in that there are interfaces that reduce performance vs a monolith
This isn't really true. Chiplets can be used to "break apart" what would traditionally be one chip, but also to more tightly integrate things that would previously have been discrete components on the motherboard and to use the right process for given a functionality.
Consider AMD's approach. They use multiple CPU dies in a single package to build very high core count systems that would previously have required multiple sockets. Bringing these into one package can make communication more energy-efficient and faster, as well as simplifying other aspects of the system. They also use different processes for different dies. The "IO die" is fabricated on a slightly old process as it is not performance-critical while the best process is reserved for building cores.
They break things apart and preserve interface protocols, but leaving the die isn't free. AMD's approach has all of the upsides and downsides that come with microservices, and taking effective advantage of it requires a similar level of planning.
I think this is a poor comparison because microservices exist to help code mirror the org chart while chiplets exist for physical engineering reasons.
Microservices are supposed to improve testability, reduce complexity, etc: it is an organizational choice. Chiplets add complexity: silicon interposer, tougher packaging, NUMA, etc: it's an engineering choice with a tradeoff for better yield, chips reaching maximum reticle size, etc
