Again, totally don't disagree - but either Intel gives up and goes out of business, or they pick a ruthless engineering leader to try and fix it. Gelsinger is about the best of those I know - if he can't, I'd be surprised who could (Raja? LOL).Yea well- this is going to take a Jobsian type turnaround. You can fanboi about your friend all you want- Im sure he's a great kisser. From my perspective: I've already worked for a company in this condition and understand intimately what needs to happen.
Also definitely not my friend - I don't float at those levels quite yet, but I worked on his teams and with his other hand-picked C-levels, and the guy has a history for being very good at what he does.
That's what they said about Intel in the Athlon64 days, and what they said about AMD in the ... well, most of the last decade, and what they said about Apple, and so on. All things are cyclical in this industry, if you've got the cash to ride out the slow times. Intel definitely has the cash. I'm not an Intel fanboy by any means (most of my main systems are AMD) - but I can also look at the business fundamentals and see that they have ~time~ and ~resources~ to fix this, with the right leadership and (again) time to get there. Can't roll out new CPUs in 12 months, after all, any more than you can roll out a new GPU that fast. Those take years to develop. What happens when AMD hits a snag?Intel is finished as an industry leader unless they can catch up on process. AMD is pumping out 5nm designs while knee deep in Zen 5 development.
Absolutely. I find the required scheduler and everything else... less than optimal by far. The funnier thing is that they're having to stretch 10nm after fighting that hard to even get there!There's some slight of hand going on here:
The first "joke" is e-cores. Now in a laptop this is completely understandable (Apple's primary market). But not in high performance computing. The only reason Intel went that route is to stretch 10nm as far as possible. And they are hitting a wall.
Maybe. Or maybe they need to license the fab tech - because with the way TSMC and co have been tapped out recently, that's the only way to actually produce anything in quantity. Only so many 5nm and 7nm fabs around. And, FWIW, and to give intel a little credit, their transistor density at 10nm is FAR better than it has any rights to be - up there (IIRC) beating TSMC 7nm by a small margin.Unless they outsource their manufacturing right now- they're done. They don't even have a 7nm part. And Zen 4 is cruising at 5nm. A 2023 7nm release coming from an Intel fab isn't going to save them. AMD has legs with Zen 4 and 5. There's lots of headroom there.
https://www.digitimes.com/news/a202...features,and Samsung's 7nm nodes respectively.
And yes, TSMC has since managed to nudge out the lead again with several improved versions of 7nm, but Intel isn't THAT far behind.
Oh they will. Technology wise they're behind.How much you want to bet that e-cores go away in x86 land assuming Intel catches up in process? It's a lock.
They are, in short, pucked.
Business wise? They've got a LONG runway to work with still - heck, they made 3.1B the quarter before last (operating income), and have 27B in cash on hand. You can ride that for a long time.