Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel is dying and we can’t save it

sithsiri.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–268 of 268 posts

Re: Intel is dying and we can’t save it

#261

Post by yboris »

perl4ever wrote: post #250
yboris wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Side note: we, here on HN, all likely have more money than 99% of all humans on this planet [0] (the link is about income; wealth is even more unequally distributed). Earning more than $60k/year puts you in the 1% already. [1] [0] https://income-inequality.info/ [1] https://howrichami.givingwhatwecan.org/how-rich-am-i

Some people on HN in fact have salaries under $60K. Not everyone here is an American or works in the private sector, either. I would be fairly surprised if $60K is top 1%, even if you have the entire world population in the denominator. But when I checked your link, it's not using the entire population for the denominator, (which is correct, IMO) so I don't think it's even close. In the US, there are about 110M fullt…

Thanks for specifying the numbers and the underlying assumptions!

Median in the US is not clear to me - I saw a figure of 60K and 35K within 2 minutes of searching. I think wage earning gets divided across family size, so those 45M people in your calculation, after dividing by family size, would have a much smaller income.

Re: Intel is dying and we can’t save it

#262

Post by incrudible »

Tuna-Fish wrote: post #259
incrudible wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My point is not that Intel is "crushing" AMD or anything, but that they manage to outpace (or at least keep pace with) AMD on a much larger node. > Also, never compare chips that are actually on the market to unreleased ones. Watch me do it: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Rocket-Lake-S-vs-Zen-3-Geekben... Am I going to gamble my house on this being true? Of course not. We're having a nerdy discussion on IPC. It doesn'…

> My point is not that Intel is "crushing" AMD or anything, but that they manage to outpace (or at least keep pace with) AMD on a much larger node. This is an entirely valid position, and I agree that it bodes well for Intel that they are able to do this. However, it is a very different statement from your original: > Consider that at 14nm+++++, Intel still manages to outpace AMD with its 7nm CPUs and latest architec…

It was a mistake not to make clear that I am talking about CPUs that have not shipped yet.

Otherwise, I do not see any issue with what I said. I am looking at Intel as a company, and there I see massively better profit margins. Street prices may not reflect this during periods of shortages, but it is the dealers who are pocketing that difference, not AMD.

Re: Intel is dying and we can’t save it

#263

Post by Rury »

blihp wrote: post #162
MichaelApproved wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The ratio of excellent to useless people I experienced there was 1:40 This has to be hyperbole but the rest of your comment makes me think you're being serious. I have only worked at small companies My guess is you thought those people were useless because you didn't understand the role they played in the company. However, I'll admin again that I don't have first hand experience. I'd genuinely love to hear from oth…

There are absolutely staggering amounts of waste in large, especially market dominating, companies. Mainly because they can afford it... for a while. The difference with most smaller, and even mid-sized, companies is that if they made even a fraction of the number and size mistakes (and I'm only talking in relative, rather than absolute, terms) that large companies do they would be bankrupt in a year or two. Large co…

I like how Steve Jobs explains it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4VBqTViEx4

Re: Intel is dying and we can’t save it

#264

Post by ekianjo »

gchamonlive wrote: post #185
ekianjo wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Intel has to work harder than usual to regain both consumer trust and innovation lead Not in the enterprise market where AMD is almost completely absent so far.

What do you mean by "almost completely absent"? A quick search showed that in 2017, AMD server market share was 1%, and in 2020 is expected to have reached nearly 10%[1] in 2019. This is still not the same as 15 years ago, but the market is also not the same, with cloud computing, and this increase is very expressive. They are bringing IPC improvement with Epyc Milan and is pushing the same innovations towards the se…

Enterprise market does not mean servers only. Look at enterprise laptops which make for several dozens of millions every year and AMD is pretty tiny still.

Re: Intel is dying and we can’t save it

#265

Post by gchamonlive »

ekianjo wrote: post #264
gchamonlive wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by "almost completely absent"? A quick search showed that in 2017, AMD server market share was 1%, and in 2020 is expected to have reached nearly 10%[1] in 2019. This is still not the same as 15 years ago, but the market is also not the same, with cloud computing, and this increase is very expressive. They are bringing IPC improvement with Epyc Milan and is pushing the same innovations towards the se…

Enterprise market does not mean servers only. Look at enterprise laptops which make for several dozens of millions every year and AMD is pretty tiny still.

I didn't say it was, I just exemplified with server market share numbers why I thought that it was odd to say that AMD was almost completely absent in the enterprise market.

Re: Intel is dying and we can’t save it

#266

Post by perl4ever »

yboris wrote: post #261
perl4ever wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people on HN in fact have salaries under $60K. Not everyone here is an American or works in the private sector, either. I would be fairly surprised if $60K is top 1%, even if you have the entire world population in the denominator. But when I checked your link, it's not using the entire population for the denominator, (which is correct, IMO) so I don't think it's even close. In the US, there are about 110M fullt…

Thanks for specifying the numbers and the underlying assumptions! Median in the US is not clear to me - I saw a figure of 60K and 35K within 2 minutes of searching. I think wage earning gets divided across family size, so those 45M people in your calculation, after dividing by family size, would have a much smaller income.

That sounds like the claim is "if the income per capita within your household is > $60K, then your household is in the top 1% of all households in income per capita".

I think the difference between this convoluted statement and normal measures of inequality could be approximately translated to "most people making > $60K have dependents". It seems like a bad way to talk about inequality, because what goal would it imply to reduce inequality? Prevent people from having dependents, or prevent them from not having dependents?

Re: Intel is dying and we can’t save it

#267

Post by yboris »

perl4ever wrote: post #266
yboris wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for specifying the numbers and the underlying assumptions! Median in the US is not clear to me - I saw a figure of 60K and 35K within 2 minutes of searching. I think wage earning gets divided across family size, so those 45M people in your calculation, after dividing by family size, would have a much smaller income.

That sounds like the claim is "if the income per capita within your household is > $60K, then your household is in the top 1% of all households in income per capita". I think the difference between this convoluted statement and normal measures of inequality could be approximately translated to "most people making > $60K have dependents". It seems like a bad way to talk about inequality, because what goal would it imp…

I think income is a proxy for something like "financial freedom" (which is presumably the eventual goal for why we want higher incomes).

Having an income of $60k while having a dependent is very different than when not having a dependent. I seems correct to say that without a dependent, you're in the top 1% of the world's wage earners (with respect to your financial freedom); while if you have a dependent, your income is no longer fully yours - and you are no longer in the top 1% of the world's wage earners.

Re: Intel is dying and we can’t save it

#268

Post by perfopt »

dathinab wrote: post #28

I see Intel not being dominant, having to take a back seat, shrinking a bit. But dying?? Nup, I'm not seeing this at all. I mean AMD for years survived in a situation much worse then Intel currently is. Intel's productions nodes might be behind TSMC's but they are still quite valuable, not all chips need 5nm processes. Heck we could say most chips don't need it. Intel is still innovating, just because they currently…

Intel is certainly not dying. They are taking hits. But unlike AMD, Intel has a LOT of enemies over the years. Most large OEMs have been bullied and pushed around by Intel in the past. So I expect there will not be much good will to help a struggling Intel.
Post reply on HN