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

Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 657 posts

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#491

Post by Aromasin »

BeetleB wrote: post #239
Aromasin wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GlobalFoundries are nowhere near the leading edge on node process, and Intel have opened up their foundries to customers since Pat's return with the advent of IFS: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/foundry/overview.htm...

Correction: Intel has had a Foundry business since 2010 or 2011. Then CEO Paul Otellini pushed hard for it, but had a lot of opposition internally. It then languished after he left until Pat took over. It never died. It was always there. Pat's just fulfilling the vision Paul had.

You're right on that one, I perhaps should have more accurately said: "Revive". I will say though that the scope of Paul's vision for an Intel foundry didn't shine a light against IFS. There wasn't the same push for increased capacity. More so excess capacity would be given to select customers, and they might maybe increase capacity for big customers like Apple (who were with Samsung at the time rather than TSMC).

Some context from 2013 when they tried their hand at it: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/150217-intel-pumps-up-...

It's funny as a side note that their big foundry announcement at the time was making chips for Altera before the merger, and now Altera is parting ways with Intel after 8 years. Time flies.

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#492

Post by JonChesterfield »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #369
randerson wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just question whether the government is backing the right horse. Intel has been losing market share in every segment for years despite once having everything in their favor: a head start, a strong brand, mountains of cash. They failed to capture the mobile phone and tablet market altogether. And the govt thinks Intel can make AI chips that compete with Nvidia?

I don't think the goal is even to compete, even though maybe it's being sold that way. The goal is to have a domestically controlled source of relatively high tech chips. It doesn't matter if they're subpar

Global foundries seems like a better bet than intel for that objective.

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#493

Post by xcv123 »

Dalewyn wrote: post #478
xcv123 wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPU Note the "G" followed by PU Graphics Processing Unit None of those are GPUs Steam survey PC video card stats show 76.92% Nvidia, 15.09% AMD, and 7.59% Intel (graphics unit integrated with CPU) I never said that Intel CPUs are not popular on gaming PCs. But Intel used to have 99% of that Market.

Intel doesn't have and has never had a GPU line worth writing home about, so I don't know why you would bring up something Intel never had to say Intel is unpopular in gaming PCs.

> Intel doesn't have and has never had a GPU line worth writing home about

That is my point. Emphasizing the earlier statement: "They missed the gaming market".

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#494

Post by JonChesterfield »

BobbyTables2 wrote: post #440
s1artibartfast wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure if this was your intent, but it sounds like you're describing the world as it actually works. Companies execute stock BuyBacks when they don't have better internal Investments, and that's a good thing! Intel doesn't care about more us-based Fabs, nor are they high yield. This is why the US government has to pay them if the US government wants those things to exist.

To me, unless a company is Nvidia, a stock buyback screams “we have no vision for the company’s long-term growth, let’s just prop up our options/shares for short term personal gain”. That said, I’m not a fan of pointless acquisitions either… Would executives actually do buybacks if they didn’t have company shares? I suspect not! At the same time, a company shouldn’t get to underpay employees, do layoffs, and stock bu…

Tech companies pay their staff in RSUs. I.e. stock in their company.

That means either issuing more or buying some from the market. Issuing more should upset shareholders and decrease the price as they've been diluted.

Thus I expect a key driver of stock buybacks is balancing the outflow of stock to employees.

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#495

Post by madaxe_again »

FredPret wrote: post #123

We're living through the silicon age and Intel has made a total dog's breakfast of it. Stagnant revenues, falling profits. Both should have been growing geometrically. Just compare these companies: https://valustox.com/INTC https://valustox.com/AMD https://valustox.com/AVGO https://valustox.com/AMAT Even Qualcomm has seen good growth: https://valustox.com/QCOM This is how it's done: https://valustox.com/NVDA EDIT the…

Why worry about revenue and profits or sustainability when the government will just bail you out?

May as well just loot the coffers, pay seven figure bonuses, and then go back cap in hand to the taxpayer.

And we call this “capitalism”.

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#496

Post by isthatafact »

rhelz wrote: post #320
znpy wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but almost zero roles required even actual engineering background Small anecdote: pat gelsinger, intel ceo, started as a technician at intel (iirc) at like years old or something like that. That entry level job paid enough that he could have a roof on his head and i guess covered his university tuition? I’m not making this up: it’s all in his book he wrote about his life (not sure I recommend the book)

True, but Pat Gelsinger isn't a good example of what public policy we should pursue to help Joe six-packs enjoy a middle-class life. Gelsinger is one of the few people I would follow blindly into the maws of hell itself; his intellect is exceeded only by his ability to lead.

I am a little bit fascinated by the way that many people seem to think so highly of Gelsinger, and I even think it is possible that he will succeed in leveraging that to make Intel competitive.

However, just from his public persona of wildly optimistic sales/marketing pitches and showmanship, while outsourcing their own manufacturing to TSMC, I have a very bad impression.

Then his claims of Intel zettaflop machines by 2027 honestly make me think he is totally delusional, but maybe that does not matter.

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#497

Post by hackerlight »

ulfw wrote: post #382
mfer wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This award isn't about innovation, the best way to do things, or job requirements. This about supply chain security and national defense. So many of our components are made overseas and under governments who are not close allies. This is in order to operate things in our country. When you have the FABs in the US and under US control you can handle international foreign policy and the security of the nation differentl…

What governments that aren't your allies? Chips are produced in Taiwan, in Korea, in Japan. In that order. Which of those governments is not allied with the US of A?

> Taiwan

The precarious position of Taiwan is the main reason for this.

https://www.metaculus.com/questions/11480/china-launches-inv...

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#498

Post by roenxi »

rhelz wrote: post #458
coliveira wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. That's why this has everything to go wrong. You cannot create the talent and the supply chain needed for this with $8B. The US needs to solve much more fundamental things like their schools and the local supply chain to even have a shot of creating a successful chip business again.

Recall, it takes years to build these fabs. Fortunately, people will be more likely to spend years in grad school training for these jobs, if they know that when they graduate there will be fabs to hire them. Rebuilding is a chicken and egg problem, but it’s not as hard as defeating the axis powers in WWII. If this country has the Will to do something, it’s gunna get done.

This is harder than defeating an enemy militarily. Defeating someone militarily is relatively simple to do; and every country figures it out from necessity. It is an expensive process, but ultimately mainly about deciding that the high price is worth it (and if the country can afford it/has the industrial base to sustain the effort, but neither of those things can be changed in a conflict).

Building a profitable industrial chain is significantly harder to do and much rarer to achieve. The US certainly has the people to do it, but it isn't clear that the political trade-offs will be acceptable.

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#499

Post by lupusreal »

resource_waste wrote: post #240
lupusreal wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Top down planning is the only way projects requiring massive capital investment get done. There's no such thing as grassroots fabs.

The top down planning could be profit driven rather than defense driven.

Defense consideration generally require defense driven planning.

Re: Intel to Receive $8.5B in Grants to Build Chip Plants

#500

Post by sevagh »

xcv123 wrote: post #493
Dalewyn wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel doesn't have and has never had a GPU line worth writing home about, so I don't know why you would bring up something Intel never had to say Intel is unpopular in gaming PCs.

> Intel doesn't have and has never had a GPU line worth writing home about That is my point. Emphasizing the earlier statement: "They missed the gaming market".

Your point is bad. Ignoring the fact that Intel's bread and butter is the CPU, of which they have a dominant gaming marketshare, is obtuse.
Post reply on HN