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

The Resurrection of Intel Will Take More Than Three Days

nextplatform.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 70 posts

Re: The Resurrection of Intel Will Take More Than Three Days

#51

Post by creshal »

adrian_b wrote: post #34
rapsey wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m putting money on this. I would not. There is nothing to indicate Intel leadership is capable of executing. Bean counters are not the kind of leadership you need in a changing environment.

Intel publishes much more information about their future roadmap than any other company in this industry. During the last couple of years they have achieved in time all the product and process launches that had been announced with years in advance, up to Meteor Lake on the new Intel 4 CMOS process at the end of 2023 and Sierra Forest on the new Intel 3 CMOS process at the middle of 2024. The only things that could be…

> During the last couple of years they have achieved in time all the product and process launches that had been announced with years in advance

By selling defective products

Re: The Resurrection of Intel Will Take More Than Three Days

#52

Post by Rinzler89 »

layoric wrote: post #32
Rinzler89 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Theres also talk about their shift to GPU, maybe Battle Mage will deliver in this year Considering the stock tanking and the announced layoffs, I fear Battle Mage will be unfortunate collateral damage along the line. Really unfortunate timing as that was the only competition we could hope for to the Nvidia and AMD GPU duopoly who jacked up their prices, and Intel was actually committed to the new GPUs constantly pus…

IMO if they released a mid level performer workstation card with 48-64GB of VRAM for a reasonable price (my understanding is standard GDDR6 is not overly expensive), say under $1k usd, they would not only fly off the shelves, but they would also gain OSS efforts improving popular packages. Products like the NVIDIA A6000 are so insanely overpriced, I’m still baffled why larger VRAM cards haven’t come out more competit…

> I’m still baffled why larger VRAM cards haven’t come out more competitive.

Because that would eat into the market of hyper expensive dedicated AI accelerator cards. Wasn't it obvious?

At TSMC you'll pay 20 per square inch of silicon(number I made up for exemplification), would you rather a) print a GPU on it and sell it to consumers for $800 or b) print an AI accelerator on it and sell it to datacenters for $8000?

It's really that simple. What company you know that says no to making more money?

Re: The Resurrection of Intel Will Take More Than Three Days

#53

Post by talldayo »

rapsey wrote: post #48
talldayo wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Considering the stock performance of the last 10 years my opinion is quite widespread among investors

It's very widespread. But if you look past the stock trade and the pop-psychology, it's pretty clear that Intel today is on a different trajectory than they were 10 years ago. In that time they've changed CEOs, reframed their roadmap, kickstarted auxiliary businesses and invested in RISC development. The catastrophic potential of Intel losing desktop market share was overstated and over-anticipated. Now, cutting off their desktop segment is practically the most profitable route.

HN has a habit of jumping the gun on financials without accounting for what the market is doing or where things are going. Intel doesn't have the dominant position they used to, but their trajectory is heads-I-win-tails-you-lose levels of redundant. Their roadmap is the good kind of boring, and they're the only fab I know that has TSMC's flagship products in the crosshairs. We're desperately trying to declare Intel dead while already anticipating their resurrection; that suggests to me there's a good pulse left.

Re: The Resurrection of Intel Will Take More Than Three Days

#54

Post by rapsey »

talldayo wrote: post #53
rapsey wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering the stock performance of the last 10 years my opinion is quite widespread among investors

It's very widespread. But if you look past the stock trade and the pop-psychology, it's pretty clear that Intel today is on a different trajectory than they were 10 years ago. In that time they've changed CEOs, reframed their roadmap, kickstarted auxiliary businesses and invested in RISC development. The catastrophic potential of Intel losing desktop market share was overstated and over-anticipated. Now, cutting off…

At the end of the day results are all that matter. Ok they have a good roadmap and plans. Can they execute it is however entirely unclear.

Re: The Resurrection of Intel Will Take More Than Three Days

#55

Post by BeetleB »

Rinzler89 wrote: post #42
ulfw wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhuh. I guess intel lays off another 15% of people because of ... 'FUD' and 'people who have no idea about the semi industry' Yea.

I never said what you're claiming. Please read comments carefully, assume good faith in the comments you read, and don't put words in my mouth. Like I said, Intel's layoffs are a reaction to their stock tanking, and their stock tanking is due to investor behavior which is sometimes rational, but a lot of the times not.

The stock tanked after the layoff announcement.

They need the layoffs because all their competition have fewer employees. Intel is simply bloated.

Re: The Resurrection of Intel Will Take More Than Three Days

#56

Post by talldayo »

rapsey wrote: post #54
talldayo wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's very widespread. But if you look past the stock trade and the pop-psychology, it's pretty clear that Intel today is on a different trajectory than they were 10 years ago. In that time they've changed CEOs, reframed their roadmap, kickstarted auxiliary businesses and invested in RISC development. The catastrophic potential of Intel losing desktop market share was overstated and over-anticipated. Now, cutting off…

At the end of the day results are all that matter. Ok they have a good roadmap and plans. Can they execute it is however entirely unclear.

That's "the game". I'd put money down on Intel's success, but you don't have to. I'm just explaining my rationale.

Re: The Resurrection of Intel Will Take More Than Three Days

#57

Post by rapsey »

talldayo wrote: post #56
rapsey wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the end of the day results are all that matter. Ok they have a good roadmap and plans. Can they execute it is however entirely unclear.

That's "the game". I'd put money down on Intel's success, but you don't have to. I'm just explaining my rationale.

There is a line between investing and gambling. Buying in NVDA after ChatGPT 3 is investing. Buying Intel now is IMO gambling.

Re: The Resurrection of Intel Will Take More Than Three Days

#58

Post by davidt84 »

Rinzler89 wrote: post #49
davidt84 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. They decided to lay off 15% of their workforce because investors act irrationally.

I never said that. Why assume bad faith?

I am assuming nothing other than what you said

How else am I supposed to interpret that paragraph?

Re: The Resurrection of Intel Will Take More Than Three Days

#59

Post by shaism »

bradleyjg wrote: post #33
shaism wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Devils Advocate: If there is no disruption in Taiwan, and TSMC continues to execute as it has, and Intel continues to execute as is has (not), then Intel might go to $0 or survive only because of government subsidies and military contracts. NVIDIA, AMD, Apple and other companies seeking cutting edge performance will choose the most advanced node to stay competitive. Being the second best foundry has historically not…

Does TSMC have sufficient capacity in the works to satisfy all the demand for sota/near sota fabrication? People sometimes wonder why anyone is buying Boeing planes—it’s because it’s that or nothing. Airbus has no spare capacity.

TSMC today has more than 60% of the foundry market share, and an estimated 80%+ market share for the leading edge.

If you exclude Intel themselves (although they also use TSMC now) and Samsung, TSMC is pretty much the sole supplier to the leading edge.

So, yes, TSMC has the capacity.

Your Boeing / Airbus analogy hinges on multiple factors. First, Airbus and Boeing have comparable capacity. Second, they have comparable products. Both are not true when you compare Intel and TSMC.

NVIDIA is heavily supply constrained. Why haven’t they sourced Intel or Samsung as second source?

Historically, there are also many other issues with Intel operating as foundry. Do you think NVIDIA and AMD will be happy to send their CPU and GPU designs to Intel for manufacturing? Independence was one of the main drivers why TSMC was founded. To have an independent supplier who does not compete with its customers.

Re: The Resurrection of Intel Will Take More Than Three Days

#60

Post by dang »

talldayo wrote: post #36
rapsey wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m putting money on this. I would not. There is nothing to indicate Intel leadership is capable of executing. Bean counters are not the kind of leadership you need in a changing environment.

[flagged]

Could you please stop posting unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments? and also turn down the general grumpiness? You've unfortunately been doing these things repeatedly. They aren't what this site is for and destroy what it is for.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

Post reply on HN