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

Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

intel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 777 posts

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#101

Post by Workaccount2 »

Cumpiler69 wrote: post #62
Workaccount2 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel just has to make a decent/mediocre GPU with 64GB+ memory at a $500 price point and they will instantly become the defacto local transformer leader. It's a true "build it and they will come" situation. Undercut the big boys with affordable on-prem AI.

>Intel just has to make a decent/mediocre GPU with 64GB+ memory at a $500 price point and they will instantly become the defacto local LLM leader Intel should have appointed people form the HN comment section as their CEO, as they clearly know more about running a giant chip design and fabrication company than the guy who worked there for 10+ years.

I actually did email Deepak Patil (head of Intel Graphics division) about this around a year ago, haha. Never did get a response though.

It is something that is easy to miss if you are just looking at typical business strategy and finances. A high memory consumer GPU would undercut their server GPUs, which are presumably higher margin intended golden geese. It's easy to see them chasing server markets and "gamers" being an afterthought.

However there is huge demand right now for a modern, even a crappy modern, GPU with gobs of memory. Make the card and the open source AI tooling for it will start sprouting in days after it's release.

It's an extremely powerful position to have every at-home AI geek's setup to be bound to using intel cards and intel focused tooling. Nvidia and AMD won't do it because they want to protect their server cards.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#102

Post by bell-cot »

etempleton wrote: post #64

I feel like this is a mistake. Pat's strategy is aggressive but what the company needs. Intel's stock is jumping at this announcement, but I look at it as a bad signal for Intel 18a. If 18a was looking to be a smash hit then I don't think Pat gets retired. If 18a is a success then it is an even more short-sighted decision by the board. What this likely means is two-fold: 1. Intel 18a is being delayed further and/or t…

> ...the best case scenario for Intel is a merger with AMD...

Why would AMD want a merger? They aren't a charity, and certainly don't need the distraction.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#103

Post by BadHumans »

Pat returned as CEO in 2021. I don't think that 3 years is enough time to clean out the internal rot that has led Intel to where it is today and a lot of problems have been in motion for a while. Short-term this might be better for Intel but this move lacks long term vision. Intel also just got a big hand-out from the government that would've kept them moving in the right direction regardless of what CEO is leading the pack.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#104

Post by n144q »

_lvbh wrote: post #35

Is this not a bit too short a time for results to show yet? Turning a ship too many times would just result in it spinning in circles around the same position

Part of me is wondering if in an imaginary world, these same people are on AMD's board, would Lisu Su have already been fired a few years ago?

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#105

Post by csdreamer7 »

etempleton wrote: post #64

I feel like this is a mistake. Pat's strategy is aggressive but what the company needs. Intel's stock is jumping at this announcement, but I look at it as a bad signal for Intel 18a. If 18a was looking to be a smash hit then I don't think Pat gets retired. If 18a is a success then it is an even more short-sighted decision by the board. What this likely means is two-fold: 1. Intel 18a is being delayed further and/or t…

Pretty much fair game for speculation. The only way this is not bad for the tech industry was if he resigned due to medical or age reasons. That would not be unexpected.

Doubtful that is the issue with Intel's track record. Curious when we will know if 18A is competitive or not.

> If 18a is not ready I think the best case scenario for Intel is a merger with AMD. The US Govt would probably co-sign on it for national security concerns overriding the fact that it creates an absolute monopoly on x86 processors. The moat of the two companies together would give the new combined company plenty of time to ramp up their fabs.

No way other countries would allow that. If A-tel (Amd-inTEL) can not sell to the EU the merger will not happen.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#106

Post by phkahler »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #49
this_user wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have made too many bad choices, and everyone else has been eating their lunch for the last few years. They are a non-factor in the mobile space where ARM architectures dominate. They are a non-factor in the GPU market where NVDA dominates ahead of AMD. They were focused heavily on data centres and desktop/laptop CPUs where ARM is also increasingly making inroads with more efficient designs that deliver comparabl…

The US government wants then making SOTA semiconductors. Biden wanted it and I highly suspect Trump will want it too.

Traditionally if you wanted SOTA semiconductors you'd go to IBM for the technology and then build your own fab. I'm not sure how true that is today but I wouldn't be surprised if it is.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#107

Post by cogman10 »

etempleton wrote: post #64

I feel like this is a mistake. Pat's strategy is aggressive but what the company needs. Intel's stock is jumping at this announcement, but I look at it as a bad signal for Intel 18a. If 18a was looking to be a smash hit then I don't think Pat gets retired. If 18a is a success then it is an even more short-sighted decision by the board. What this likely means is two-fold: 1. Intel 18a is being delayed further and/or t…

> The moat of the two companies together would give the new combined company plenty of time to ramp up their fabs.

I'm not convinced of this. Fabs are incredibly expensive businesses. Intel has failed to keep up and AMD spun off their fabs to use TSMC.

There is also ARM knocking at the door for general computing. It's already gaining traction in previously x86 dominated markets.

The model for US based fabbing has to include selling large portions of capacity to third party ASIC manufacturers, otherwise I see it as doomed to failure.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#108

Post by Workaccount2 »

leoc wrote: post #95
Workaccount2 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US government wants then making SOTA semiconductors. Biden wanted it and I highly suspect Trump will want it too.

I have to wonder if part of this is Intel wanting a Trumpier CEO so it can retain the favour of the US government, while Trump associates Gelsinger with the CHIPS act which he reflexively hates as a Biden thing.

[flagged]

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#109

Post by solarkraft »

etempleton wrote: post #64

I feel like this is a mistake. Pat's strategy is aggressive but what the company needs. Intel's stock is jumping at this announcement, but I look at it as a bad signal for Intel 18a. If 18a was looking to be a smash hit then I don't think Pat gets retired. If 18a is a success then it is an even more short-sighted decision by the board. What this likely means is two-fold: 1. Intel 18a is being delayed further and/or t…

> I think the best case scenario for Intel is a merger with AMD (…) it creates an absolute monopoly on x86 processors

If this happens, couldn’t they force them giving out licenses as a condition? The licensing thing has been such an impediment to competition that it seems like it’s about time anyway.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#110

Post by sofixa »

kranke155 wrote: post #100
this_user wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have made too many bad choices, and everyone else has been eating their lunch for the last few years. They are a non-factor in the mobile space where ARM architectures dominate. They are a non-factor in the GPU market where NVDA dominates ahead of AMD. They were focused heavily on data centres and desktop/laptop CPUs where ARM is also increasingly making inroads with more efficient designs that deliver comparabl…

Apple saw the writing on the wall and bailed years ago, built their own chips and denied them a large customer. It’s a really bad sign when a customer decides it can out innovate you by internally copying your entire business and production line.

> It’s a really bad sign when a customer decides it can out innovate you by internally copying your entire business and production line.

Not necessarily, at scale, especially Apple's scale, vertical integration can make a ton of sense - for control, innovation, price, risk hedging.

Post reply on HN