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

171–180 of 777 posts

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#171

Post by Grazester »

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…

Is Intel really in such a dire situation that they need to merge with AMD? AMD has been in troubling situation in the past(some thanks to Intel illegal dealings) yet they managed to survive and they were nowhere near Intel's size.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#172

Post by bhouston »

Cumpiler69 wrote: post #128
brokencode wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d argue that focus is what Intel fundamentally lacks. Or any kind of real vision. If they had focused more on mobile CPUs, GPUs, or especially GPGPUs a decade ago, they could have more product diversity now to hold them over. Instead, they dipped their toes into a new market every few years and then ran away screaming when they realized how difficult and it would be to gain market share. If they had any actual visi…

>they could have a line of ARM CPUs now to compete with the onslaught in all major CPU markets. Disagree. Selling ARM chips with high profit margins is tough. There's too much competition from the likes of Samsung, MediaTek and until the US ban, Hi Silicon(Huawei). ARM chips are a race to the bottom in terms of price with a market dominated by companies from Asia. There's no guarantee Intel could have had a competiti…

> There's too much competition from the likes of Samsung, MediaTek and until the US ban, Hi Silicon(Huawei). ARM chips are a race to the bottom in terms of price with a market dominated by companies from Asia

Yes, without proprietary technology, margins are slim.

But Qualcomm has somewhat succeeded in this area anyhow. I guess they took the ARM base but innovated on top of it in order to command higher margins.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#173

Post by orenlindsey »

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…

A lot of people on this thread are underestimating how much of a hold Intel has on the chips industry. In my experience, Intel is synonymous with computer chip for the average person. Most people wouldn't be able to tell you what AMD does differently, they'd just say they're a knockoff Intel. Technologically, both companies are neck and neck. But for the average person, it's not even close.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#174

Post by bee_rider »

etempleton wrote: post #85
highwaylights wrote: post #45

The market seems to think this is great news. I disagree strongly here, but I can see why traders and potentially the board thought this was the right move. A lot of hate for Pat Gelsinger on Reddit and YouTube from armchair experts who don't really grasp the situation Intel were in or what was needed to turn the ship around, so if he was pushed it seems like it might be to pacify the (not particularly informed) YouT…

Both of the Co-CEOs have a finance background. I think that is rather telling. They are trying to appeal to Wallstreet and potentially have people that are equipped to manage an M&A deal.

The guy that got them into this situation started as an engineer. Swan was a money guy, but he did better than Krzanich. So, I think it is just hard to guess based on somebody’s background how they’ll do.

However, IMO: they need somebody like Lisa Su, somebody with more of an R&D-engineering background. Gelsinger was a step in the right direction, but he got a masters degree in the 80’s and did technically hardcore stuff in the late 80’s, early 90’s. That was when stuff just started to explode.

Su finished her PhD in the 90’s, and did technically interesting stuff through the computer revolution. It appears to have made a world of difference.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#175

Post by consp »

nabla9 wrote: post #89

Gelsinger retires before Intel Foundry spin is ready. This means trouble. Intel invested tens of billions into A20 and A18 nodes, but it has not paid off yet. News about yield seemed promising. Massive investments have been made. If somebody buys Intel foundries now, they pay one dollar and take debt + subsidies. Intel can write off the debt but don't get potential rewards. Foundry is the most interesting part of Int…

> Massive investments have been made. If somebody buys Intel foundries now, they pay one dollar and take debt + subsidies. Intel can write off the debt but don't get potential rewards.

You are describing the start of the Vulture capitalist playbook for short term profits and dividents right there, take subsidies and loans and sell everything to pay dividents (or rent back to yourself via a shell company) then let the remaining stuff die and sell of for an aditional small profit. Don't know how it works here but it sure sounds like it.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#176

Post by izacus »

cogman10 wrote: post #114
phkahler wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> If 18a is not ready I think the best case scenario for Intel is a merger with AMD. Aside from the x86 monopoly that would create, I don't think Intel has much of value to AMD at this point other than the fabs (which aren't delivering). IMHO if Intel is failing, let them fail and others will buy the pieces in bankruptcy. This would probably benefit several other companies that could use 22nm and up fab capacity and…

Yeah, what both companies would need to be competitive in the GPU sector is a cuda killer. That's perhaps the one benefit of merging Antel can more easily standardize something.

Why would you want this kind of increased monopolization? That is, CPU companies also owning the GPU market?

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#177

Post by sokoloff »

csdreamer7 wrote: post #105
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 s…

This does not seem orderly/planned enough to be simple age-related.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#178

Post by paulpan »

phkahler wrote: post #94
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…

>> If 18a is not ready I think the best case scenario for Intel is a merger with AMD. Aside from the x86 monopoly that would create, I don't think Intel has much of value to AMD at this point other than the fabs (which aren't delivering). IMHO if Intel is failing, let them fail and others will buy the pieces in bankruptcy. This would probably benefit several other companies that could use 22nm and up fab capacity and…

Certainly feels like preempting news that Intel 18A is delayed.

Restoring Intel's foundry lead starting with 18A was central to Pat's vision and he essentially staked his job on it. 18A is supposed to enter production next year but recent rumors is that it's broken.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#179

Post by varelse »

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…

[dead]

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#180

Post by izacus »

Grazester wrote: post #171
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…

Is Intel really in such a dire situation that they need to merge with AMD? AMD has been in troubling situation in the past(some thanks to Intel illegal dealings) yet they managed to survive and they were nowhere near Intel's size.

More importantly, AMD troubles made them refocus and improve their products to the levels we're seeing today.

Giving life support to dinosaurs isn't how you create a competitive economy.

Post reply on HN