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

391–400 of 777 posts

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#391

Post by blibble »

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.

looking at their sept 2024 p&l: the rando probably couldn't have done much worse

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#392

Post by thomasjudge »

windexh8er wrote: post #342
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…

Nope. Look at what Pat did to VMware. He's doing the exact same thing at Intel. He came in, muddied the waters by hiring way too many people to do way too many things and none of them got done appropriately. Pat is a huge part of the problem. I had the unfortunate pleasure of watching him not understand, at all, VMware's core competency. It was a nightmare of misunderstanding and waste in that company under his leade…

Do you have more details or a reference for the VMware activity? The wikipedia VMware article is pretty brief

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#393

Post by bluGill »

cogman10 wrote: post #303
etempleton wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but that is because users demand it. And they do so begrudgingly. Users are not going to demand an ARM Windows laptop.

But will IT departments buy them if they are 100, 200, or $400 cheaper than a competing x86 machine? That's the question that remains to be seen.

Can those users get all the software they need? Many users who want a mac are told no because some weird software they need doesn't run on it. Others only get a mac because some executive demanded IT port that software to mac. So long as companies have any x86 only software they won't let people switch. Often "art" departments get a specific exception and they get to avoid all the jobs that require x86 only software just to run their mac.

Of course these days more and more of that is moving the the cloud and all IT needs to a web browser that works. Thus making their job easier.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#394

Post by [deleted] »

bcantrill wrote: post #345

I am amazed -- stunned -- how many people here seem to think that Gelsinger was the right person for the job, but wronged by the people who pre-dated him (BK?!) or the CHIPS act (?!) or other conditions somehow out of his control. Gelsinger was -- emphatically -- the wrong person for the job: someone who had been at Intel during its glory days and who obviously believed in his heart that he -- and he alone! -- could…

[deleted]

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#395

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#396

Post by brokencode »

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…

Well they have to try something and actually invest in it. Every year, it looks more and more like x86 is a sinking ship.

Intel and AMD can dominate the x86 market all they want. But x86 has been steadily losing ground every year to cheaper and more power efficient ARM processors. It’s still a big market now, but I don’t think it’s going to be a great business in a decade or two.

ARM was just an example. If Intel spent a decade strengthening their Larrabee GPGPU platform and building AI and crypto ecosystems on it, they may have been well positioned to benefit immensely like Nvidia has over the last 5 years.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#397

Post by 654wak654 »

phkahler wrote: post #118

Has Intel ever made a production chip using their own EUV process? They keep moving the goal post so they'll be state of the art when they get there - currently aiming for "18A" with high NA using the absolute latest equipment from ASML. But I don't think they've demonstrated mastery of EUV at any node yet.

18A isn't going to use high NA yet, it's just EUV. Intel is hoping to start using high-NA with their 14A process in 2026. Obviously with their current state that 2026 deadline might get pushed further.

[1]: https://wccftech.com/intel-adds-14a-process-node-to-its-road...

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#398

Post by bluGill »

etempleton wrote: post #111
KeplerBoy wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would the US govt allow a merge with AMD? Sure they won't allow Intel to be bought by a foreign company, but surely everyone would much rather see Intel being bought by literally any other company than AMD and Nvidia.

What other US companies are equipped and interested in running a giant chip design/fab? NVIDIA and AMD are likely the only two candidates.

Ford, GM... The big automakers got burned with the chip shortage after COVID (this is their fault, but still they got burned)

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#399

Post by bcantrill »

baq wrote: post #370
bcantrill wrote: post #345

I am amazed -- stunned -- how many people here seem to think that Gelsinger was the right person for the job, but wronged by the people who pre-dated him (BK?!) or the CHIPS act (?!) or other conditions somehow out of his control. Gelsinger was -- emphatically -- the wrong person for the job: someone who had been at Intel during its glory days and who obviously believed in his heart that he -- and he alone! -- could…

let's not pretend BK did any good for the company though, you sound like he did an ok job

I definitely have some issues with BK, but it's more that there is another entire CEO between BK and Gelsinger (Bob Swan!) -- and I think it's strange to blame BK more than Swan?

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#400

Post by ghaff »

steelframe wrote: post #286
shermantanktop wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be a healthy, balanced and long-term-oriented approach. But those who get to the level of CEO are subjected to intense forces that select against those traits. I don’t know much about this guy but it’s reasonable to assume that any C-level exec will hold on to the position for dear life until they are forced out.

> any C-level exec will hold on to the position for dear life until they are forced out I don't know. Frank Slootman's retirement from Snowflake earlier this year was certainly not celebrated by any significant stakeholders. I'd imagine at some point someone like Frank realizes that they are worth more than Tim Cook, they consider that they're in their mid-60s, and they decide the remaining time they have on earth mi…

There are certainly some indications this was something that was not long in the planning. On the other hand, when (solid) financial security is not a subject on the table, it's a lot easier for many folks to let go--especially given that they can probably do as many board or advisor gigs in the industry as they have an appetite for. Or just go on to a new chapter.
Post reply on HN