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

471–480 of 777 posts

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#471

Post by kgeist »

kergonath wrote: post #409
kgeist wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Intel Russia opened in 2000 back when USA and Russia were on good terms, and Putin was relatively unknown. Sure it was a mistake in hindsight...

It had been obvious for quite a while even before 2022. There were the Chechen wars, and Georgia in 2008, and Crimea in 2014. All the journalists and opposition politicians killed over the years, and the constant concentration of power in the hands of Putin. The Ukraine invasion was difficult to predict, but Russia was a dangerous place long before that. It’s a CEO’s job to have a strategic vision, there must have be…

Wars involving the US in the 21st century:

  War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)
  US intervention in Yemen (2002–present)
  Iraq War (2003–2011)
  US intervention in the War in North-West Pakistan (2004–2018)
  Second US Intervention in the Somali Civil War (2007–present)
  Operation Ocean Shield (2009–2016)
  Intervention in Libya (2011)
  Operation Observant Compass (2011–2017)
  US military intervention in Niger (2013–2024)
  US-led intervention in Iraq (2014–2021)
  US intervention in the Syrian civil war (2014–present)
  US intervention in Libya (2015–2019)
  Operation Prosperity Guardian (2023–present)
Wars involving Russia in the 21st century:

  Second Chechen War (1999–2009)
  Russo-Georgian War (2008)
  Russo-Ukrainian War (2014–present)
  Russian military intervention in the Syrian Civil War (2015–present)
  Central African Republic Civil War (2018–present)
  Mali War (2021–present)
  Jihadist insurgency in Burkina Faso (2024–present)

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#472

Post by PaulHoule »

bane wrote: post #209
Octoth0rpe wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> An x86 monopoly in the late 80s was a thing, but not now. I think you're off by 20 years on this. In the 80s and early 90s we had reasonable competition from 68k, powerpc, and arm on desktops; and tons of competition in the server space (mips, sparc, power, alpha, pa-risc, edit: and vax!). It wasn't till the early 2000s that both the desktop/server space coalesced around x86.

Thank you for saying this. It's clear that processors are going through something really interesting right now after an extended dwindling and choke point onto x86. This x86 dominance has lasted entire careers, but from a longer perspective we're simply seeing another cycle in ecosystem diversity, specialized functions spinning out of and back into unified packages, and a continued downward push from commoditization…

I remember when I was a senior in undergrad (1993) the profs were quite excited about the price/performance of 486 computers which thoroughly trashed the SPARC-based Sun work stations that we'd transitioned to because Motorola rug-pulled the 68k. Sure we were impressed by the generation of RISC machines that came out around that time like SPARC, PA RISC, POWER PC and such but in retrospect it was not those RISC machines that were fast it was 68k that was dying, but x86 was keeping up.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#473

Post by immibis »

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.

If Microsoft insists on treating them like phones with locked-down software stacks, still no.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#474

Post by drexlspivey »

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…

Merger with AMD is very unlikely for competitive reasons but I’ve read some rumors that 1) Apple will push some production to Ιntel from TSMC and 2) Apple (and Samsung) are considering buying Intel.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#476

Post by hn3er1q »

mylies43 wrote: post #408
microtonal wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Broadcom/Apple takeover of Intel sounds much more reasonable. Out of curiosity, what would make Intel interesting to Apple? Apple already acquired Intel's modem business and they have their own CPU and GPU.

Maybe for the fabs? It might be attractive for Apple to move production state side via Intels fabs but on the other hand I don't think Intels fabs can do what Apple wants

Depends on what Apple wants…

Yes Congressman, we agree to take over Intel fabs if you agree to drop this antitrust nonsense. And we would like our $20B from Google back too.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#477

Post by ahartmetz »

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

Oh no no no no. Oh hell no. For now, we need competition in the x86 market, and that would kill it dead. Imagine Intel re-releasing the Core 2 Quad, forever.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#478

Post by kergonath »

kgeist wrote: post #471
kergonath wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It had been obvious for quite a while even before 2022. There were the Chechen wars, and Georgia in 2008, and Crimea in 2014. All the journalists and opposition politicians killed over the years, and the constant concentration of power in the hands of Putin. The Ukraine invasion was difficult to predict, but Russia was a dangerous place long before that. It’s a CEO’s job to have a strategic vision, there must have be…

Wars involving the US in the 21st century: War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) US intervention in Yemen (2002–present) Iraq War (2003–2011) US intervention in the War in North-West Pakistan (2004–2018) Second US Intervention in the Somali Civil War (2007–present) Operation Ocean Shield (2009–2016) Intervention in Libya (2011) Operation Observant Compass (2011–2017) US military intervention in Niger (2013–2024) US-led inte…

I don’t know what you are trying to say. If you have a point to make, at least be honest about it.

Also, I am not American and not an I conditional supporter of their foreign policy. And considering the trajectory of American politics it is obvious that any foreign multinational developing in the US should have contingency plans.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#479

Post by gondo »

alecco wrote: post #430
LittleTimothy wrote: post #11

Difficult to see how this is anything other than a failure. I had high hopes when Gelsinger returned, but it seems that BK had done too much damage and Gelsinger didn't really get a grip on things. One of the things I heard that really highlighted the failure of this recovery was that BK had let Intel balloon in all sorts of ways that needed to be pared back and refocused, but head count under Gelsinger didn't just s…

I would argue there were many good things but not well delivered. The Optane persistent memory should've been revolutionary for databases but Intel just put it out and expected people to do all the software. I'm seeing the same thing now with Intel QAT / IAA / DSA. Only niche software support. Only AWS seems to have it and those "bare metal" machines don't even have local NVMe. About 10 years ago Intel Research was p…

> Nvidia and their amazing software stack and support for their hardware.

Linus seems to disagree https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tQIdxbWhHSM

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#480

Post by downvotetruth »

fancyfredbot wrote: post #117
mythz wrote: post #29

Well their stock is already in the dumps, they can't do much worse than they already have been. Divesting from their discrete GPUs just as they were starting to become a viable value option was one of their most recent asinine decisions. No idea why they didn't try test the market with a high RAM 64GB+ card before bowing out to see how well they'd do. Nvidia's too busy printing money to add more RAM to their consumer…

They aren't divesting from discrete GPUs. The Battlemage launch is tomorrow.

With the B770 16GB gone and the idea for the B580 to be cheaper than current 7600 XT @ 16 GB by cutting 4 GB makes Battlemage DOA. A gamer making an investment on a card for ~3 years cares less about spending ~$30 more vs being unable to run high resolution texture packs on a gimped GPU. The XMX cores are superior for AI for a month until Blackwell with smaller 2 and 4FP units, but a month is too little lead to overcome the CUDA software inertia. The next beancounter CEO gets the gift of terrible sales numbers and the excuse to drop the prices to move them out before RTX 5000 & RX 8000 competition hits.
Post reply on HN