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

Intel's Problems Are Even Worse Than You've Heard

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–13 of 13 posts

Re: Intel's Problems Are Even Worse Than You've Heard

#11

Post by jarbus »

bcrl wrote: post #10
jarbus wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I understand, Intel went with TSMC because their own nodes weren't ready yet, which makes sense to me. I imagine once their node is production ready, they will switch back. It's also interesting that for a single generation or two, they were able to switch to TSMC, with the plan to switch back, which, as an outsider, suggests to me that changing between nodes is not as tall of a task as one might think. Add…

The US military will never be the "biggest customer" of a fab. The only true volume products the military needs are bullets. For reference, Intel CPU sales are on the order of 50 million units per year. As a comparison, Apple is selling on the order of 232 million iPhones per year. This is why missing the entire mobile market has hurt Intel, and there's no way the US military is buying more than 232 million of anythi…

Good point, We'll just have to see, I suppose. I'm really curious how far Intel will get before they fail, if they do indeed fail. Given the current demand for cutting edge chips and TSMC's risky monopoly, I know a lot of people are hoping they somehow pull through

Re: Intel's Problems Are Even Worse Than You've Heard

#12

Post by bcrl »

jarbus wrote: post #11
bcrl wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US military will never be the "biggest customer" of a fab. The only true volume products the military needs are bullets. For reference, Intel CPU sales are on the order of 50 million units per year. As a comparison, Apple is selling on the order of 232 million iPhones per year. This is why missing the entire mobile market has hurt Intel, and there's no way the US military is buying more than 232 million of anythi…

Good point, We'll just have to see, I suppose. I'm really curious how far Intel will get before they fail, if they do indeed fail. Given the current demand for cutting edge chips and TSMC's risky monopoly, I know a lot of people are hoping they somehow pull through

I think that Intel being split up into separate design and manufacturing firms might well be the optimal path forward. It is quite clear that AMD did the right thing when it spun out Global Foundaries 15 years ago. Were Intel to do so, the urgency of winning customers to survive might well give the manufacturing business the clarity of purpose and drive needed to do what needs to be done. Plus the new board of directors would not be able to allow the ship to continue drifting.
Post reply on HN