Earlier quoted context omitted.
Intel is already an investor in oxide https://www.intelcapital.com/investing-in-oxide-unlocking-cl...
Sure. But I want an Oxide for enthusiasts/startups/small companies.
I’d love an oxide homelab.
What Arm's CEO makes of the Intel debacle
51–58 of 58 posts
Re: What Arm's CEO makes of the Intel debacle
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their own pocket I'd wager. A simple way to check if a board/CEO wants to extract a lot of future value _now_ is to look into their accounting, and especially how they count physical assets. If they count physical assets at their current selling price, you can probably get in long-term. If they count them at their buying prices you might have to worry. If they do 'future accounting', tying into assets their estimated…
What is the selling price of physical assets? I would think Intel is not a reseller, so they don't buy and sell stuff but rather buy raw materials and then transform them into a CPU? And how would counting physical assets at their buying price move money from the company into the pocket of the CEO?
Let's say Company A buy a machine to engrave CPU 10 millions (no idea of the real cost), half of it with debt.
In normal/traditional accounting, you put the selling price of the machine (if you have to liquidate the company) on the side of the asset: let's say 8 millions the first year, and 5 million on the debt side (they bought it with 5 million of investment money, leveraged with debt). Company has 8 millions in assets, 5 million in debt: good ratio, healthy company.
Company B use future accounting: it buy the 10 million dollars machine. On the 'asset' side, you put 16 millions: the machine is worth 8, and is expected to earn the company a net profit of 8 during its lifetime. On the 'debt' side, you put 5. 16/5, the ratio is truly excellent. So good even that you can afford to take another 5 millions, and buy share/issue dividends. Now your asset/debt ratio is 16/10=8/5, same as Company A, except either your current shareholders have already reimbursed the initial investment, derisking themselves totally if the company ends up failing.
I think you have a Republican primary candidate who used that with his drug company, the company failed to produce anything of value, but only late investors lost anything.
Re: What Arm's CEO makes of the Intel debacle
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you are right about CPU vs. GPU. It’s complex independent cores vs. simple array cores. The largest part of that “overhead” is the need for much higher memory bandwidth and caching due to having many more cores to feed. And the added complexity of programming is managing groups of cores (and multiple groups of cores) so they are all as active as possible without blocking each other algorithmically or due to m…
The CPU for complex stuff and GPU for simple number crushing is a really popular narrative. It's true in one sense and nonsense in another, determined solely on the software it's running. If your program has one or two threads and spends all its time doing branchy control flow, a CPU will run it adequately and a GPU very poorly. If the program has millions of mostly independent tasks, a GPU will run it adequately and…
Thanks, that is a good summary.
> If the program has millions of mostly independent tasks, a GPU will run it adequately and a CPU very poorly.
Now I would say:
CPU - optimized to execute threads with independent instruction streams and data use.
GPU - Optimized to execute threads with common instruction streams and data layouts.
—
CPUs
As you noted: Optimizing conditional branches is one reason CPU cores are more complex, larger.
CPUs also handle the special tasks of being overall “host”. I.e. I/O, etc.
—-
GPUs
One instruction stream over many cores greatly reduces per core footprints.
Both sides of conditional code are often taken, by different cores. So branch prediction is also dispensed with.
(All cores in a group step through all the instructions of both if-true and else-false conditional clauses, but each core only executes one branch, and is inactive for the other. Independent per-core execution, without independent code branching. Common branching happens too.)
—
Both CPU and GPU can swap between threads or thread groups, to keep cores busy.
Both optimize layers of faster individual to larger shared memory (i.e. registers, cache levels & RAM).
Re: What Arm's CEO makes of the Intel debacle
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a nutshell, Intel's board was focused on extracting value from the company instead of innovating. While this was going on, compute was undergoing a transformation as everything transitioned to cloud solutions. By the time they realized, it was too late and the rot had set in. Now the company is full of mediocre middle managers and principles who spend all day playing politics instead of working on real problems.
board was focused on extracting value from the company From the company? Extract to where?
Dividends primarily.
Re: What Arm's CEO makes of the Intel debacle
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a nutshell, Intel's board was focused on extracting value from the company instead of innovating. While this was going on, compute was undergoing a transformation as everything transitioned to cloud solutions. By the time they realized, it was too late and the rot had set in. Now the company is full of mediocre middle managers and principles who spend all day playing politics instead of working on real problems.
> Intel's board was focused on extracting value from the company instead of innovating But then they failed at that as well. Their share price almost never increased after 2000s. Currently they are valued lesser than their 1996's valuation, even if you exclude inflation. Highest they went was $263B valuation in 2021, which is nowhere close to tech giants.
Intel is a dividend stock. You can't just look at share price.
Re: What Arm's CEO makes of the Intel debacle
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a nutshell, Intel's board was focused on extracting value from the company instead of innovating. While this was going on, compute was undergoing a transformation as everything transitioned to cloud solutions. By the time they realized, it was too late and the rot had set in. Now the company is full of mediocre middle managers and principles who spend all day playing politics instead of working on real problems.
exactly the same as every other F500 company...
Nvidia says otherwise.
Re: What Arm's CEO makes of the Intel debacle
#57ARM CEO will tell you otherwise, but RISC-V is the ISA that will be replacing x86.
Re: What Arm's CEO makes of the Intel debacle
#58ARM CEO will tell you otherwise, but RISC-V is the ISA that will be replacing x86.
Just like gimp is replacing photoshop.