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

671–680 of 777 posts

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#671

Post by Dylan16807 »

tasuki wrote: post #493
PaulHoule wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel GFX held back the industry 10 years. If people thought Windows Vista sucked it was because Intel "supported" it by releasing integrated GPUs which could almost handle Windows Vista but not quite. The best they could do with the GFX business is a public execution. We've been hearing about terrible Intel GFX for 15 years and how they are just on the cusp of making one that is bad (not terrible). Most people who'v…

> If people thought Windows Vista sucked it was because Intel "supported" it by releasing integrated GPUs which could almost handle Windows Vista but not quite. What does an OS need a GPU for? My current laptop only has integrated Intel GPU. I'm not missing Nvidia, with its proprietary drivers, high power consumption, and corresponding extra heat and shorter battery life...

> My current laptop only has integrated Intel GPU.

Which is far more powerful than the ones that caused problems almost two decades ago.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#672

Post by chx »

aryonoco wrote: post #653
chx wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first iteration of Intel 10nm was simply broken -- you had Ice Lake mobile CPUs in 2019 yes but desktop and server processors took another two years to be released. In 2012 Intel said they will ship 14nm in 2013 and 10nm in 2015. Not only they did fail to deliver 10nm Intel CPUs but they failed Nokia server division too, nearly killing it off in 2018, three years after their initial target. No one in the industry…

Indeed. Brian Krzanich destroyed Intel.

Most of the stock buybacks happened under Bob Swan though. Krzanich dug the grave of Intel but it was Swan who kicked the company in there by wasting forty billion. (No wonder he landed at a18z.)

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#673

Post by mort96 »

phonon wrote: post #601
CuriousCosmic wrote: post #577

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately rights to the x86_64 license expire on the event of transfer of either company to a new owner.

License for what? The patents have expired.

For the old stuff maybe, but they keep adding new stuff. AVX is from 2008, AVX2 from 2013.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#674

Post by kasabali »

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.

You joke, but seriously, had they asked Redditors, they'd know better than putting fucking Raja of all the people, in charge of their GPU team.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#675

Post by kasabali »

Cumpiler69 wrote: post #291
bhouston wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

>But Qualcomm has somewhat succeeded in this area anyhow It's wasn't just anyhow. Qualcomm succeed in the mobile SoC space because they also had the best modems in the industry (name comes form Quality Communications after all). And also the best mobile GPU IP they bought from ATI.

You forgot also the best lawyers in the industry

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#676

Post by singhrac »

jiggawatts wrote: post #571
alecco wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

When I read the Intel QAT / IAA / DSA whitepaper I knew it was the beginning of the end for Intel. Every aspect of that document was just dripping in corporate dinosaur / MBA practices. For example, they include 4 cores of these accelerators in most of their Xeons, but soft fuse them off unless you buy a license. Nobody is going to buy that license. Okay, maybe one or two hyperscalers, but nobody else for certain. It…

You see this again and again - when you gate technical features behind an enterprise barrier, the adoption rate is very low. AMD messed this up with CDNA and RDNA (now merging to UDNA), but Nvidia had it right from the start: CUDA from the bottom to the top.

Intel started doing this kind of right recently with their Xe cores (ideally same programming model between their integrated GPUs and their datacenter HPC GPUs), but we’ll see how different the Xe-LPG and Xe-HPC end up being when Falcon Shores really comes out (I’m very worried about this description of it as a XPU, which seems like real confusion about what ML people want).

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#677

Post by bayindirh »

tasuki wrote: post #493
PaulHoule wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intel GFX held back the industry 10 years. If people thought Windows Vista sucked it was because Intel "supported" it by releasing integrated GPUs which could almost handle Windows Vista but not quite. The best they could do with the GFX business is a public execution. We've been hearing about terrible Intel GFX for 15 years and how they are just on the cusp of making one that is bad (not terrible). Most people who'v…

> If people thought Windows Vista sucked it was because Intel "supported" it by releasing integrated GPUs which could almost handle Windows Vista but not quite. What does an OS need a GPU for? My current laptop only has integrated Intel GPU. I'm not missing Nvidia, with its proprietary drivers, high power consumption, and corresponding extra heat and shorter battery life...

More than you think.

As people noted, most of your GUI is being rendered by it. Every video you watch is accelerated by it, and if it has some compute support, some applications are using it for faster math at the background (mostly image editors, but who knows).

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#678

Post by akimbostrawman »

alecco wrote: post #576
gondo wrote: post #479

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nvidia and their amazing software stack and support for their hardware. Linus seems to disagree https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=tQIdxbWhHSM

That was about drivers and in 2012. At the time Linux was not interesting for them as clients. But now with AI, Nvidia has open source drivers. https://www.phoronix.com/news/NVIDIA-Transitions-OSS-KMD

>Nvidia has open source drivers.

Kernel Module Driver which is most likely less than 5% of drivers.

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#679

Post by phonon »

mort96 wrote: post #673
phonon wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

License for what? The patents have expired.

For the old stuff maybe, but they keep adding new stuff. AVX is from 2008, AVX2 from 2013.

How do you know those are encumbered? Intel invented them, after all....

Re: Intel announces retirement of Pat Gelsinger

#680

Post by lmm »

jcranmer wrote: post #308
quotemstr wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are already packages that let people run CUDA programs unmodified on other GPUs: see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40970560 For whatever reason, people just delete these tools from their minds, then claim Nvidia still has a monopoly on CUDA.

There's already a panoply of CUDA alternatives, and even several CUDA-to-non-Nvidia-GPU alternatives (which aren't supported by the hardware vendors and are in some sense riskier). To my knowledge (this isn't really my space), many of the higher-level frameworks already support these CUDA alternatives. And yet still the popcorn gallery says "there no [realistic] alternative to CUDA." Methinks the real issue is that C…

> There's already a panoply of CUDA alternatives, and even several CUDA-to-non-Nvidia-GPU alternatives (which aren't supported by the hardware vendors and are in some sense riskier). To my knowledge (this isn't really my space), many of the higher-level frameworks already support these CUDA alternatives.

On paper, yes. But how many of them actually work? Every couple of years AMD puts out a press release saying they're getting serious this time and will fully support their thing, and then a couple of people try it and it doesn't work (or maybe the basic hello world test works, but anything else is too buggy), and they give up.

Post reply on HN