- It is good to know the CEO is working hard and he does what he says.
- Of course the margin is going down given such scale of investments.
- It takes years to be competitive.
- Comparing Intel to other companies like AMD is meaningless as the business model will be very difficult.
- If you are American, why are you not supportive for Intel's efforts given it is the last western company being able do advance manufacturing?
22 replies (most recent on top)
Yep, i don't get it either. Pat is really trying to bring intel back to its former self. Why in the world would ANYONE in the US. want anything different? There success is our success! Get over it!
I don’t get people who hate on Pat with the hopes of getting BK back. It won’t happen.
PG prays every night
- . Please bless LTD to do in the next four years four nodes and not repeat their one node in 6 years for 1nm
- . Scale in manufacturing isn’t required for Intel. Yield and EUV experience will come due to an out of body blessing and running wafers isn’t required
- customer service nor broad and robust PDK and IP is required from foundry customers, just faith in Intel all mighty and their right to be first
Yes it pays to have a good fearing and believing leader!
Does it worry you that our leader of a technology/science/evidence-based firm believes in an invisible sky god?
“ You have to give Pat some credit” he will most certainly get all the credit for where Intel is in 2025
@1vng+1f8gBguZ The only reason AMD, Nvidia and TSMC are giving Intel a Can of Whoop A$$ is how Intel TMG/LTD screwed up the silicon and Foundry for the past decade.
Now the only way Intel gets back in the game is if Samsung/TSMC and AMD, Nvidia, Apple and the rest of the Foundry pull a LTD FUBAR, I’d say the chances of all those companies jointly choose and execute wrong is unlikely.
@1imt+1f8gBguZ It does not make sense to imply the future from now. A few years back, people thought AMD was going to bankrupt and no one believed it could compete with Intel. I remembered Stacy Rasgon gave a target price for AMD at around $4. But what happened? It just shows what we are saying here can be far from the truth from either sides.
The IFS just started. We do not know how well it can perform in the future. We do know it is the last western company capable of advance manufacturing. As long as you are in the game, you can compete.
intel gfx will lead the way to market dominance!
Most people are not dependent on Intel anymore.
- CPU: companies and customers are okay to get AMD and Apple’s CPUs unless there are chip shortage.
- GPU: companies and customers are very happy with Nvidia and AMD’s offerings.
- Manufacturing: Chip design companies would love to work with TSMC and Samsung.
After customers switched to AMD, Nvidia, and other companies’ products, does anyone want to go back to Intel? That’s a lot of cost and time to invest by customers.
I don’t know what Intel is good at anymore…
1jde+1f8gBguZ whether we feel the strategy is good or bad does not matter. What matters is what will happen around 2024 and 2025, i.e. whether Intel can deliver what it says. When TSMC just started, no one believed their business model.
@uma+1f8gBguZ If China did to Apple what US did to Huawei they would have shut down all Foxconn exports to US.
A CEO hopefully has vision and leadership to set strategy and drive execution.
Without strategy, execution is aimless. Without execution, strategy is useless.
I would say the strategy of IDM2.0 and Foundry are the wrong strategy and are destined only for success if Apple/AMD/Nvidia and their manufacturing partners TSMC and Samsung pull and Intel 10nm FUBAR. The likelihood of that is very low!
There is little chance Intel will execute their claimed four nodes in four years given their pitiful 10nm performance.
So all in all I think the end is all but inevitable. There are no Avengers coming and Pat learning at Grove’s feet is useless when you have such a flawed strategy. The CHIPs act don’t directly address any of the reason Intel failed at 10nm nor their manufacture failure
Huawei was winning against Apple a few years ago. If we should be cheering winners, we should all use Huawei phones and network equipments if without the US intervention...
Both TSMC and Samsung takes subsides from their governments.
The business model is not yet established. It is not wise to yield everything to TSMC and Samsung. Intel fabs do not need to be best. They just need to be competitive.
AMD and Nvidia are going to curb-stomp Intel due to TSMC's / Samsung process advantage.
Why should Intel, which failed in the market, get government dollars so it can fail again?
We should be encouraging the winners like TSMC/Samsung to diversify their fabs into Europe and America as it would benefit them as well. It's really a win-win.
PCs are a nice business but there's no growth. You can't sustain leading edge fabs with a non-growing business. The PC business is at serious risk from AMD. The server business is already getting seriously eroded by AMD.
Intel maybe has a shot at getting some GPU dollars only because they are using TSMC.
They are competing in some segments. But Intel is branching out to areas that AMD, NVIDIA, and others cannot participate. If you insist on comparing them, if Intel can restore its manufacturing capacities at leading nodes, have competitive products like Alder Lake, even assuming some inefficiencies at its manufacturing site, its cost structure will be far more superior than what AMD can achieve. That is just x86. Its fabs can also participate in bringing out products that are based on ARM and RISC-V.
Maybe Intel's business model is broken!
IDM is a boat anchor.
They should ditch the fabs and go all in on TSMC to better compete with AMD and others.
There's no way they can catch up to TSMC given their 44B spend next year and more in the years to come. PC/server volumes aren't large enough to compete with TSMC's economies of scale.
I disagree that "Comparing Intel to other companies like AMD is meaningless" since they are direct competitors in several segments of the market.
It is not nonsense. For what Intel is going to be, the business model is similar to Samsung. It is trying to address a much much larger potential market than both AMD and NVIDIA combined. For example, if Intel can sort out its manufacturing, it can use it manufacturing capacity to take market sure from AMD when it has a competitive product like Alder Lake. The PEs of both AMD and NVIDIA are not sustainable given the competitive landscape. Seeing the matter from a higher level, comparing them does not make much sense. Maybe a little for now.
Intel HR's Friday post... Look, the business models are different but the products compete so you have to compare Intel against AMD, Nvidia and others... This type of nonsense post should be reserved for low level Intel employees that don't know any better. Intel's margins are dropping because the company is losing MSS to AMD in high margin server products and it will indeed take years for Intel catch up if the company ever does with the existing strategy.
I can't agree more!
Typo: the business model will be very different.