4 ms·

Top three reply chains are transparently Intel damage control. It slides the topic but doesn't add anything to the discussion. Fact is Intel flopped on the tick

Top three reply chains are transparently Intel damage control. It slides the topic but doesn't add anything to the discussion. Fact is Intel flopped on the tick tock cycle and is going the TSMC route to try to move to a smaller process and this is essentially what's been going on with them in the past few years. Moreover we learned through Spectre and Meltdown that Intel took a lot of shortcuts for decades, Theo De Raadt famously called out the CORE microarchitecture as being dramatically flawed and he ended up being correct[1]. Profits are important as a publicly held company but Intel needs a new from-scratch improved microarchitecture which isn't based on the venerable Pentium Pro, which is basically what we're all running a riced up version of even today. [1]https://linuxreviews.org/Theo_de_Raadt_on_the_Intel_Core_2_Jun_27,_2007 https://linuxreviews.org/Theo_de_Raadt_on_the_Intel_Core_2_J...

TMWNN 4y ago
>Profits are important as a publicly held company but Intel needs a new from-scratch improved microarchitecture which isn't based on the venerable Pentium Pro, which is basically what we're all running a riced up version of even today. Indeed. In the one market Intel dominates, what saved the company 15 years ago amid Itanic and Pentium 4 was 1) AMD Thunderbird being just as inefficient as Pentium 4 and, more importantly, 2) an Intel Israel skunk works project to improve on the Pentium 3. There is no such out-of-the-blue miracle this time. Meanwhile, Intel has failed, or at least failed to distinguish itself, in every single market it has entered since IBM chose the 8088 forty years ago: Every non-x86 instructional set CPU, flash memory, antivirus (still perhaps the most mystifying move in Intel history), servers/motherboards, and GPUs come to mind. The most successful non-x86 business for Intel is ... Ethernet cards? Meanwhile, it's embarrassed itself with discrete GPUs at least three separate times. A few years ago buying Nvidia would have been a savvy move; now it can no longer do so, and it's not impossible to imagine Nvidia buying Intel in the future.
- midislack 4y ago
  Intel's made a bet on RISC-V so let's see how that turns out. It's a bit of a signal that maybe x86/x64 is dying. Might be apparent in a couple years but at this point it was enough to make me prick my ears up.
- phonon 4y ago
  They're also strong in Wifi chipsets and FPGA.

TMWNN 4y ago

>Profits are important as a publicly held company but Intel needs a new from-scratch improved microarchitecture which isn't based on the venerable Pentium Pro, which is basically what we're all running a riced up version of even today. Indeed. In the one market Intel dominates, what saved the company 15 years ago amid Itanic and Pentium 4 was 1) AMD Thunderbird being just as inefficient as Pentium 4 and, more importantly, 2) an Intel Israel skunk works project to improve on the Pentium 3. There is no such out-of-the-blue miracle this time. Meanwhile, Intel has failed, or at least failed to distinguish itself, in every single market it has entered since IBM chose the 8088 forty years ago: Every non-x86 instructional set CPU, flash memory, antivirus (still perhaps the most mystifying move in Intel history), servers/motherboards, and GPUs come to mind. The most successful non-x86 business for Intel is ... Ethernet cards? Meanwhile, it's embarrassed itself with discrete GPUs at least three separate times. A few years ago buying Nvidia would have been a savvy move; now it can no longer do so, and it's not impossible to imagine Nvidia buying Intel in the future.

midislack 4y ago
Intel's made a bet on RISC-V so let's see how that turns out. It's a bit of a signal that maybe x86/x64 is dying. Might be apparent in a couple years but at this point it was enough to make me prick my ears up.
phonon 4y ago
They're also strong in Wifi chipsets and FPGA.