5 ms·

other perspective - in the long run, intel can't afford to axe the gpu division, because there's so much potential in that space where x86 and its new generatio

other perspective - in the long run, intel can't afford to axe the gpu division, because there's so much potential in that space where x86 and its new generations is increasingly getting bigger competition from arm based designs. Intel basically has to get gpus right, eventually. AMD is already doing it. Apple is already doing it, for their purposes. Intel has to catch up.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago
>intel can't afford to axe the gpu division, because there's so much potential in that space Haha, that's adorable when you consider how many things with potential Intel has either axed, sold off, or abandoned over the years. - ARM mobile chips (StrongARM) - Mobile modems (now belonging to Apple) - Compute stick - Itanium - The Edison and Curie - IoT Gateway - Xeon Phy - Movidius VPUs haven't been axed but they don't seem to be getting developed further - Recon smart glasses
- thunderbird120 4y ago
  None of those were core to Intel's business in the way GPUs are likely going to be going forward. The closer integration of CPUs and GPUs is an industry wide trend with Apple, Nvidia, AMD, and Intel all trying to eliminate the need to go off-chip for as much as possible. Things can be dramatically faster and more efficient across both consumer and server workloads if everything is just part of the same actual chip and you don't have to go out and use things which are plugged into the motherboard. Making that work is a lot easier if you have both your own CPU and GPU architectures. Apple has both in the M1, Nvidia is pairing ARM cores with its GPUs, AMD obviously makes both, and Intel is trying to get in on the game. They recognize that having their own GPU designs are going to be very important to both their consumer and HPC products going forward, especially as use-cases which rely on GPU or GPU-like acceleration (AI stuff) proliferate. Having competitive GPU designs is critical to their future competitiveness.
- sogen 4y ago
  > ARM Oh what could have been
- mepian 4y ago
  Intel actually spent too much effort on the Itanium, it was stillborn. The Xeon Phi was just the product name of the Larrabee without the display output parts, and the Larrabee was demoted to the Xeon Phi BECAUSE it didn't have enough potential to compete with the discrete GPUs from Nvidia and AMD. The current attempt at discrete GPUs is more promising.
- elihu 4y ago
  Also, they helped develop Infiniband before dropping out. Much later they got back into the Infiniband business by buying QLogic, and from there developed Omnipath which they eventually gave up on, spinning the product line off as a separate company, Cornelis Networks. Some others: Realsense, Optane, and they sold their NAND busisess to SK Hynix.
- viewtransform 4y ago
  Don't forget the Intel purchase of McAfee software for $7.5B
- happycube 4y ago
  I think they just junked their network switch silicon. Again.
- imtringued 4y ago
  But Intel replaced the Xeon Phi with their discrete GPUs, I would abandon those too, if I had an even better product to sell.
worrycue 4y ago
But if they can't afford to keep it running then they will have no choice but to axe it.

ChuckNorris89 4y ago

>intel can't afford to axe the gpu division, because there's so much potential in that space Haha, that's adorable when you consider how many things with potential Intel has either axed, sold off, or abandoned over the years. - ARM mobile chips (StrongARM) - Mobile modems (now belonging to Apple) - Compute stick - Itanium - The Edison and Curie - IoT Gateway - Xeon Phy - Movidius VPUs haven't been axed but they don't seem to be getting developed further - Recon smart glasses

thunderbird120 4y ago
None of those were core to Intel's business in the way GPUs are likely going to be going forward. The closer integration of CPUs and GPUs is an industry wide trend with Apple, Nvidia, AMD, and Intel all trying to eliminate the need to go off-chip for as much as possible. Things can be dramatically faster and more efficient across both consumer and server workloads if everything is just part of the same actual chip and you don't have to go out and use things which are plugged into the motherboard. Making that work is a lot easier if you have both your own CPU and GPU architectures. Apple has both in the M1, Nvidia is pairing ARM cores with its GPUs, AMD obviously makes both, and Intel is trying to get in on the game. They recognize that having their own GPU designs are going to be very important to both their consumer and HPC products going forward, especially as use-cases which rely on GPU or GPU-like acceleration (AI stuff) proliferate. Having competitive GPU designs is critical to their future competitiveness.
sogen 4y ago
> ARM Oh what could have been
mepian 4y ago
Intel actually spent too much effort on the Itanium, it was stillborn. The Xeon Phi was just the product name of the Larrabee without the display output parts, and the Larrabee was demoted to the Xeon Phi BECAUSE it didn't have enough potential to compete with the discrete GPUs from Nvidia and AMD. The current attempt at discrete GPUs is more promising.
elihu 4y ago
Also, they helped develop Infiniband before dropping out. Much later they got back into the Infiniband business by buying QLogic, and from there developed Omnipath which they eventually gave up on, spinning the product line off as a separate company, Cornelis Networks. Some others: Realsense, Optane, and they sold their NAND busisess to SK Hynix.
viewtransform 4y ago
Don't forget the Intel purchase of McAfee software for $7.5B
happycube 4y ago
I think they just junked their network switch silicon. Again.
imtringued 4y ago
But Intel replaced the Xeon Phi with their discrete GPUs, I would abandon those too, if I had an even better product to sell.

worrycue 4y ago

But if they can't afford to keep it running then they will have no choice but to axe it.