4 ms·

Every year Intel announces a new failure, and every year I feel more ashamed for having Intel as the bulk of my software engineering experience on my resume. I

Every year Intel announces a new failure, and every year I feel more ashamed for having Intel as the bulk of my software engineering experience on my resume. I saw the signs when I was still there and attending quarterly updates. It felt like in one breath they admitted to missing the mobile boat and in another they said only gamers need dedicated/discrete powerful gpus.

jvanderbot 3y ago
Intel can and does produce phenomenal technical products. Their compilers and HPC toolsets have done enormous good. Their chips are second to none (or perhaps tied for first, depending on who you ask). They are not a shameful company. They are just yesterday's giant, and as such, are due for a Microsoft-like reinvention. Intel is my daily driver for gaming, due to it's incredible (but sadly cancelled) Extreme Compute Element form factor with its incredible customization. What they're struggling with is adapting to a changing world and to find new business centers. But this is a hardware/software world built on Intel, even if it changes daily.
- hedora 3y ago
  Which intel chips are second to none, and by what metric?
  - jvanderbot 3y ago
    Trying to be measured here: Depending on who you ask, you'll find that for gaming, AMD or Intel alternate pretty regularly on technical benchmarks. At the moment, AMD is most power efficient, on average, and can eek out higher overall benchmark performance (as of late 2023). Throughout 2023, AMD and Intel were both listed as "best" on Toms Hardware, PC Mag, etc etc https://www.pcmag.com/picks/the-best-cpus-for-gaming https://www.pcmag.com/picks/the-best-cpus-for-gaming For server marketshare, intel vastly dominates (80%?). For gaming marketshare, Intel still has 60-70% the marketshare. Even if it's a mixed bag, if given an Intel (or AMD) processor, there's no way I would throw it in the trash and if a current-gen chip, you can find things that either are better than the other with. Both are top-tier accomplishments. AMD has a signifigant fan-following though, which tends to distort the story a little.
    - greenknight 3y ago
      > Their chips are second to none (or perhaps tied for first, depending on who you ask). > For server marketshare, intel vastly dominates (80%?). For gaming marketshare, Intel still has 60-70% the marketshare. Marketshare is one thing, but saying they are the best but the marketshare is 60-70% is a totally different metric. Its saying oh Toyota has the best cars because they ship the most... but they cant be as good as a Lambo / Ferrari because they dont ship the most. In terms of server cpus, if you are looking at raw performance per socket, intel is no where near amd -- https://www.phoronix.com/review/intel-xeon-platinum-8592/10 https://www.phoronix.com/review/intel-xeon-platinum-8592/10 . This is based on Emerald Rapids / Bergamo. In terms of gaming cpus, they definetly are neck and neck with performance. But yes you are right, Intels chips arent something you would throw away in the trash. They are good chips. They need to stick around. Its just that you cant say marketshare makes them the best.
      - jvanderbot 3y ago
        I didn't say marketshare makes them the best. I said there were lots of metrics, that on any given metric, AMD and Intel trade first place spots frequently, and marketshare implies there's something special still about Intel.
        hedora 3y ago
        The only metric I could tease out of that where they are close is single core performance on high wattage enthusiast parts. That’s exactly where the Unix processors were the year before Intel put them out of business. (Except the old Unix machines also won by large margins on multithreading and Intel isn’t winning there anymore).
- kouteiheika 3y ago
  > Their chips are second to none (or perhaps tied for first, depending on who you ask). No. They're definitely behind AMD. AMD has significantly better power efficiency[1], better performance in gaming for most of the titles[2], and vastly more cores and better multithreaded performance (with Threadrippers[3]). [1]: https://gamersnexus.net/megacharts/cpu-power https://gamersnexus.net/megacharts/cpu-power [2]: https://gamersnexus.net/cpus/intels-300w-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review-benchmarks-gaming-power https://gamersnexus.net/cpus/intels-300w-core-i9-14900k-cpu-... [3]: https://gamersnexus.net/cpus/best-cpus-2023-intel-vs-amd-gaming-video-editing-budget-biggest-disappointment#best-hedt https://gamersnexus.net/cpus/best-cpus-2023-intel-vs-amd-gam...
  - kyrra 3y ago
    I would argue that AMD is not the reason they are more power efficient, it's TSMC. Intel bet on a fabrication process that did not succeed. I will bet in the next 2 years Intel will be on par with AMD again.
    - soulbadguy 3y ago
      > I would argue that AMD is not the reason they are more power efficient, it's TSMC. Why ?
      - allie1 3y ago
        Because the areas where Intel stumbled wasn’t design, it was their manufacturing being behind, something tsmc does for AMD.
        isthatafact 3y ago
        But it was also design where Intel failed to innovate for many years. For example, the chiplet approach that AMD embraced allowed AMD to put together far more powerful CPUs, i.e. with more cores and at a competitive price, than Intel could.
  - jvanderbot 3y ago
bee_rider 3y ago
Intel’s engineering is pretty solid, I think anyone who looks down on Intel’s engineers because they “only” managed to overcome their management’s wasteful dithering for… like… 30 years is not worth working for.
kjs3 3y ago
That's a pretty personal take; don't take that shame on yourself. Stick to the usual, comfortingly impersonal "Obviously, Intel is dead and buried and all their management sucks and they ruined the world" whenever Intel has announced a setback any time in the last 50 years. No one has a blanket "we don't hire losers from Intel" policy; it's not like you worked at CA or Oracle.
boshalfoshal 3y ago
These sound largely like management/product direction issues and is not really indicitive of bad engineering quality. I wouldn't be concerned about the quality of your resume.
lvl102 3y ago
It wasn’t long ago that Intel internship was the gold standard. They launched a lot of careers. We should cherish Intel for their golden years.

jvanderbot 3y ago

Intel can and does produce phenomenal technical products. Their compilers and HPC toolsets have done enormous good. Their chips are second to none (or perhaps tied for first, depending on who you ask). They are not a shameful company. They are just yesterday's giant, and as such, are due for a Microsoft-like reinvention. Intel is my daily driver for gaming, due to it's incredible (but sadly cancelled) Extreme Compute Element form factor with its incredible customization. What they're struggling with is adapting to a changing world and to find new business centers. But this is a hardware/software world built on Intel, even if it changes daily.

hedora 3y ago
Which intel chips are second to none, and by what metric?
- jvanderbot 3y ago
  Trying to be measured here: Depending on who you ask, you'll find that for gaming, AMD or Intel alternate pretty regularly on technical benchmarks. At the moment, AMD is most power efficient, on average, and can eek out higher overall benchmark performance (as of late 2023). Throughout 2023, AMD and Intel were both listed as "best" on Toms Hardware, PC Mag, etc etc https://www.pcmag.com/picks/the-best-cpus-for-gaming https://www.pcmag.com/picks/the-best-cpus-for-gaming For server marketshare, intel vastly dominates (80%?). For gaming marketshare, Intel still has 60-70% the marketshare. Even if it's a mixed bag, if given an Intel (or AMD) processor, there's no way I would throw it in the trash and if a current-gen chip, you can find things that either are better than the other with. Both are top-tier accomplishments. AMD has a signifigant fan-following though, which tends to distort the story a little.
  - greenknight 3y ago
    > Their chips are second to none (or perhaps tied for first, depending on who you ask). > For server marketshare, intel vastly dominates (80%?). For gaming marketshare, Intel still has 60-70% the marketshare. Marketshare is one thing, but saying they are the best but the marketshare is 60-70% is a totally different metric. Its saying oh Toyota has the best cars because they ship the most... but they cant be as good as a Lambo / Ferrari because they dont ship the most. In terms of server cpus, if you are looking at raw performance per socket, intel is no where near amd -- https://www.phoronix.com/review/intel-xeon-platinum-8592/10 https://www.phoronix.com/review/intel-xeon-platinum-8592/10 . This is based on Emerald Rapids / Bergamo. In terms of gaming cpus, they definetly are neck and neck with performance. But yes you are right, Intels chips arent something you would throw away in the trash. They are good chips. They need to stick around. Its just that you cant say marketshare makes them the best.
    - jvanderbot 3y ago
      I didn't say marketshare makes them the best. I said there were lots of metrics, that on any given metric, AMD and Intel trade first place spots frequently, and marketshare implies there's something special still about Intel.
      - hedora 3y ago
        The only metric I could tease out of that where they are close is single core performance on high wattage enthusiast parts. That’s exactly where the Unix processors were the year before Intel put them out of business. (Except the old Unix machines also won by large margins on multithreading and Intel isn’t winning there anymore).
kouteiheika 3y ago
> Their chips are second to none (or perhaps tied for first, depending on who you ask). No. They're definitely behind AMD. AMD has significantly better power efficiency[1], better performance in gaming for most of the titles[2], and vastly more cores and better multithreaded performance (with Threadrippers[3]). [1]: https://gamersnexus.net/megacharts/cpu-power https://gamersnexus.net/megacharts/cpu-power [2]: https://gamersnexus.net/cpus/intels-300w-core-i9-14900k-cpu-review-benchmarks-gaming-power https://gamersnexus.net/cpus/intels-300w-core-i9-14900k-cpu-... [3]: https://gamersnexus.net/cpus/best-cpus-2023-intel-vs-amd-gaming-video-editing-budget-biggest-disappointment#best-hedt https://gamersnexus.net/cpus/best-cpus-2023-intel-vs-amd-gam...
- kyrra 3y ago
  I would argue that AMD is not the reason they are more power efficient, it's TSMC. Intel bet on a fabrication process that did not succeed. I will bet in the next 2 years Intel will be on par with AMD again.
  - soulbadguy 3y ago
    > I would argue that AMD is not the reason they are more power efficient, it's TSMC. Why ?
    - allie1 3y ago
      Because the areas where Intel stumbled wasn’t design, it was their manufacturing being behind, something tsmc does for AMD.
      - isthatafact 3y ago
        But it was also design where Intel failed to innovate for many years. For example, the chiplet approach that AMD embraced allowed AMD to put together far more powerful CPUs, i.e. with more cores and at a competitive price, than Intel could.
- jvanderbot 3y ago

bee_rider 3y ago

Intel’s engineering is pretty solid, I think anyone who looks down on Intel’s engineers because they “only” managed to overcome their management’s wasteful dithering for… like… 30 years is not worth working for.

kjs3 3y ago

That's a pretty personal take; don't take that shame on yourself. Stick to the usual, comfortingly impersonal "Obviously, Intel is dead and buried and all their management sucks and they ruined the world" whenever Intel has announced a setback any time in the last 50 years. No one has a blanket "we don't hire losers from Intel" policy; it's not like you worked at CA or Oracle.

boshalfoshal 3y ago

These sound largely like management/product direction issues and is not really indicitive of bad engineering quality. I wouldn't be concerned about the quality of your resume.

lvl102 3y ago

It wasn’t long ago that Intel internship was the gold standard. They launched a lot of careers. We should cherish Intel for their golden years.