4 ms·

The thing that will surprise a lot of people is how low Intel pay is in the USA. Just look up Hardware Engineer Intel on Payscale or other wage comparison site

The thing that will surprise a lot of people is how low Intel pay is in the USA. Just look up Hardware Engineer Intel on Payscale or other wage comparison site. Other companies are paying 50% more for the equivalent level. Eg. "Intel Bay Area Hardware Engineer salary" level 5 vs entry level "Google/Meta/Nvidia/AMD/Apple hardware engineer salary". On a direct, with no PPP or similar conversion comparison they do pay more for Bay Area talent than TSMC does for talent in Taiwan but Taiwan has significantly lower costs of living so you really wouldn't be better off even as talent in Taiwan migrating for an Intel job. There's no way Intel is getting the best talent nor has it been for a long time. They do not compete in the slightest and they haven't in a long time. They do not even come close. Oh and they are doing layoffs of the cheapest hardware engineering workforce in the USA right now. Lets see how this pans out for them.

jp42 2y ago
100% agree on pay. Also Intel is ossified, there is less and less team where you are held accountable. Empire building is rampant. One of the fundamental thing missing is vision and how each team is relate to that vision.
- BobbyJo 2y ago
  A friend left his SWE position at Intel(He was part of the Altera acquisition) about 4 years ago. His weeks consisted of answering one email on Monday and working out the rest of the work week because his lead did pretty much nothing, and their manager not only did nothing, but made shit up regularly. It was pretty wild honestly.
  - protastus 2y ago
    One problem with paying people significantly below market is that some of your people will be disgruntled and will optimize for working as little as possible without getting fired. Soon enough there are entire groups whose culture aligns with cutting corners and pretending to work.
snapcaster 2y ago
Was it always like this? Or did they have a period where they stopped paying top dollar for talent?
- lovethevoid 2y ago
  Since the mid 2010s at least. It was common then that Intel would expect far greater for less pay than others. They're also known for paying half than the market rate for contract work too.
Workaccount2 2y ago
The truth is that hardware just plain sucks compared to software. More punishing to produce and less profitable to do so. Nobody with money really wants to back hardware over software, at least right now.
- polalavik 2y ago
  Ya it’s simple economics unfortunately (I’m a hardware engineer). Software can pay more because the cost to produce is lower and so the margins are higher. Hardware has abysmal margins - design, r&d, failure, debugging, schedule push back, component cost, supply chain logistics, warehousing, manufacturing, etc… the list goes on there’s a million things eating into the bottom line.
  - catproc 2y ago
    Presumably, the end state of the US is one single software company producing nothing but ads. Because it pays the most, no other jobs are important.
  - protastus 2y ago
    Is it? Hardware engineers at Apple, Microsoft, Meta, NVIDIA, Amazon are paid much better than at Intel.
    - polalavik 2y ago
      Check out the stats on apples margins on hardware vs their services and software ;) And arguably most of these companies (minus Apple and nvidia) have software and services as their bread and butter, not hardware.
    - mkipper 2y ago
      Using those examples when comparing software and hardware engineering _in general_ gives a skewed perception of things. Three of those companies are only interested in hardware as a way to optimize their (incredibly profitable) software business, and Apple/NVIDIA are two of the three largest companies on earth. That's a teeny tiny slice of the job market. I'd bet that if you averaged out compensation from the top 100 paying companies for both hardware and software engineering rather than the top 5, the software number would be nearly double the hardware number. Once you start look at "normal" companies, the difference in margins between software and hardware and its effect on pay becomes very clear.
lizknope 2y ago
I work for a fabless semiconductor company in the US. We have hired a lot of people from Intel over the last 5 years and the main reason they leave and join us is because we pay more. Apple and Nvidia pay even more than us so we lose people to them.
2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
Is Intel's pay low or has the FAANG infinite-money glitch fucked up the talent market?
- AnotherGoodName 2y ago
  I'd say the pay is on the low side even when comparing outside the FAANG. Globally tech wages went up but Intel didn't budge due to long standing poor financial performance (see stock price since 2000) leading to a slow rot of their core strength. In a direct dollar to dollar conversion Intel in the Bay Area (the highest paying location) pays pretty much exactly 2x in raw salary for equivalent levels to TSMC roles based in Taiwan. That might sound like a pro-Intel comment but the simple fact is that it's a lot cheaper to live in Taiwan. 2x Taiwanese wages are not going to entice anyone to move to the highest cost of living region in the world. TSMC clearly has amazing talent and Intel are not only failing to compete against the other US tech giants, they can't even entice from lower wage regions of the world right now. It's pretty obvious that there's talent Intel needs and if we want to onshore the production from Taiwan we need that talent but Intel isn't coming close.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
    Very interesting. What are the contributors for high cost of living in the Bay Area?
    - ethbr1 2y ago
      Homeowners in the Bay Area.
    - nradov 2y ago
      The main contributor is high real estate prices. Much of the value generated by tech companies is eventually captured by property owners. Geography and open space preserves prevent building out anywhere within easy commuting distance. Politics prevents building higher density housing in most neighborhoods. The secondary contributor is high taxes. The Bay Area, and California in general, isn't the worst for taxes but in terms of total tax burden (income tax, sales tax, excise taxes, mandatory fees) it's near the top. Especially because state income taxes are no longer deductible on federal income tax returns.
kyledrake 2y ago
This 10000000%. They treat their employees like shit. Intel lost literally their entire red team to Oracle of all places over (at least) pay. Intel has a complete joke pay system that is like something out of the 1950s, underpays substantially and docks that already low pay based on certain qualifications like having a college degree (sorry Steve Jobs!). I have zero interest as a taxpayer in bailing out their crappy company, let it fail or succeed on its own merits like the companies all of their employees moved to because they were better at retaining staff. Modernize your staffing system to hire competitively or die.
- KK7NIL 2y ago
  The "companies all of their employees moved to" don't make leading edge semiconductors with US based R&D, so I don't know why you're acting like they'd be able to do what Intel does. This isn't about Intel, it's about keeping US companies competitive in leading edge semiconductor manufacturing. If we let Intel fail, we'd have an even tougher battle to get some other US company to compete.
  - schmidtleonard 2y ago
    Ok, so let bankruptcy wipe out the shareholders and then let someone more responsible buy the good parts at auction. Or nationalize it. If shareholders aren't taking risk and responsibility, why the hell are we putting them in charge and letting them pay themselves massive dividends?
    - KK7NIL 2y ago
      1) No other US company is capable of using the parts for leading edge semiconductors. Case in point: GlobalFoundry had EUV machines but returned them to ASML as they weren't able to compete technically and capital wise. They would be the best to take over Intel's assets but they weren't competitive years ago, why would they be now? 2) idk where you're getting the idea that Intel is paying massive dividends when it has been one of the worst performing tech stocks for years. The SW companies juiced up on low interest rates have done far better.
osnium123 2y ago
I think Intel is more competitive for process engineers and semiconductor manufacturing engineers from a compensation perspective.

jp42 2y ago

100% agree on pay. Also Intel is ossified, there is less and less team where you are held accountable. Empire building is rampant. One of the fundamental thing missing is vision and how each team is relate to that vision.

BobbyJo 2y ago
A friend left his SWE position at Intel(He was part of the Altera acquisition) about 4 years ago. His weeks consisted of answering one email on Monday and working out the rest of the work week because his lead did pretty much nothing, and their manager not only did nothing, but made shit up regularly. It was pretty wild honestly.
- protastus 2y ago
  One problem with paying people significantly below market is that some of your people will be disgruntled and will optimize for working as little as possible without getting fired. Soon enough there are entire groups whose culture aligns with cutting corners and pretending to work.

snapcaster 2y ago

Was it always like this? Or did they have a period where they stopped paying top dollar for talent?

lovethevoid 2y ago
Since the mid 2010s at least. It was common then that Intel would expect far greater for less pay than others. They're also known for paying half than the market rate for contract work too.

Workaccount2 2y ago

The truth is that hardware just plain sucks compared to software. More punishing to produce and less profitable to do so. Nobody with money really wants to back hardware over software, at least right now.

polalavik 2y ago
Ya it’s simple economics unfortunately (I’m a hardware engineer). Software can pay more because the cost to produce is lower and so the margins are higher. Hardware has abysmal margins - design, r&d, failure, debugging, schedule push back, component cost, supply chain logistics, warehousing, manufacturing, etc… the list goes on there’s a million things eating into the bottom line.
- catproc 2y ago
  Presumably, the end state of the US is one single software company producing nothing but ads. Because it pays the most, no other jobs are important.
- protastus 2y ago
  Is it? Hardware engineers at Apple, Microsoft, Meta, NVIDIA, Amazon are paid much better than at Intel.
  - polalavik 2y ago
    Check out the stats on apples margins on hardware vs their services and software ;) And arguably most of these companies (minus Apple and nvidia) have software and services as their bread and butter, not hardware.
  - mkipper 2y ago
    Using those examples when comparing software and hardware engineering _in general_ gives a skewed perception of things. Three of those companies are only interested in hardware as a way to optimize their (incredibly profitable) software business, and Apple/NVIDIA are two of the three largest companies on earth. That's a teeny tiny slice of the job market. I'd bet that if you averaged out compensation from the top 100 paying companies for both hardware and software engineering rather than the top 5, the software number would be nearly double the hardware number. Once you start look at "normal" companies, the difference in margins between software and hardware and its effect on pay becomes very clear.

lizknope 2y ago

I work for a fabless semiconductor company in the US. We have hired a lot of people from Intel over the last 5 years and the main reason they leave and join us is because we pay more. Apple and Nvidia pay even more than us so we lose people to them.

2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago

Is Intel's pay low or has the FAANG infinite-money glitch fucked up the talent market?

AnotherGoodName 2y ago
I'd say the pay is on the low side even when comparing outside the FAANG. Globally tech wages went up but Intel didn't budge due to long standing poor financial performance (see stock price since 2000) leading to a slow rot of their core strength. In a direct dollar to dollar conversion Intel in the Bay Area (the highest paying location) pays pretty much exactly 2x in raw salary for equivalent levels to TSMC roles based in Taiwan. That might sound like a pro-Intel comment but the simple fact is that it's a lot cheaper to live in Taiwan. 2x Taiwanese wages are not going to entice anyone to move to the highest cost of living region in the world. TSMC clearly has amazing talent and Intel are not only failing to compete against the other US tech giants, they can't even entice from lower wage regions of the world right now. It's pretty obvious that there's talent Intel needs and if we want to onshore the production from Taiwan we need that talent but Intel isn't coming close.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
  Very interesting. What are the contributors for high cost of living in the Bay Area?
  - ethbr1 2y ago
    Homeowners in the Bay Area.
  - nradov 2y ago
    The main contributor is high real estate prices. Much of the value generated by tech companies is eventually captured by property owners. Geography and open space preserves prevent building out anywhere within easy commuting distance. Politics prevents building higher density housing in most neighborhoods. The secondary contributor is high taxes. The Bay Area, and California in general, isn't the worst for taxes but in terms of total tax burden (income tax, sales tax, excise taxes, mandatory fees) it's near the top. Especially because state income taxes are no longer deductible on federal income tax returns.

kyledrake 2y ago

This 10000000%. They treat their employees like shit. Intel lost literally their entire red team to Oracle of all places over (at least) pay. Intel has a complete joke pay system that is like something out of the 1950s, underpays substantially and docks that already low pay based on certain qualifications like having a college degree (sorry Steve Jobs!). I have zero interest as a taxpayer in bailing out their crappy company, let it fail or succeed on its own merits like the companies all of their employees moved to because they were better at retaining staff. Modernize your staffing system to hire competitively or die.

KK7NIL 2y ago
The "companies all of their employees moved to" don't make leading edge semiconductors with US based R&D, so I don't know why you're acting like they'd be able to do what Intel does. This isn't about Intel, it's about keeping US companies competitive in leading edge semiconductor manufacturing. If we let Intel fail, we'd have an even tougher battle to get some other US company to compete.
- schmidtleonard 2y ago
  Ok, so let bankruptcy wipe out the shareholders and then let someone more responsible buy the good parts at auction. Or nationalize it. If shareholders aren't taking risk and responsibility, why the hell are we putting them in charge and letting them pay themselves massive dividends?
  - KK7NIL 2y ago
    1) No other US company is capable of using the parts for leading edge semiconductors. Case in point: GlobalFoundry had EUV machines but returned them to ASML as they weren't able to compete technically and capital wise. They would be the best to take over Intel's assets but they weren't competitive years ago, why would they be now? 2) idk where you're getting the idea that Intel is paying massive dividends when it has been one of the worst performing tech stocks for years. The SW companies juiced up on low interest rates have done far better.

osnium123 2y ago

I think Intel is more competitive for process engineers and semiconductor manufacturing engineers from a compensation perspective.