4 ms·

Here are Pat's public failings: * Can't win over AMD, Nvidia, Apple, Broadcom as fab customers * Fab cancellations and delays, wasting a ton of money * Not h

Here are Pat's public failings: * Can't win over AMD, Nvidia, Apple, Broadcom as fab customers * Fab cancellations and delays, wasting a ton of money * Not hiring the right people to steer Intel's internal fab culture to external quick enough * Not simplifying product roadmap. No one knows what the lake code names are. Expect 30% of roadmap to get cancelled. 30% get delayed. 30% switch node tech. Compare this to the simplified AMD roadmap, which is easy to understand and makes sense. * Didn't stop paying dividends until August 2024 * He cut fab funding to pay dividends in 2022 [0] * Didn't see that Intel was swimming naked during the covid boom and that after the boom, Intel would be in huge trouble due to inferior products * He hired 20% more workers since he joined but 54% less revenue * Intel still has more employees in 2024 than in 2019. Instead of trimming fat, he added more fat. Sure, Intel was on the decline no matter who stepped in as CEO in 2021. However, Pat definitely accelerated the decline and made a mess of things with little progress in any area. Gelsinger was a failure all around and it's time someone with no ties to the original decades-long Intel IDM strategy step into the role. Intel needs an outsider who can come in and objectively see the current situation - not the rosy glorious Intel of the past. [0]https://semianalysis.com/2022/07/29/intel-cuts-fab-buildout-by-4b-to/ https://semianalysis.com/2022/07/29/intel-cuts-fab-buildout-...

computerdork 2y ago
Kind of disagree. Have read on forums that by all accounts, the tech in the 18A process is amazing (Gate-all-around transistors, backside power-delivery, 3d packaging tech...), and that they are on the path to catchup/pass TSMC in terms of chip-fabrication performance/power-expenditure in a year or two. Yeah, this is an amazing achievement for such a large company. But have also ready that to make this profitable is like a 5-8 year plan, not something that is profitable in 3. To me, this is his biggest mistake, he needed to keep the ship sailing at least somewhat smoothly while waiting for this big gamble to pay off. And eventhough I do agree with you that he made a lot of mistakes, still he got the the most important issue right, regaining manufacturing leadership.
- newswasboring 2y ago
  I would love to see a source for you first paragraph.
  - computerdork 2y ago
    This forum is full of engineers and they talk about 18A (I myself am only a software engineer but who took hardware design classes waay back in college, so can understand 60% what they're are saying but am no expert). https://semiwiki.com/forum/index.php?threads/intel-18a-too-good-but-design-lags.21568 https://semiwiki.com/forum/index.php?threads/intel-18a-too-g... And obviously, many of these posters are like me and have a bias towards Intel succeeding. Still, it sounds like 18A seems like it's on track in terms of the technologies (at least for now)
- aurareturn 2y ago
  Even if 18A can catch TSMC, which I highly doubt, what does it matter if they don’t have any of the big chip designers like Apple and Nvidia?
  - throwaway48476 2y ago
    Depends how similar the PDK is.
    - philistine 2y ago
      That's the only thing? We're talking Apple here. If you can't provide tens of millions of chips per quarter, you're useless to them. TSMC not only has the best fabs, the chips fly out of those fabs at blinding speed.
      - throwaway48476 2y ago
        There are more custers besides apple. Intel is not a small manufacturer.
chithanh 2y ago
> * Intel still has more employees in 2024 than in 2019. Instead of trimming fat, he added more fat. Intel hiring practices under Gelsinger were really puzzling. Did he think that by hiring thousands of random university graduates there will be the next Gordon Moore among them? It was also discussed on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42300028 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42300028 I can kind of understand the extensive poaching of TSMC engineers in Arizona. Though making TSMC upset is playing with fire as much of Intel's business now depends on them.
BeetleB 2y ago
2 days late, but my 2 cents: > Can't win over AMD, Nvidia, Apple, Broadcom as fab customers Not surprising, and arguably not to be expected. His 5 nodes in 4 years plan ends in 2025, and only then is the fab "good enough" for external customers. Specifically, they want to see how well Intel's own product on 18A performs before committing. So the real test is in 2025-2026. > Fab cancellations and delays, wasting a ton of money The cancellations and delays are on the expanded fab roadmap that he introduced. Compared to before he joined, the fabs are in a much better place. Essentially, this is complaining that he committed to opening 5 new fabs and only opened 3 (or whatever the number is). > Not hiring the right people to steer Intel's internal fab culture to external quick enough Perhaps. 5 nodes in 4 years, which Intel may actually achieve, is unprecedented, though. No other company has done it (and likely never will again - it's crazy expensive). So at least as far as execution goes, the fab is in much better shape than when he joined. > Not simplifying product roadmap. Definitely agree. > Didn't stop paying dividends until August 2024 They cut them significantly in early 2023. Yes, they should have done it all earlier, but keep in mind that the board needs to approve it. Or at least, not fire him for doing it. On the plus, he did stop stock buybacks almost immediately after joining. > Didn't see that Intel was swimming naked during the covid boom and that after the boom, Intel would be in huge trouble due to inferior products I'm sure he knew the products were inferior. What his failure was is to see that the overall PC market would drop significantly. As an example, in one year it dropped globally 25%. Intel's share dropped 33%, with AMD picking up the remaining 8%. That extra 8% for AMD was something like a 30-50% increase in sales. > He hired 20% more workers since he joined but 54% less revenue Totally agreed. What's worse, after the 5% cuts in 2022, Intel was back at the same headcount before the current layoffs. How do you lay off 5% of the company, claiming you need to save money and in 18 months grown the company to the same level? If you want to see his positives, look here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42336143 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42336143
- aurareturn 2y ago
  Reasonable takes. I think the employee count blowup was his biggest mistake because it shortened Intel's runway towards being an external fab company. Lip Bu Tan, who was on the Intel board, recently resigned because he did not agree with Pat's employee count plan and company culture. Tan was likely right. Specifically, they want to see how well Intel's own product on 18A performs before committing. So the real test is in 2025-2026. Another mistake of Pat's is that he did not split the company fully. AMD, Nvidia, Apple, Qualcomm aren't voluntarily going to fund a competitor by using Intel fabs. Furthermore, Intel not splitting means there will always be small conflicts of interests with Intel designs teams. Pat wanted the cake and eat it too. He wanted to compete with TSMC in addition to Nvidia, Apple, AMD, Qualcomm. Now Intel is at risk with competing against neither group. I think not having any major external customer signed onto 18A in 2024, approaching 2025, is a huge failure on Pat's part.

computerdork 2y ago

Kind of disagree. Have read on forums that by all accounts, the tech in the 18A process is amazing (Gate-all-around transistors, backside power-delivery, 3d packaging tech...), and that they are on the path to catchup/pass TSMC in terms of chip-fabrication performance/power-expenditure in a year or two. Yeah, this is an amazing achievement for such a large company. But have also ready that to make this profitable is like a 5-8 year plan, not something that is profitable in 3. To me, this is his biggest mistake, he needed to keep the ship sailing at least somewhat smoothly while waiting for this big gamble to pay off. And eventhough I do agree with you that he made a lot of mistakes, still he got the the most important issue right, regaining manufacturing leadership.

newswasboring 2y ago
I would love to see a source for you first paragraph.
- computerdork 2y ago
  This forum is full of engineers and they talk about 18A (I myself am only a software engineer but who took hardware design classes waay back in college, so can understand 60% what they're are saying but am no expert). https://semiwiki.com/forum/index.php?threads/intel-18a-too-good-but-design-lags.21568 https://semiwiki.com/forum/index.php?threads/intel-18a-too-g... And obviously, many of these posters are like me and have a bias towards Intel succeeding. Still, it sounds like 18A seems like it's on track in terms of the technologies (at least for now)
aurareturn 2y ago
Even if 18A can catch TSMC, which I highly doubt, what does it matter if they don’t have any of the big chip designers like Apple and Nvidia?
- throwaway48476 2y ago
  Depends how similar the PDK is.
  - philistine 2y ago
    That's the only thing? We're talking Apple here. If you can't provide tens of millions of chips per quarter, you're useless to them. TSMC not only has the best fabs, the chips fly out of those fabs at blinding speed.
    - throwaway48476 2y ago
      There are more custers besides apple. Intel is not a small manufacturer.

chithanh 2y ago

> * Intel still has more employees in 2024 than in 2019. Instead of trimming fat, he added more fat. Intel hiring practices under Gelsinger were really puzzling. Did he think that by hiring thousands of random university graduates there will be the next Gordon Moore among them? It was also discussed on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42300028 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42300028 I can kind of understand the extensive poaching of TSMC engineers in Arizona. Though making TSMC upset is playing with fire as much of Intel's business now depends on them.

BeetleB 2y ago

2 days late, but my 2 cents: > Can't win over AMD, Nvidia, Apple, Broadcom as fab customers Not surprising, and arguably not to be expected. His 5 nodes in 4 years plan ends in 2025, and only then is the fab "good enough" for external customers. Specifically, they want to see how well Intel's own product on 18A performs before committing. So the real test is in 2025-2026. > Fab cancellations and delays, wasting a ton of money The cancellations and delays are on the expanded fab roadmap that he introduced. Compared to before he joined, the fabs are in a much better place. Essentially, this is complaining that he committed to opening 5 new fabs and only opened 3 (or whatever the number is). > Not hiring the right people to steer Intel's internal fab culture to external quick enough Perhaps. 5 nodes in 4 years, which Intel may actually achieve, is unprecedented, though. No other company has done it (and likely never will again - it's crazy expensive). So at least as far as execution goes, the fab is in much better shape than when he joined. > Not simplifying product roadmap. Definitely agree. > Didn't stop paying dividends until August 2024 They cut them significantly in early 2023. Yes, they should have done it all earlier, but keep in mind that the board needs to approve it. Or at least, not fire him for doing it. On the plus, he did stop stock buybacks almost immediately after joining. > Didn't see that Intel was swimming naked during the covid boom and that after the boom, Intel would be in huge trouble due to inferior products I'm sure he knew the products were inferior. What his failure was is to see that the overall PC market would drop significantly. As an example, in one year it dropped globally 25%. Intel's share dropped 33%, with AMD picking up the remaining 8%. That extra 8% for AMD was something like a 30-50% increase in sales. > He hired 20% more workers since he joined but 54% less revenue Totally agreed. What's worse, after the 5% cuts in 2022, Intel was back at the same headcount before the current layoffs. How do you lay off 5% of the company, claiming you need to save money and in 18 months grown the company to the same level? If you want to see his positives, look here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42336143 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42336143

aurareturn 2y ago
Reasonable takes. I think the employee count blowup was his biggest mistake because it shortened Intel's runway towards being an external fab company. Lip Bu Tan, who was on the Intel board, recently resigned because he did not agree with Pat's employee count plan and company culture. Tan was likely right. Specifically, they want to see how well Intel's own product on 18A performs before committing. So the real test is in 2025-2026. Another mistake of Pat's is that he did not split the company fully. AMD, Nvidia, Apple, Qualcomm aren't voluntarily going to fund a competitor by using Intel fabs. Furthermore, Intel not splitting means there will always be small conflicts of interests with Intel designs teams. Pat wanted the cake and eat it too. He wanted to compete with TSMC in addition to Nvidia, Apple, AMD, Qualcomm. Now Intel is at risk with competing against neither group. I think not having any major external customer signed onto 18A in 2024, approaching 2025, is a huge failure on Pat's part.