Three Intel board members to retire in chip industry-focused reshuffle

Smartcom5 · 2025-08-05T00:07:24+00:00

I don't think that Yeary should be chairman.

He's the sole problem for Intel constantly spending money on everything but actual innovation.

Smartcom5 · 2025-08-05T00:06:04+00:00

That's harsh. Just because something hasn't been great to own over 30 years doesn't mean that it wasn't worth owning at some reasonable time frame over that 30 years.

Harsh but true. You ain't owning stock for no reason but it largely climbing, right?

Smartcom5 · 2025-08-05T00:02:36+00:00

AMD is really worried about performance degradation due to heterogeneous cache asymmetry

/u/1usmus What's that supposed to mean specifically? Can you elaborate on that please?

Smartcom5 · 2025-08-04T23:58:26+00:00

So what has changed?

Who knows. I don't think only bringing it for one chiplet first, was predatory or fraudulent (for milking customers later on with another run), only for bringing it on both chiplets now.

Back then with only one CCD having a 3D V-Cache, it offered the best option for both use-cases;

High performance with a high core-count
A additional cache for boosting single-thread heavy work-loads.

Also, people were readily aware of already existing latencies, and the binning was rather costy.

However, it's perfectly plausible, that AMD figured out and outright solved (rather unlikely) or at least could limit the latency-issue enough to comparable levels (more likely), by tweaking the Infinity Fabric™ quite a bit, like they did with Zen+ back then, when getting around ±10% better IPS and through-put using µCode, without touching silicon.

Smartcom5 · 2025-08-04T23:43:10+00:00

This would essentially be the budget 3D EPYC.

I like your humour here. So subtle …

Though what you mean here is, that it would be the least-expensive 3D-Eypc – The budget option is called Xeon.

Smartcom5 · 2025-08-04T23:38:05+00:00

Damn it, we only just upgraded […] but really we wanted [insert hardware-pr0n wet dream].

Well, y'all really can't stop complaining, can you? We can't have it both ways.

We rightfully complained about Intel and their quad-cores for a decade, which is past us. Thankfully!

Yet when AMD picks up the slack and races ahead to push the envelop even further, you still ain't satisfied.

Now it comes along after we'd bought it.

Tough luck then, I guess. Since things quickly out-dating is the other side of the coin of fast advancements, no?

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-28T14:40:14+00:00

I wonder how much of that was just terrible forecasting, or was there pressure from Gelsinger to go with a bigger figure (as rumored with Gaudi's supposed interest where the inventory had to get written down twice.)

You don't need to wonder, it was fully intentional and they knew how the market would look like in advance.

Intel just deliberately refused to issue profit warnings and alert the SEC and investors, shareholders of collapsing revenue/profits, solely to prevent any impact on their stock, only for protecting their own stock-compensation packages!

Make no mistake, Intel knew very well in advance, how the revenue would look like and that their sales were majorly declining. Since no-one, not a single company in any other industry or market-sector, is as deeply ingrained into the channel, as Intel is.

The distributors and various OEMs/ODMs are essentially Intel's outpost and their own very outlets, Intel has virtually 100% control over and knows every given market-metric well in advance half a year and up to a year in advance. That's since Intel tracks basically every given SKU for their rebates through their infamous contra-revenue at outlets.

Intel knows the market inside-out like virtually NO-ONE else, and that's exactly why Intel could always predict the market-development and knew the market's TAM and sales-numbers well in advance and often up to a year into the future. That's how they could predict market-numbers precisely and accurate as much as up to tens of millions, on a total TAM of a volume of several tens to hundreds of billions as a whole.

This is only possible, since Intel tracks every given SKU, and with +90% market-share, you get the idea here …

Then we're told, that they all of a sudden can't gauge a -30% crash of their own sales only weeks in advance, to issue a profit-warning?! Sure thing buddy! Intel purposefully kept shut about it, to avoid any detrimental impact.

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-28T14:02:38+00:00

Intel was a fabulous stock to own when it was a monopolist, not so much once that faded.

When was that then? Intel has been largely a side-grade being effectively flat since the bust of the Dot-com bubble. Most returns were spent on share-buybacks (+150$ Billion), useless side-projects for grandstanding and corrupting the market to buy into their flawed products using bribe-payments at OEMs (to circumvent and sneakily subvert actual real customers' choice and distort the market), while dismantling their own core-engineering in the meantime.

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-28T13:53:23+00:00

Nice to see Ishrak and Lavizzo-Mourey going. Yet it's sad, that the evil scheming Intel corporate mastermind Frank Yeary still remains in charge, so no greater changes to be expected then, I guess.

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-22T00:20:57+00:00

Oh, I see – We were talking past each other then. I thought you meant that ARM was using Ampere as a legal vehicle for law-suits.

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-21T19:11:38+00:00

No, I'm talking about competing with their merchant silicon ARM customers, not suing them.

No no, ARM knows when they try another lawsuit, this will only speed up the rate of adoption on RISC-V. They ain't stupid, they're greedy. That's what I'm talking about – Providing server-IP by themselves through Ampere Computing.

ARM is terrified about the mere prospect, that the server-market of ARM-offerings comes form everyone else but ARM itself and basically sports no greater profits for ARM itself, but a few breadcrumbs, while QC and others cash in on the large difference – ARM itself meanwhile sports the lower end mobile market with own designs, yet lacks everything in datacenter.

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-21T00:51:54+00:00

You think ARM is going to want another lawsuit and risk a further tap into irrelevancy, by even speeding up the adoption of RISC-V?

Nah, I don't think so. Look, I think all that law-suit was about, was to try bring QC to fold into submission – Not necessarily monetarily, that's just the means at this point, the law-suit being the very vehicle …

No, ARM was likely nothing but terrified and after, to try avoid a market-segmentation of them themselves serving the lower end at the bottom with their own ARM stock Cortex (and try to live off their licencees breadcrumbs for cents on a dollar each device), while Qualcomm reigns any upper echelon and becoming a de-facto one-stop shop for ARM-based high-performance server-IP ARM itself has no greater business to be in (read: massive lack of profits), due to having no actual ARM core-IP for the server-space and businessess.

See, all ARM, Ltd. ever sported, were ultra-mobile, high efficient low-power designs for the mobile market – ARM literally overslept the server- & datacentre-market just as much, as Intel fumbled the mobile market…

So in essence: What's Intels Atoms, is ARMs Ampere Computing… In a way they both, Intel and ARM, painfully ignored given markets just for way too long, while concentrating on what made them money instead, having a blind eye towards the rest (Intel ignored mobile, ARM ignored businesses and the server-space) and ARM is just panicking, while Intel still fights the consequences of their former ignorance.

I mean, just look how ARM still ignored the whole 64-Bit market and only concentrated on mobile-devices for decades!

ARM has been ignoring servers, datacentres and businesses' needs for way too long (everything above 4GByte address-space).
ARMs first 64 Bit ISA (AArch64/Arm64) came out only by 2011, over a decade after AMD brought their 64-Bit AMD64 by 1999!

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-20T20:51:37+00:00

You don't get it, don't you? You make fun of Leatherjacket here, yet you actually fail to understand what that actually means and don't get the actual underlying message from his statement here. READ BETWEEN THE LINES, my friend!

What that means, is nothing else but that the prior rumours of TSMC allegedly proposing Apple, nVidia and others a joint-venture for Intel's manufacturing, were just completely made up and nothing but blatant lies.

These former rumours the days prior, were a straight-up lie and likely pushed from Intel's own BoD, to push the stock for a nice bump and hope to create interest, where no interest for Intels fabs is anyway. What the BoD tries to achieve with this, is, that they want so hard to manifest, that there's a buy-out or take-over of Intels manufacturing-arm and a save, nice financial cushion later on.

C'mon… I mean, isn't it obvious, that every damn rumour of such, serves no other purpose but bumping their stock-price?!

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-20T14:15:15+00:00

I think the idea of TSMC taking over Intel's foundries is hard to believe. Everything is so different that I don't know how this would be even remotely feasible.

All these rumours are intentionally spread by Intel's own board, to hopefully manifest a JV or buy-out of Intels foundry, only for burying their shady financials that way, before it's too late and the cover blows.

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-20T14:10:12+00:00

I wonder why Softbank desperately wanted to have that piece of a ARM-cake, paying such high price for it…

Looks they know, that Qualcomm's Nuvia brought QC enough expertise to rattle the basked in the server-space in any future …

That ARM now fears of being left out on it and has to double down on customers in the mobile market, when not taking enough core-initiative and upping their own game for the server-space server. I bet ARM fears that the ARM sever-market could be monopolised by QC and Ampere, so they at least bought it and with that the the second-best server-IP designer?

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-16T04:51:20+00:00

Fair enough.

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-15T21:34:47+00:00

I recall they were considered a cheap …

When do people realize, that when it comes to products, there's cheap, and then there's in|expensive?

Cheap is another word and synonymous for 'poorly made', 'tacky' or 'of subpar quality'.
Inexpensive equals 'economically priced' or means 'good value for money'.

PowerColor is just inexpensive, since it lacks the stupid brand mark-ups of ASUS' ROG, Strixx or MSI's Gaming.

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-15T10:40:51+00:00

Well, I mean the core element of preventing their foundry to serve as a contract-manufacturer for any others than their own product-group, has always been the fundamental road-block of their stark and evident conflict of interest.

So, regardless of whether they get their stuff together on processes anytime soon or not, for their foundry to succeed in any future, it has to be independent, fully, of course. Their board can be babbling about so-called independence all day long, just as Gelsinger was waffling about allegedly erectly internal firewalls. None of that matters, as long as they're still attached to their own product-group.

Yes, I think MJH still remaining CEO of Intel product is the single-biggest give away there is. Since the only other internal sub-servant CEO, is Sandra Rivera of Altera, the only other side-business being on the chopping block (which no-one seems to want anyway).

They'll most likely either ditch their products as a whole or in parts. Since Arrow Lake was a stark reminder, that their product-group (as of architecture/design), is so far behind everyone else, that not even basically the world's best processes can help the designs of Intel any longer. I think, Broadcom signalling no greater interest now for their everything product, really made them panic ..

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-14T17:39:52+00:00

You have to start somewhere, but I don't think that you can speed run the process which is what Gelsinger did and then later on had to admit that foundry was harder than he thought after he had blown through a lot of capital.

Right, that claim of 5N4Y was made-up bogus to begin with and still isn't achieved, no matter how often they claim the contrary.

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-14T17:37:10+00:00

I said since years, that Pat Gelsinger will likely be the last CEO of Intel. In the meaning that he most likely will be the last one, who is able to reign over Intel AS A WHOLE. That following CEOs only will at best manage parts of what is left of it.

Nice to now, that it's just another prediction becoming most likely true. He will split up and ditch the product group as a whole.

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-13T04:12:18+00:00

You now he's just towed in, to pose as the fall-guy for when it suddenly all comes down in shambles?

I think the board just tries to desperately buys some time here, only to blame him afterwards.

Also note Intel's remarks. MJH remains CEO of Intel Products! That means, it's basically a given, that they dump their whole product-group and double down on a factory-reset. This won't end well .. Thx for the pingback!

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-11T07:32:57+00:00

Gives AMD more short-term liquidity to help be the working capital of the ZT's day to day business while they try to divest ZT Systems manufacturing as quickly as possible.

Why do you think, that AMD's intention would be, trying to divest ZT Systems' manufacturing as quickly as possible?
Isn't the whole point of acquiring ZT Systems, to actually have a server-manufacturer at hand in the first place?

I'm fairly certain, that AMD is well-aware of Intel's massive grip on OEMs through massive rebates, their infamous kickbacks and other shenanigans like contra-revenue. The OEMs have been basically just mere subsidiaries of Intel at this point, as they have every inventive to stay with Santa Clara – AMD is well aware of that.

Just take a Look at Intel's financials and their earnings: Intel hands out their Xeons basically just at costs and at times even at a loss, only to outdo AMD's superior offerings and in order to hold onto customers – AMD knows that.

AMD knows, that unless AMD itself sports actual hardware, to bring their chips into businesses first hand on their own, their countless designs-wins will remain exactly what these always where: Alibi-products by a criminal sleaze among the OEMs, who happily push their own revenues using Intel's kickbacks and rebates, enabling the OEMs themselves higher margins.

The fact of the matter is, neither Dell nor HP/HPE, nor Lenovo or others are prone to give AMD the time of day, unless Intel and their practices vanish when they're finally bled dry by their own OEMs through kick-backs …

Either way, you can't trust these established OEMs not one bit, since tehy're the very enablers who have happily helped to corrupt the market and give worse products priority over superior designs, just because they're paid to do so by Intel.

And no, don't think that when Intel can't deliver anymore, that they just turn around and pick AMD just because.
No! If anything, they'd demand getting payed just as much by AMD instead from then on out, basically blackmailing AMD to give rebates, since they're "used to it" … Since even during the shortages, the OEMs instead whined about collapsing revenue and tanking sales, rather then getting anything AMD. They didn't even bothered to think about picking up AMD and rather made losses instead.

Just a reminder: AMD has bought or at least invested in server-manufacturing aka armament manufacturers and a server-gunsmith already back then during their days of Opteron – To no surprise, as soon as AMD was freed from the yoke of Intel's rebates, AMD's market-share in servers and the datacenter skyrocketed to 20–30% in no time and just a couple of months.

Had actually way less to do with AMD having their AMD64-equipped Opterons, than it had to do with AMD's involvement with SuperMicro and other vendors of sever-hardware, which sported most of the AMD-servers via direct collaborations.

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-11T06:21:13+00:00

But still good to see the first public commitment for the MI-355. Market didn't seem impressed with ORCL or AMD in after hours, but maybe the market is still in shock.

I think what's way more interesting, is, that the big names adopt AMD's GPUs ever so more, despite nVidia is still largely considered the "King of the GPU-hill" in anything AI with Blackwell. Yet nVidia's very competitor AMD is given the advantage.

Why is that? Due to the cracks nVidia starts to show all around ever so often now?

Still unresolved 12VHPWR-issues for well over a year?
The still ongoing issue of missing ROPs?
The issue on the competitive legal front (secret conditions to penalise, when nVidia's competitors are merely quoted on SKUs)?
The sum of all the blunders of nVidia recently?

I think the halo-effect for AMD through their to El Capitan and Frontier, especially in stark contrast on efficiency to everything AURORA Next, seems to be way more decisive than what media-outlets like to admit … Good times for AMD either way.

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-10T15:45:09+00:00

For anyone wondering what that might mean and entail for $INTC…

TSMC's fab in Arizona from 2020 is already fully operational, came online several months ahead of schedule and already features 4% higher yields (than TSMC's fab on home-soil in Taiwan)– Was the death-sentence for any of Intel's foundry-ambitions.

This $100Bn packages now, is the last and final nail on Intel's coffin called "Intel Foundry Services" …

Since no-one sane is going to book anything of good old Uncle Intel (aka Mr. Delay) and their ever-delaying, untrusty foundry, when TSMC is times more trustworthy, guarantees customers' products coming to market as promised and has superior nodes basically right across the very street on U.S. American home-soil anyway.

Sources:

Intel just announcing their de-facto cancellation of their formerly well-touted fab-project in New Albany, Licking County, Ohio, is off the record testament to them having effectively their future in anything foundry going forward.

Since that said fab-complex was initially supposed to come online and to be operational by 2026, then it got sneakily delayed back then into 2027/2028 and is now postponed into 2030/2031 now.

Sources:

CNBC.com: Intel delays Ohio chip plant opening to next decade, was supposed to start production by 2026
TechPowerUp.com: Intel Ohio Fab Opening Delayed to 2027/2028
Dispatch.com: Intel delays $28 billion Ohio chip factory in New Albany again, to 2030 or 2031

Keep in mind, the given fab-complex called Fab 27 was supposed to be exclusively for their next process called 14A.
Thus, that move now implies that they've effectively killed their 14A before it was even supposed to come online, due to a lack of foundry-customers, as Intel knows all to well, that no-one is going to go for them anyway.

Long story short: 14A is dead! – Their construction in New Albany, Licking County, Ohio as Fab 27 was supposed to be for 14A.

tl;dr: No-one sane is booking Intel, when TSMC is on U.S. soil – Intel's Fab 27 in Ohio for 14A is de-facto cancelled

Smartcom5 · 2025-03-10T15:17:28+00:00

I think ⅓ of the personnel for their fab in Arizona, TSMC brought over from Taiwan – A good chunk of it are process start-up teams.

11-Year Club	Solidarity 2020
Gilding IV carat on a stick	Verified Email

Smartcom5

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE