Intel planning for thousands of job cuts, internal sources say

[VirtualLarry]

Or perhaps a return of a Pentium Anniversary-style cheap overclocker.

Intel should "unlock" all of their Core chips, full-stop.

Edit: What about "Hardware DLC"? Has Intel investigated this? Sell only quad-cores with HT, but they come configured as dual-core or single-core with HT, and the buyer of the PC, then has to buy the "hardware upgrade" from Intel to turn it back into a full-blown quad. I know Intel "dabbled" in this tech before, but I'm honestly surprised that they're not embracing it fully. It would make even more sense if they move desktops to BGA-only, because it would cut down the number of SKUs that mobo makers would have to buy and stock.

 

[jpiniero]

Or perhaps a return of a Pentium Anniversary-style cheap overclocker.

If anything this might accelerate the move to BGA only on mainstream desktops and just simply give leaky mobile parts for OEMs that want to use the form factor.

 

[moonbogg]

Runaway! Hide!! ZEN is coming!!

But seriously, 12,000 jobs is some serious cuts. Hopefully they are overseas cuts and not many in the USA. That will be some serious affects to a lot more than just 12,000 Intel employees. Sub-vendors and local economy's are going to suffer no matter where they are located.

Exactly. They are minimizing the huge loss of sales impact that will occur when Zen arrives and slaughters their revenue. Behe probly not. Just kidding.
I do wonder if Zen's anticipation has had an effect on their decisions though. You have to admit that if Zen is even half way decent, that could potentially take away a gigantic number of customers.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Exactly. They are minimizing the huge loss of sales impact that will occur when Zen arrives and slaughters their revenue. Behe probly not. Just kidding.
I do wonder if Zen's anticipation has had an effect on their decisions though. You have to admit that if Zen is even half way decent, that could potentially take away a gigantic number of customers.

It would be somewhat odd if you dont see AMD announce layoffs on the 21st.

Toshiba axed 14000.
Intel axed 12000.
IBM axed a minimum of 14000.

 

[scannall]

Exactly. They are minimizing the huge loss of sales impact that will occur when Zen arrives and slaughters their revenue. Behe probly not. Just kidding.
I do wonder if Zen's anticipation has had an effect on their decisions though. You have to admit that if Zen is even half way decent, that could potentially take away a gigantic number of customers.

If Zen tripled AMD's market share, it would be a rounding error on Intel's bottom line. AMD is essentially irrelevant to Intel's cash flow. What's killing them is people just aren't upgrading their computers. Not to mention, their failure to crack mobile.

For the most part, if your computer is from 2008 or newer you likely have no reason to upgrade unless you're a gamer, your computer dies or your workload is CPU intensive. This also goes for computers in businesses btw.

OEM's are rightfully cautious about Intel's mobile offerings. They've been burned by Intel before, being a sole supplier. It would be a bad business decision to choose Intel's mobile offerings for the bulk of your tablet lines. Once trapped in x86, forever trapped.

 

[Sonikku]

Maybe I'd spring for a new intel chip if they didn't lock my multipliers.

 

[krumme]

...

 

[moonbogg]

Maybe I'd spring for a new intel chip if they didn't lock my multipliers.

I don't get it. You can get unlocked chips. All of the normal desktop chips are fully unlocked. Which ones are you talking about?

Also, most of those 12k jobs are like, Chinese workers or something, right? They all make $1 per day so they aren't even saving that much. Well, maybe save $12k per day. I guess that's not bad. I thought the only American Intel employee was like, the CEO or maybe a few other rich guys.

 

[dark zero]

Intel should "unlock" all of their Core chips, full-stop.

Edit: What about "Hardware DLC"? Has Intel investigated this? Sell only quad-cores with HT, but they come configured as dual-core or single-core with HT, and the buyer of the PC, then has to buy the "hardware upgrade" from Intel to turn it back into a full-blown quad. I know Intel "dabbled" in this tech before, but I'm honestly surprised that they're not embracing it fully. It would make even more sense if they move desktops to BGA-only, because it would cut down the number of SKUs that mobo makers would have to buy and stock.

Intel failed since it was unacceptable for the consumer. However of they turns into a monopoly, they likely do that.

 

[SAAA]

Intel should "unlock" all of their Core chips, full-stop.

Edit: What about "Hardware DLC"? Has Intel investigated this? Sell only quad-cores with HT, but they come configured as dual-core or single-core with HT, and the buyer of the PC, then has to buy the "hardware upgrade" from Intel to turn it back into a full-blown quad. I know Intel "dabbled" in this tech before, but I'm honestly surprised that they're not embracing it fully. It would make even more sense if they move desktops to BGA-only, because it would cut down the number of SKUs that mobo makers would have to buy and stock.

LoL. They are almost doing this by selling HT "locked" i7 as i5.
I'm 100% sure they don't have that many duds as SMT adds just a tiny portion of the die.
Maybe they might harvest for graphics now given how much space they devote to that.

Also... where are my faster stock dual cores? Like aren't they supposed to hit 4+ GHz more reliably than quad cores? There's a single 3.9GHz i3 today and it's been 5 years since people could overclock most chips to 4.4 or more... let's not even talk about disabled turbo on them

 

[senseamp]

SKU details are tactical stuff. Strategy is what Intel is lacking. And when you lack strategy, you fire workers and give money back to the shareholders.

 

[NTMBK]

Intel should "unlock" all of their Core chips, full-stop.

Edit: What about "Hardware DLC"? Has Intel investigated this? Sell only quad-cores with HT, but they come configured as dual-core or single-core with HT, and the buyer of the PC, then has to buy the "hardware upgrade" from Intel to turn it back into a full-blown quad. I know Intel "dabbled" in this tech before, but I'm honestly surprised that they're not embracing it fully. It would make even more sense if they move desktops to BGA-only, because it would cut down the number of SKUs that mobo makers would have to buy and stock.

They tried it: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Upgrade_Service People didn't like it, because it made Intel's arbitrary locking of features even more obvious.

 

[MiddleOfTheRoad]

Thanks for confirming my post that 10 years ago, Quads weren't mainstream.

The sad part is 2009 is almost 10 years ago. Damn, we are all getting old.

 

[jpiniero]

Also, most of those 12k jobs are like, Chinese workers or something, right? They all make $1 per day so they aren't even saving that much. Well, maybe save $12k per day. I guess that's not bad. I thought the only American Intel employee was like, the CEO or maybe a few other rich guys.

A 1.2B charge doesn't sound like they are laying off people in China. The people getting laid off were making quite a bit.

Edit: Oh and gaming was one of the things mentioned as to what Intel wants to focus on. 'Course you'll have to pay...

 

[StinkyPinky]

What a lot of enthusiasts don't get is that 95% of customers don't give a crap how powerful their PC is. As long as it works, they're happy. They don't care about getting the latest quad core or the latest GPU. Even most gamers simply want enough power to run their games at an acceptable level. They don't care about 144 fps gaming.

 

[positivedoppler]

Somebody here nailed it last year. Intel screwed themselves by going aggressively after the low end. By providing dirt cheap celerons and atoms that were good enough for daily office tasks, they trained consumers into understanding the typical user don't even need a i3. That low end starter market was traditionally AMD and people were often ready to step up from their starter AMD computer to Intel a few years down the road. By flooding the low end with "Intel Inside" there was no longer any stigma with sticking with a cheap internet machine.

 

[positivedoppler]

I see absolutely no way for Intel to remain the giant they are today. They have no path in mobile. PC market is shrinking and if AMD survive at the very least they will take back some market share from Intel. ARM, IBM, AMD, and everyone else will probably starts to eat into Intel's server market. There's no way they can maintain 99.9999% market share so they have nowhere to go but DOWN. Without the monopoly on the PC and server front to feed their fab monster, Intel will eventually fall behind in the fab world as well.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Somebody here nailed it last year. Intel screwed themselves by going aggressively after the low end. By providing dirt cheap celerons and atoms that were good enough for daily office tasks, they trained consumers into understanding the typical user don't even need a i3. That low end starter market was traditionally AMD and people were often ready to step up from their starter AMD computer to Intel a few years down the road. By flooding the low end with "Intel Inside" there was no longer any stigma with sticking with a cheap internet machine.

Interesting point. "Who needs more than a Haswell Celeron, for web browsing?".

Still, supposedly Intel has been having record sales of the i7-6700K.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Most people are going to get better performance with a haswell celeron, 8gb ram, and a SSD than a skylike i7 and a HDD. You hardly need any power to browse the web and type up word documents which is what 90% of the office workers do.

 

[dark zero]

Most people are going to get better performance with a haswell celeron, 8gb ram, and a SSD than a skylike i7 and a HDD. You hardly need any power to browse the web and type up word documents which is what 90% of the office workers do.

Worse? Atom killed the Celeron Core since is good enough to everything and ARM entered and did the grace shoot to them. ARM A53 is good enough for everything that is basic.

 

[videogames101]

Not having double digit growth should not be a death sentence for a company.

 

[Silverforce11]

People bring up cars and compare it to semiconductors for generation improvements are daft because cars don't benefit every few years from a 2x potential leap due to a node shrink.

In a car analogy, it's akin to every few years, the engine can be 2x the horsepower and fits within the same size constraints and fuel requirements.

We would be driving cars that go at the speed of light already if semiconductor improvements applied to cars.

 

[nerp]

Interesting point. "Who needs more than a Haswell Celeron, for web browsing?".

Still, supposedly Intel has been having record sales of the i7-6700K.

Yes, but they never sold that many i7s as compared to i3s and their notebook chips. So it's good they're selling so many i7s to gamers, VR developers, content creators, but it's not going to make up for the overall decline in desktop CPU shipments. Or notebook cpu shipments for that matter.

 

[nerp]

People bring up cars and compare it to semiconductors for generation improvements are daft because cars don't benefit every few years from a 2x potential leap due to a node shrink.

In a car analogy, it's akin to every few years, the engine can be 2x the horsepower and fits within the same size constraints and fuel requirements.

We would be driving cars that go at the speed of light already if semiconductor improvements applied to cars.

Actually, if you measure cars by efficiency and not horsepower, automakers are outpacing CPU manufacturers. And by efficiency, we can refer to things like active grill shutters, underbody cladding, areodynamics, 8-, 9-, 10-speed transmissions, not to mention the improvements made in emissions. Today you can get a tiny 4cyl that produces 300 horsepower and can get 35 mpg on the highway. 10 years ago it was unfathomable. But billions and billions of R&D plus government regulations sure has a way of sparking innovation.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Somebody here nailed it last year. Intel screwed themselves by going aggressively after the low end. By providing dirt cheap celerons and atoms that were good enough for daily office tasks, they trained consumers into understanding the typical user don't even need a i3. That low end starter market was traditionally AMD and people were often ready to step up from their starter AMD computer to Intel a few years down the road. By flooding the low end with "Intel Inside" there was no longer any stigma with sticking with a cheap internet machine.

Um, no. Intel has been seeing record Core mix quarter after quarter. People don't buy PCs as often, but when they do, they are tending less and less to buy cheap crap.