• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Discussion Intel's past, present and future

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Former GEO Pat Gelsinger plan was 7-8 year long. Intel bleeding cash and will only last 3 years. That why Biden gave $8-9 billion to shore up it cashflow and help Intel along. The foundry is where the bleed is at! Even Intel does not use it own foundry to make it's CPUs.
 
Harry_Wild said:
Former GEO Pat Gelsinger plan was 7-8 year long. Intel bleeding cash and will only last 3 years. That why Biden gave $8-9 billion to shore up it cashflow and help Intel along. The foundry is where the bleed is at! Even Intel does not use it own foundry to make it's CPUs.
Click to expand...
$8-9 billion is pennies compared to their investment and you can't magically decide for your CPUs foundry in a year Intel outsourcing to TSMC rumor came in 2020-2021? and we see the results in 2023 with MTL which was defined in 2019 4 years approx same with ARL so if they made decision in 2021 it will come in 2025
 
Harry_Wild said:
Former GEO Pat Gelsinger plan was 7-8 year long. Intel bleeding cash and will only last 3 years. That why Biden gave $8-9 billion to shore up it cashflow and help Intel along. The foundry is where the bleed is at! Even Intel does not use it own foundry to make it's CPUs.
Click to expand...

That's right. Intel forecasted break-even of foundry to be in 2027. But that's on basis of accounting Profit and Loss bases. Even further into the future, Intel would have to continue to pour cash into equipment to equip the fabs.

The cash requirements to build out the founry is something Intel is unable to meet. So rather than run our of cash, BoD is seeking alternative course of action.
 
Joe NYC said:
That's right. Intel forecasted break-even of foundry to be in 2027. But that's on basis of accounting Profit and Loss bases. Even further into the future, Intel would have to continue to pour cash into equipment to equip the fabs.

The cash requirements to build out the founry is something Intel is unable to meet. So rather than run our of cash, BoD is seeking alternative course of action.
Click to expand...
They have to but not accelerate spending like they needed to catch up it will be regular cadence after 18A and board allowed to burn money in money pits instead of their core buisness what they did wrong is spent too much
 
511 said:
board allowed to burn money in money pits instead of their core buisness what they did wrong is spent too much
Click to expand...
They were fed lies by IFS and probably Pat too on the health and progress of the nodes.

Come on, we've all been there. Talking to our parents enthusiastically and telling them how much we could achieve with a desktop PC or laptop and then spending all our time on games? This is what Pat did with the board.
 
igor_kavinski said:
They were fed lies by IFS and probably Pat too on the health and progress of the nodes.

Come on, we've all been there. Talking to our parents enthusiastically and telling them how much we could achieve with a desktop PC or laptop and then spending all our time on games? This is what Pat did with the board.
Click to expand...
What do you have against him lol? Kranzich and swan did worse than him and board watched. Pats fabs are better plan than Kranzich Smart Tshirt
 
igor_kavinski said:
He should've implemented that plan AFTER fixing Intel's cash flow problem. He should've inspired the design teams to make a better product.
Click to expand...
For fixing cash problem he should have made stride with his strategy smartly
For Designs we will be seeing more of his design with Clearwater forest Panther lake his influence was on Lunar Lake Granite Rappids and Sierra Forest.
Arrow Lake was 2020 defination and Meteor Lake was 2019 and it is launching now unified core based on E core is also under him you should blame him properly like for Axing Data center GPU
 
Intel’s new co-CEOs

"We are more likely to tell you things after they are materializing rather than tell you what we are hoping to achieve in the future," he added. "This is why the board chose us to lead."

seekingalpha.com

Intel co-CEOs say they remain invested in Foundry, not writing off separation

Intel co-CEOs Michelle Johnston Holthaus and David Zinsner didn't hold back when saying their company has a lot of work to do. Read more here.
seekingalpha.com seekingalpha.com
 
So they will follow Pat's strategy just be not trying to oversell it and be pragmatic nice Pat lacked it he was overly enthusiastic
 
511 said:
So they will follow Pat's strategy just be not trying to oversell it and be pragmatic nice Pat lacked it he was overly enthusiastic
Click to expand...
In another article they spoke about how splitting off foundry was an "open ended question" and talked about their openness to continue to outsource to TSMC even going forward.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1867401381256319200

Honestly I have no confidence in the new CEOs keeping the foundry on track at all. Anything they say about their commitment to foundry sounds like just trying to assuage investors that Intel's multibillion dollar foundry investment won't become a complete sink.

"Intel Products will seek the right manufacturing partner by product. "At times picking TSMC is right, and at other times it makes sense to use Intel Foundry,” Holthaus said."
I understand outsourcing for meteor lake -> arrow lake since intel's foundries were simply not ready to produce a competitive product, but to still talk about actively planning to outsource future products does not show any confidence at all in foundry nor does it bode well for its future success.
 
It seems like it's all riding on 18a now. If it meets some arbitrary, poorly-defined metric indicating success, they won't spin off the foundries. Otherwise they might.
 
511 said:
I read that and I don't like it it is going in Drain cause she doesn't have the Technical Expertise required she is a good PR from the entire conversation
Click to expand...
On the positive side, it makes her responsible for the "product" so she's gonna have to work hard to not get the blame for bad financial performance of CPUs/GPUs and other stuff in consumer and enterprise sector. Maybe this is Intel board admitting that the product side was left unattended by Pat due to his fab mania.
 
Hitman928 said:
"We are more likely to tell you things after they are materializing rather than tell you what we are hoping to achieve in the future," he added. "This is why the board chose us to lead."
Click to expand...
LOL, after this the whole board should be fired summarily - by the investors who have the right to know what they are trying to achieve well in advance.
DrMrLordX said:
It seems like it's all riding on 18a now. If it meets some arbitrary, poorly-defined metric indicating success, they won't spin off the foundries.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but we would not know about that until "after things are materializing".

It's over.
 
igor_kavinski said:
On the positive side, it makes her responsible for the "product" so she's gonna have to work hard to not get the blame for bad financial performance of CPUs/GPUs and other stuff in consumer and enterprise sector. Maybe this is Intel board admitting that the product side was left unattended by Pat due to his fab mania.
Click to expand...
She will be talking the blame/reward for her previous CEOs Plans 🫠🫠
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top