Not sure about Picasso, you might be correct. But regarding TSMC, yeah that's the main problem stumping the growth of ARM server and laptop/desktop efforts. I can see some stuff going to Samsung, but neither seems to be building new fabs en-masse.
Elf, your rose colored interpretations of Intel remind me of people who think because we have a cold winter global warming isn't true. Intel makes a lot of money but what they make would literally be swallowed up to build a state of the art fab today. They don't have the capital to pull it off. They need the money for stock buybacks and paying dividends.PC centric is the biggest segment for intel and while that is not just desktop it's a big part of it.
14nm still works and still makes them huge amounts of money so why fix something that isn't broken? The only drive companies have to make better products is if they have to make more sales.
Operating Segments
Intel’s data-centric and PC-centric operating segments include technologies and solutions for processing, data analysis, storage, and data transfer.www.intc.com
Also intel makes more money than tsmc amd and nvidia put together and if their upcoming GPUs are halfway acceptable they are going to take away a lot of nvidia's and amd's marketshare in GPUs.
It makes a lot of sense that intel does a lot of stock buy back before the release of them.
Intel Dominates Chip Revenue Forecast, TSMC, AMD, Nvidia Gaining
The wafer race is onwww.tomshardware.com
BK has a degree in Chemistry (looked it up) and was a fab worker and manager. Didn't exactly help, now did it?
He has a Bachelor's degree in chemistry and from what I can tell mostly worked in validation/quality control before moving into management. There's a huge difference between that and having a Ph.D. and leading R&D / technical teams.
Do you think Lisa Su is personally reviewing chip designs herself? I don't. Management is the issue, sure, but I don't need you need a technical CEO to understand that TSMC getting that far ahead is going to end up causing a ton of problems for Intel. In that sense spinning off the fabs to new management who might take things more seriously does make sense.
The last years have been a huge bubble in tech sales, it would be extremely risky to build fabs on the assumption that sales will stay the same after the human malware is gone.
What was interpreted from what I said?
Of course she isn't, but I prefer leadership of a very technical company to have at least somewhat of a real technical background. If they have a Ph.D. with real technical experience and understand the business side as well, even better. When you have purely business people leading highly technical companies they tend to make decisions that make the books look good in the short to medium term, but screw things up on the technical side which has long term consequences. Of course, there's no guarantee no matter which way you go, but based upon my experience working in the industry and following other companies for decades now, my opinion is not very high of business people running high tech companies.
As a matter of fact she occasionally sorta does:
Now contrast this to Intel's higher ups (the only exception being Raja according to Naveen Rao ) who will never visit the fabs on any tapeout, no matter how crucialCatMerc said:
She's done great things so far at AMD, but I think that user is jumping the gun just a teeny bit declaring her as one of the greatest leaders in American history. Now in another 5-10 years she is still crushing it (at AMD or at another company), we can revisit her leadership/legacy. She's had a great start for sure, so I'm not dismissing that aspect at all.
Agreed on that
They haven't righted the ship as quickly as some investors wanted after the mess Krzanich left them in, but at least they didn't bring in Eddie Lampert or Bob Nardelli.
They failed to bring in anybody of note so Bobby Swan got to keep the job since he wanted it.They haven't righted the ship as quickly as some investors wanted after the mess Krzanich left them in, but at least they didn't bring in Eddie Lampert or Bob Nardelli.
Maybe sometime Intel will be in a "better" shape for people that can make a difference to be allowed to make a difference.I imagine within another 2-3 years, Intel should be in better shape (they're still doing pretty OK by all accounts). That is if they ever can move on from 14nm. Hopefully in 2025 they won't be on 14nm+++++++++++++++++++++
I think the main thing Lisa Su is doing is that her main goal is to produce the best products available in the market and she isn't afraid of the hard work it takes to make that happen. You can just tell by listening/reading about her that she is supremely driven about the technology.
You mean the intel that has hardware image and video processing and on never systems AI build into every CPU, is making XE, has made xeon phi, has put a full computer on a pcie board, has put a CPU on a m.2 stick, has created 3dxpoint/optane and so on?!
They have a different vision that isn't getting them anywhere unless you call being overtaken and beleaguered and having your stock hammered positive developments.
Anandtech is an old forum, and in case it survives a few more decades (me, too), I want to revisit this post in the future (assuming the world will be still standing).
I am not implying Intel is at the end of the road, or finished or anything like that.
Yes, that vision involves space heating and further x86 fragmentation for benchmarketing.
Sorry I thought this was a thread about Intel.
She certainly has done a good job at AMD. It is really hard to judge though, since she started with a company that had a very bad product, so lots of room for easy improvements. She was also aided by the continual woes at Intel. If Intel had performed competently, they would have been on 7 or even 5 nm by now, and AMD products would not look nearly so impressive.
The need to do something, doesn't mean they should panic and do something as dumb as divest fabs.
Facebook
Twitter