New Intel CEO wants company to move faster refine later

[Exophase]

If 75% of people only care about video playback then SoC is barely going to matter to them. There's precious little left that CPU power optimizations can improve there. Most of the work is done by dedicated hardware that even Intel is licensing. And on a tablet that power consumption is small compared to the display.

 

[dealcorn]

To which I would argue that Intel needed to add more resources to the project so that its release timeline could be expedited.

Standard project management triangle stuff.

If you want to improve on the development schedule then you either pare back the scope (reduce the feature set), or you pare back the quality (considered to part of the scope) or you increase the development cost (add resources).".

IDC's project management triangle is credible and has served him well for years. Intel could apply more cash to make it happen faster. Intel outspends everyone else on the stuff they care about. I wonder how much Intel would need to further increase spending to make it happen faster. Is the market willing to accept increased Intel prices to get better stuff?

If Intel is under spending on leadership, why don't competitors outspend Intel to steal the crown? I hear more statements that our product will be as good reasonably soon. I do not see a spending ramp as a credible strategy.

 

[dealcorn]

If 75% of people only care about video playback then SoC is barely going to matter to them. There's precious little left that CPU power optimizations can improve there. Most of the work is done by dedicated hardware that even Intel is licensing. And on a tablet that power consumption is small compared to the display.

Are you being a silly goose? SoC typically means IGD and Intel's Baytrail will build IGD with the good stuff (low power Finfet process built on a superior dimension) to match/dominate even if the CPU is not a factor. Historic graphics inadequacies are largely off the table for mainstream markets with Baytrail as Intel brings IGD design in house with a stripper model of known good stuff. Leadership is not evidenced by some common design features. Leadership comes from the fact that on the important SoC part that is different, Intel plans to dominate efficiency with Finfet.

Snapdragon 800 can dominate graphics performance but they pay a heavy price in efficiency that matters to all except the Android gaming tablet market. I fully agree that Intel is not a contender in the immature Android gaming table niche at 22 nm. That is why the Intel Brahman created 14 nm.

 

[Vesku]

Question is why not have some tiers, at least 2, of graphics with Baytrail?

 

[BallaTheFeared]

I don't understand.. How I apply this to the current tick tock model we've seen play out since 2011?

Shorter cycles but more products, how does that work?

My mind wants to imagine 920 -> 950

But that was back when 1366 was first, whereas now it's mainstream then severs. I can't image that is going to change...

So how is this applied?

I like how it works now Intel

 

[Khato]

Question is why not have some tiers, at least 2, of graphics with Baytrail?

Such is a very good question, especially when you consider that Intel already has the graphics IP for the scaled up versions. (It would still be a fair amount of effort to put all the necessary power hooks into the design though.) My guess as to the answer though would be that if you want more graphics performance in a tablet you're supposed to go with Haswell. It'll be quite interesting to see how products using the 4.5W SDP Haswell SKUs compare to those using the likes of Snapdragon 800.

But ya know, if Intel did want to make a more graphics-heavy version of Baytrail I believe that's the kind of thing that I think BK is talking about. Get the initial version out with what they have, then iterate with a version that has a full IVB GT1 or GT2 implementation a half year later with no other changes.

 

[Arachnotronic]

From a products and niches perspective, Baytrail is the model. Contrast how much Snapdragon 800 outperforms Saltwell to the projections of how Baytrail outperforms Saltwell. I get that Snapdragon 800 has double Baytrail graphics and half Baytrail's efficiency (twice as efficient versus 4.4-4.7 times as efficient). If you want an Android gaming tablet and have access to a plug, Baytrail is not a contender. Intel cedes that niche at 22 nm. However, like Natalie Portman in The Professional, the Android gaming tablet niche is not yet mature.

Some folks do not want a dead battery to kill their access to SpongeBob SquarePants @1080p when they need him. They like Baytrail. Gender, age, and whatever will affect consumer preferences. I think SpongeBob claims more than 75% of the market versus less than 25% for gamers. If Intel clearly dominates the biggest niche, Bryan may see that an OK first step even if Baytrail can not access portions of the market.

I understand Anand's statement that Intel's mobile team needs a "graphics wakeup call" but from a strategic perspective Byran might differ. Classic Intel graphics trash talk lacks traction in the mainstream market if Baytrail delivers better than 1080p media consumption with Angry Birds on the side. However, any hint of failure on efficiency leadership will be dealt with harshly by mobile consumers. Better graphics cost both efficiency and precludes access to price sensitive segments of the market because more transistors cost more money. Baytrail is strategically targeted to deliver mainstream market share.

Like Natalie, the Android gaming tablet market may mature and remain attractive. It's heresy, but Atom needs a viable Android gaming tablet to clean up the market. I hear Bryan requesting/demanding some spin on IRIS Pro for Atom at 14 nm. If it has the tablet market's best performance that is cool. However, Baytrail may not even need the world's best graphics. Some mobile gamers lack ready access to a plug. They are low hanging fruit Bryan wants to harvest today, while Finfet benefits are incontestable.

The fact that everyone in this space claims efficiency leadership evidences the broad recognition that efficiency is a/the killer issue in the mobile SoC space. Right or wrong, Bryan thinks Intel wins efficiency and wants to claim the prize now. He does not want distractions.

Bay Trail is still an Otellini-era product. You won't see Brian Krzanich products until...well, jeez...a long time from now, lol. Intel's R&D pipeline is broad and deep.

 

[Exophase]

Are you being a silly goose? SoC typically means IGD and Intel's Baytrail will build IGD with the good stuff (low power Finfet process built on a superior dimension) to match/dominate even if the CPU is not a factor. Historic graphics inadequacies are largely off the table for mainstream markets with Baytrail as Intel brings IGD design in house with a stripper model of known good stuff. Leadership is not evidenced by some common design features. Leadership comes from the fact that on the important SoC part that is different, Intel plans to dominate efficiency with Finfet.

Snapdragon 800 can dominate graphics performance but they pay a heavy price in efficiency that matters to all except the Android gaming tablet market. I fully agree that Intel is not a contender in the immature Android gaming table niche at 22 nm. That is why the Intel Brahman created 14 nm.

Intel may have more power efficiency in their video decode IP due to FinFETs. But for all intents and purposes it won't matter for tablets that can already play video for > 9 hours. Saving a few hundred mW at best on the decode process won't be a game changer for Intel.

 

[mrmt]

Bay Trail is still an Otellini-era product. You won't see Brian Krzanich products until...well, jeez...a long time from now, lol. Intel's R&D pipeline is broad and deep.

5 years down the road, in 7nm node.

 

[dealcorn]

In a prior post I forgot Arnold Frish's name and this link: http://seekingalpha.com/article/1511712-tsmc-globalfoundries-and-samsung-can-t-save-arm-and-amd-from-intel-s-finfets. It is a long read but I found his reasoning that no competitor will catch up with Intel's Finfet advantage for more than a year persuasive. He owns many hats: a healthy dose of skepticism may be warranted. Still, the reasoning sounds credible.

I characterize him as providing a lateral perspective on how Intel sees the world.

 

[sontin]

Intel may have more power efficiency in their video decode IP due to FinFETs. But for all intents and purposes it won't matter for tablets that can already play video for > 9 hours. Saving a few hundred mW at best on the decode process won't be a game changer for Intel.

And the ARM world counters it with the big.Little approach.

 

[mrmt]

And the ARM world counters it with the big.Little approach.

Not every ARM designer is betting on big little. Qualcomm doesn't think it is the way.

 

[sontin]

That is Qualcomm's problem. Fact is big.Little is useful for low performance tasks.

 

[mrmt]

That is Qualcomm's problem. Fact is big.Little is useful for low performance tasks.

It's just a trade off: Make the SoC bigger and more complex or spend more time working on power gating and optimizing the big core.

Not a surprise that Nvidia embraced it, the company took a lot of shortcuts and went for very aggressive designs in the mobile arena. But in the end, what we are seeing is the good old symmetrical core winning the day in the mobile arena.

 

[sm625]

Performance is irrelevant when intel prices themselves out of the entire market. Even on the iRipoff the SoC dont cost half what intel will be charging for its cheapest baytrail. And the AWhatever inside the next iRipoff will be a hell of a lot larger than any atom. Intel is charging in the neighborhood of 4X the cost per transistor vs their competitors. That just aint gonna fly, because they aint 4X as fast. They may be marginally faster at best.

 

[mrmt]

Performance is irrelevant when intel prices themselves out of the entire market. Even on the iRipoff the SoC dont cost half what intel will be charging for its cheapest baytrail. And the AWhatever inside the next iRipoff will be a hell of a lot larger than any atom. Intel is charging in the neighborhood of 4X the cost per transistor vs their competitors. That just aint gonna fly, because they aint 4X as fast. They may be marginally faster at best.

Lots of wild assumptions here. Do you know how much Intel will be charging for Bay Trail?

I have a feeling that we're seeing a slight different price policy here, otherwise $200 Bay Trail tablets wouldn't be viable.

 

[krumme]

Performance is irrelevant when intel prices themselves out of the entire market. Even on the iRipoff the SoC dont cost half what intel will be charging for its cheapest baytrail. And the AWhatever inside the next iRipoff will be a hell of a lot larger than any atom. Intel is charging in the neighborhood of 4X the cost per transistor vs their competitors. That just aint gonna fly, because they aint 4X as fast. They may be marginally faster at best.

Who actually needs more performance for their phone today?

The future is better and more effient screen and battery tech.

Using Atom and loads of capex for that problem is sort of idiotic. But if you have a knife you keep seeing sticks and if you have a ....well coorporate strategy explained.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[sandorski]

1 major flaw could bring even a company as big as Intel to its' knees. Especially against competitors that have been steadily growing in importance in the Industry they are involved in, albeit somewhat indirectly in their segment of the Market. When your position is weakening, making a major misstep can be devastating.

 

[krumme]

Lots of wild assumptions here. Do you know how much Intel will be charging for Bay Trail?

I have a feeling that we're seeing a slight different price policy here, otherwise $200 Bay Trail tablets wouldn't be viable.

No question that Intel will give it away at a loss as they give away atom now, the question is just when they will get tired of it.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

 

[ShintaiDK]

No question that Intel will give it away at a loss as they give away atom now, the question is just when they will get tired of it.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

Are they giving atom away at a loss? Link?

 

[beginner99]

Snapdragon 800 is not the competition of atom. I'm pretty sure under full load that thing gulps as much as Y-series haswells will. IMHO intel is doing sane approach. fast adn efficient cpu matters a lot in browsing on a smartphone, who cares about gpu? For UI it will still be overkill.

 

[Khato]

No question that Intel will give it away at a loss as they give away atom now, the question is just when they will get tired of it.

I find it extremely amusing that some people actually believe that Intel's operating costs are higher than the combination of an ARM SoC designer plus their foundry. Intel can always sell product at foundry margins if they so choose in order to markedly undercut the competition while still making a decent profit. (And it won't affect gross margin too much unless they take over the mobile market... but they'd increase prices well before that happened.)

As for more CPU processing performance on mobile platforms, well, the need for that is pretty much entirely dependent upon software. There's always a need for more efficient processing power though.

 

[Roland00Address]

Who actually needs more performance for their phone today?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 4 Beta

I find it kinda ironic that the person who stated this has arguably the best phone on the market today (this is comming from another Galaxy S4 user )

 

[CHADBOGA]

Are they giving atom away at a loss? Link?

There is no link to wishful thinking. D:

 

[Pheesh]

'who needs more processing power on their phone'?

Everyone will, they just don't know why yet.

Once more processing power is fitting in that form factor we're going to see some innovative uses of it. i.e. perceptual computing