Who will be next Intel CEO?

ksec

Senior member
Mar 5, 2010
340
1
91
#1
Am I the only one who want Pat Gelsinger back to Intel? He is 56, may as well spend the last few years of his career at Intel.

All Intel's CEO in history, has spent many years if not their entire professional life at the company and rises through ranks. All the current suggested candidate, even if they are internal, has been brought in may be just a little more then a few years.

Since Intel is now at another turning point, they will need a CEO who has the vision to see this through. Last time Andy Grove saved Intel, and bring them to their glorious era. Now it they will need another Andy Grove.
 
Last edited:
Jul 12, 2006
92,127
591
136
#2
I'd be willing to do it. I can't imagine that with my skill level (0 years electrical, computer engineering experience and education, management and leadership at any level, 0 seats on fortune 500 boards), that I wouldn't just as equally qualify for that $56 million parachute at the end of my tenure.
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
5,916
81
126
#3
I'm going to say Murthy. Seems like they need an outsider.
 

formulav8

Diamond Member
Sep 18, 2000
6,997
0
126
#4
Murthy is who most people seem to want.
 

NTMBK

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2011
8,105
75
126
#6
Jen Hsun Huang. Intel and NVidia merger, with JHH in charge of the combined entity.
 

NostaSeronx

Platinum Member
Sep 18, 2011
2,215
31
106
#7
If it is Internal, my finger would be at Dr. Mike Mayberry; https://newsroom.intel.com/editorials/tech-innovation-the-pursuit-of-moores-law/

If following the pattern of CEOs based on degrees.
Ph.D in physics & bachelor’s degree in mathematics -> Noyce
Ph.D in chemistry and physics & B.S. in chemistry -> Moore
Ph.D. in chemical engineering & B.A. in chemical engineering -> Grove
Ph.D. in materials science -> Barrett
Masters Business Admin and B.A. in economics -> Otellini
B.A. in chemistry -> Krzanich

With:
Ph.D. in physical chemistry & bachelor’s degree in chemistry and mathematics -> Mayberry

The other pattern:
chief operating officer -> Andy Grove
chief operating officer -> Craig Barrett
chief operating officer -> Paul Otellini
chief operating officer -> Brian Krzanich

Except... there is no COO?

Generally speaking CTO -> COO or COO -> CTO. So, Mayberry is in the spot of COO, if there is no discrete COO.

A bit fast regardless.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/12390/intel-appoints-new-cto-confirms-product-assurance-group

===
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/presentation/a190/5ed96e50d971e70ddfced5549537193b9153.pdf
Accordingly, Mike Mayberry, director of component research at Intel, said at the recent IMEC Technology Forum that he“has looked down the highway of conventional silicon development and reckons things become foggy beyond about the 7-nm node.” In fact, in his March 2013 presentation: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/presentation/a190/5ed96e50d971e70ddfced5549537193b9153.pdf Mike Mayberry also presents monolithic 3D on his road map.
- https://electroiq.com/2013/08/monolithic-3d-is-now-on-the-roadmap-for-2019/

https://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/intel-invests-1-5m-in-iot-chip-rd-in-ireland-2016-06/
https://www.itproportal.com/2015/09/04/intel-invests-32-7m-to-advance-quantum-computing/
Already has a culture of personality based on what I can find. CEO needs a vision, Mayberry has it.
 
Last edited:

Dayman1225

Senior member
Aug 14, 2017
785
31
96
#8
Am I the only one who want Pat Gelsinger back to Intel?
I did, but he has publicly denied the position saying he has no interest in leaving VMWare, I believe the next pick for the CEO spot will be Murthy Renduchintala, Intel's Chief Engineering Officer(CEO!)
 

ksec

Senior member
Mar 5, 2010
340
1
91
#9
I did, but he has publicly denied the position saying he has no interest in leaving VMWare, I believe the next pick for the CEO spot will be Murthy Renduchintala, Intel's Chief Engineering Officer(CEO!)
But that was long time ago. I think it was 2013 or 2014 he publicly denied it.
 
Feb 4, 2009
18,839
268
126
#11
I'd be willing to do it. I can't imagine that with my skill level (0 years electrical, computer engineering experience and education, management and leadership at any level, 0 seats on fortune 500 boards), that I wouldn't just as equally qualify for that $56 million parachute at the end of my tenure.
Hey you're a smart guy, why not?
I'll be your right hand man for short money. Bring me into meetings to yell at people.
 

Spartak

Senior member
Jul 4, 2015
269
109
86
#13
I'm more interested to know Intel's road ahead.

Otellini was one of Intel's most succesful CEO's. His eight year tenure saw intel move away from the Pentium4, develop the Pentium M into Core 2, Nehalem, Ivy Bridge, Sandy bridge, Haswell and probably into the development of Skylake.
Brian Krzanich was probably the worst CEO Intel ever had. In his five year tenure he brought the Core architecture from Skylake to...well still Skylake. The disappointing IPC improvement of Skylake and lack of any architecture improvements after, paints a picture of a CEO that all but halted R&D developement the day he took office.
This five year standstill has brought AMD and even Apple/ARM into striking distance of Skylake.

On the process node front a similar picture, 14nm was delayed by almost a year (unprecedented at the time), and he failed to transition Intel from 14 to 10nm. Meanwhile the competition is blasting past them full speed ahead.

On both fronts it seems Intel has no immediate solution at hand. The recent hire of Keller paints a picture of them hitting a performance wall with the Core architecture, and need a ground-up redesign similar to Zen. But if developement of that started with Keller's appointment it will take them at least another 3 years before they have anything to offer. leaving the gate wide open for AMD/ARM to sweep in and attack their highly profitable notebook and server markets.

There have also been rumors of Intel skipping 10nm altogether.

I'm mostly curious how a new CEO can dig them out of the hole they have found themselves in the coming two/three years. Frankly, I think (and hope) the days of Intel's monopoly are over. Their new CEO will be the one to take the hit...finding someone that knows he'll be out in three years will be hard.

I can see Swan staying around a bit longer, for bad financial results to start trickling in. Only then can a new CEO step in and clean up the house. But it needs to be someone with a clear vision, that can inspire and rally the troops.
 
Feb 25, 2004
20,965
6
106
#14
I've also thought the new CEOs job will be to deliver all the bad news we already know, take the blame for that and then resign.
 
Jul 12, 2006
92,127
591
136
#16
I've also thought the new CEOs job will be to deliver all the bad news we already know, take the blame for that and then resign.
I knew I could do this job! I'll even take a paycut: $25 million, please. I assume FM will be happy with his cut, as well.
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
5,916
81
126
#17
On both fronts it seems Intel has no immediate solution at hand. The recent hire of Keller paints a picture of them hitting a performance wall with the Core architecture, and need a ground-up redesign similar to Zen.
That's what Sapphire Rapids is rumored to be. Of course if they can't fix 10 nm, then it becomes moot.

Keller btw is said to be working on SoC integration and not on an actual CPU core.
 
Jul 12, 2006
92,127
591
136
#18
Keller btw is said to be working on SoC integration and not on an actual CPU core.
Wonder if that is true. So, top CPU maker in the world brings in the top designer in his field to not work within his wheelhouse.

Sounds brilliant.
 

NostaSeronx

Platinum Member
Sep 18, 2011
2,215
31
106
#19
Wonder if that is true. So, top CPU maker in the world brings in the top designer in his field to not work within his wheelhouse.

Sounds brilliant.
He could be making a Phone SoC for Intel. With the big cores....

---
on-topic: Still pointing at Mayberry.
 
Last edited:

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
5,916
81
126
#20
Wonder if that is true. So, top CPU maker in the world brings in the top designer in his field to not work within his wheelhouse.

Sounds brilliant.
Maybe that's what he wants to work on. The stuff banded about with EMIB/Feveros/chiplet integration does sound pretty interesting. So you can't really say that Intel has nothing in the pipeline regarding CPU improvements, although in reality it won't matter if they don't have a node to fab on.
 

Spartak

Senior member
Jul 4, 2015
269
109
86
#21
That's what Sapphire Rapids is rumored to be. Of course if they can't fix 10 nm, then it becomes moot.

Keller btw is said to be working on SoC integration and not on an actual CPU core.
Thanks for the update on Sapphire Rapids, didn't know about it yet. But it's four years from now (12th generation), a bit the time frame I expected it to be, and that's if everything goes as planned.

And now you say it, I recall reading Keller working on SoC as well. But the mobile battle has been lost, and it seems a waste to put Keller in charge of that. Intel needed a good SoC solution based on Core five years ago, not two years from now when ARM will battle for the notebook / server space.
 
Last edited:

PeterScott

Platinum Member
Jul 7, 2017
2,484
63
96
#22
Jen Hsun Huang. Intel and NVidia merger, with JHH in charge of the combined entity.
He would be good. Too Good. We would be heading back to Intel with a near monopoly again.
 

ksec

Senior member
Mar 5, 2010
340
1
91
#23
Otellini was one of Intel's most succesful CEO's. His eight year tenure saw intel move away from the Pentium4, develop the Pentium M into Core 2, Nehalem, Ivy Bridge, Sandy bridge, Haswell and probably into the development of Skylake.
Huh? That has nothing got to do with Otelliini. Pentium M was 2003. Its worked started in Barrett era. It was Pat that fight to make Pentium M, and Core, and ultimately is what saved Intel. And it just so happen Pentium M was what Apple needed for Laptop, Otellini biggest achievement was to Apple to Intel switch.

There have also been rumors of Intel skipping 10nm altogether.
Utter nonsense. 10nm is good, just yield is crap. Even if they ironed it out next year it is still competitive. Just not a generation lead they are used to, and the investment gone into 10nm is far too high to skip.

I'm mostly curious how a new CEO can dig them out of the hole they have found themselves in the coming two/three years. Frankly, I think (and hope) the days of Intel's monopoly are over. Their new CEO will be the one to take the hit...finding someone that knows he'll be out in three years will be hard.
Lisa Su took worked under immense pressure, perfect execution to get to AMD where it is at today, that is 4 years. And they don't have to worry about the manufacturing side, which the GF has been in good hands also for those 4 years. But Intel do have a few uArch in the pipeline, and they can do price war

I can see Swan staying around a bit longer, for bad financial results to start trickling in. Only then can a new CEO step in and clean up the house. But it needs to be someone with a clear vision, that can inspire and rally the troops.
If, and If Apple were not happy about Intel, and has been for some time and are now in full throttle to ARM transition. Then the next CEO likely be Swan to do damage control. And move to someone else after the news have hit. I wouldn't be surprised if Intel sees a double digit share price drop after the announcement.
 
Last edited:

Spartak

Senior member
Jul 4, 2015
269
109
86
#24
Huh? That has nothing got to do with Otelliini. Pentium M was 2003. Its worked started in Barrett era. It was Pat that fight to make Pentium M, and Core, and ultimately is what saved Intel. And it just so happen Pentium M was what Apple needed for Laptop, Otellini biggest achievement was to Apple to Intel switch.
That's not what I wrote? Notice the rather essential [develop Pentium M] into Core. Yes Pentium M was developed during Barrett, Banias probably too. But it was Otellini that made the switch from Pentium 4 to the Core Microarchitecture not just for mobile but for their entire lineup, including new branding. That takes guts and vision.
It's even likely that the development of Core started at the end of Barrett's tenure, but seeing how Otellini from the start put his full weight behind it and swayed Apple, I would not surprised if, as president (and COO) he was one of Cores main internal proponents.

Utter nonsense. 10nm is good, just yield is crap. Even if they ironed it out next year it is still competitive. Just not a generation lead they are used to, and the investment gone into 10nm is far too high to skip.
Again you read something I didnt write. The rumor isn't nonsense, its there.
It might even be true that they are debating that internally. Is it likely they will actually skip? Probably not. But that's a different claim altogether from what I wrote.
And according to people far more knowledgeable than me there are indeed fundamental problems with their 10nm approach, so saying '10nm is good' kindof betrays you don't know what you're talking about. The 'too aggressive' specifically refers to the quad multipatterning in combination with the use of cobalt.

Try reading a bit more careful next time, I don't think we disagree on any point fundamentally.
 
Last edited:

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
5,916
81
126
#25
Yeah 10 nm at this point might be unfixable.
 


ASK THE COMMUNITY