[WSJ] Intel to Stop Making Modem Chips for 5G Smartphones

CHADBOGA

Golden Member
Mar 31, 2009
1,779
44
136
#2
Intel has so many failures outside their core competency, it is not funny.
 
Apr 30, 2012
943
9
91
#3
Soooo, Charlie at sa was spot on calling out Intel a looong time ago
 

NostaSeronx

Platinum Member
Sep 18, 2011
2,356
145
126
#4
I wonder if they will focus the rest of the development towards Lantiq stuff. It would be nice to get 802.11be production drafts sooner than later.
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/smart-home/connected-home/anywan-grx750-home-gateway.html
^-- be nice to get a 10nm quad-core as well.

I don't see why they should drop 5G Modems entirely, there is still the always connected laptops/tablets.
Random search quote; "The chip maker is teaming up with Microsoft, Dell, HP and Lenovo to create new PCs with 5G connectivity using Intel’s XMM 8060 5G multimode modem. The company expects the first 5G-connected PCs to be launched in the second half of 2019, which should give some time to carriers around the world to build their 5G networks."
 

ehume

Golden Member
Nov 6, 2009
1,339
11
91
#5
. . . I don't see why they should drop 5G Modems entirely, there is still the always connected laptops/tablets.
They're not. They're just not going to produce stuff for smartphones. IOT is different, somehow.

Edit to add cite: "Hours after the Apple-Qualcomm settlement was announced, surprise, surprise, Intel declared it will quit building 5G modems for smartphones. It will also "complete an assessment of the opportunities for 4G and 5G modems in PCs, internet of things devices and other data-centric devices."
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,579
1,030
136
#7
I have to wonder if this interview applies. It seems to.

Xerox Failure
I am deaf, and there is no cc on that video. Could you sum it up for me please ? (not joking)

Since I was let go from Xerox as they cleaned house at Tektronix, I am really curious, and I hope Xerox the worst.
 

gorobei

Platinum Member
Jan 7, 2007
2,948
62
106
#9
I am deaf, and there is no cc on that video. Could you sum it up for me please ? (not joking)

Since I was let go from Xerox as they cleaned house at Tektronix, I am really curious, and I hope Xerox the worst.
its just the Steve Jobs interview where he outlines how companies with monopolies(like pepsi and xerox) end up promoting marketing personnel to the decision making tiers while shutting out the technical product makers. if there is no benefit for making a better copier then the only one who can increase profits is the advertising guys. end result is management has no clue whether a product is good or bad. the parc xerox team called the executives 'toner heads'. Jobs says xerox could have owned the pc market if not for the bad.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
17,579
1,030
136
#10
Well, thanks, but that really didn;t tell me much.

Here is what I know about Xerox. Tektronix had a very successful printer line based on solid ink. Xerox could not compete, so they bought out the division of Tektronix that I worked in, and laid off most of the people, then killed the solid ink printer line. Stupid move IMO, they were great printers. (circa 2002)

If you can't beat the competition, buy them, and kill their product.

So thats why I hate Xerox. And technically I retired from there with 20 years service. But no severance package.

Also, I agree with the statement that upper management does not know anything about the product. The company that I worked for After Tektronix/Xerox was the same. Upper management are idiots, and I could prove it, including a VP that I knew very well, but at the top, stupidity reins supreme ! They got millions for loosing money and bad customer service.
 
Last edited:

ehume

Golden Member
Nov 6, 2009
1,339
11
91
#11
Think about what happened to Syracuse China, or to Lechmere. Same deal: buy the competition, kill off the product line, lay off the people. Look at what happened to Maxtor as opposed to Hitachi in HD. Teddy Roosevelt started trust-busting. Antitrust enforcement was supposed to save capitalism, but today we have generic med makers making monopoly profits by not making meds that compete, and their alleged competitors don't make meds that would compete, so the consumers pay higher prices. And now we see Intel . . . not competing. Clearly, their marketers run the company.

My late father used to say, long ago, "Engineers like work and salesmen like money. So they give engineers work and salesmen money." Things haven't changed.
 

dark zero

Platinum Member
Jun 2, 2015
2,511
8
61
#12
They should partnered with Mediatek and Spreadtrum in order to make their 5G modems competent... seems that the US-China Trade War was even more critical than expecting.

And Intel is clearly suffering the IBM destiny... but this time by their own hand and because they did not innovated in time.
 

NTMBK

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2011
8,282
247
126
#13
Wow, the diversification from the PC market is going great.
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
6,316
213
126
#14
Have to assume it's pretty much another product killed off because they can't really fix 10 nm. There was no way they would have been able to produce enough chips for Apple.

I would have thought they would have seen this coming and tried to move it to a functional node, but guess not or was too late.
 

Dayman1225

Senior member
Aug 14, 2017
868
68
96
#15
Have to assume it's pretty much another product killed off because they can't really fix 10 nm. There was no way they would have been able to produce enough chips for Apple.

I would have thought they would have seen this coming and tried to move it to a functional node, but guess not or was too late.
I don’t think you can blame every failure of Intel on 10nm... especially given rumours that XMM 8160 was to be fabbed at TSMC. I think this decision is primarily due to new management, it had one customer that was ultimately going to abandon them in the future... why continue investing into this money pit?
 
Apr 27, 2000
11,488
820
126
#17
I don’t think you can blame every failure of Intel on 10nm... especially given rumours that XMM 8160 was to be fabbed at TSMC. I think this decision is primarily due to new management, it had one customer that was ultimately going to abandon them in the future... why continue investing into this money pit?
If Charley is to be believed, it's because neither the 8060 nor 8160 ever worked. Would be interesting to know if the 8060 samples were fabbed on Intel 10nm or TSMC 7nm.

Heehee. Pity Qualcomm killed their server CPU business. That would have gotten interesting with all that extra money flowing into the coffers from Apple.

Also, what about that Apple modem team? 6 years of Qualcomm modems? Hmmmm
 

Dayman1225

Senior member
Aug 14, 2017
868
68
96
#18
Also, what about that Apple modem team? 6 years of Qualcomm modems? Hmmmm
6 year licensing agreement and a "multi year chipset agreement", not 6 years of chipset agreement
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
6,316
213
126
#19
I don’t think you can blame every failure of Intel on 10nm... especially given rumours that XMM 8160 was to be fabbed at TSMC. I think this decision is primarily due to new management, it had one customer that was ultimately going to abandon them in the future... why continue investing into this money pit?
There were rumors of fabbing at TSMC; but either way it was either on 10 nm, or it was being ported from 10 nm to TSMC and they couldn't complete it in time for Apple.
 
Nov 2, 2018
50
3
41
#20
There were rumors of fabbing at TSMC; but either way it was either on 10 nm, or it was being ported from 10 nm to TSMC and they couldn't complete it in time for Apple.
Why would Intel want to use an expensive 10nm process on modems is beyond me. It's a low margin, low power part. It could be done on 14nm just like the LTE modems they make for Apple now.

Truth is this was never a good deal for Intel, but it could be excellent for Qualcomm.
Both companies gained on stock exchanges today. Qualcomm by enormous 35% and Intel by excellent 5% (given that they "lost" a contract, not got one :)).
 

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
3,187
468
136
#21
Why would Intel want to use an expensive 10nm process on modems is beyond me. It's a low margin, low power part. It could be done on 14nm just like the LTE modems they make for Apple now.
Power. Power. Power.

In smartphones everything is low power.
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
6,316
213
126
#22
Why would Intel want to use an expensive 10nm process on modems is beyond me. It's a low margin, low power part. It could be done on 14nm just like the LTE modems they make for Apple now.
The first gen 5g modem was on Intel's 14 nm and sucked up way too much power.
 

deathBOB

Senior member
Dec 2, 2007
514
16
116
#23
6 year licensing agreement and a "multi year chipset agreement", not 6 years of chipset agreement
Good catch. I doubt anyone can build a modem without licensing Qualcomm IP.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
4,465
390
126
#24
I wonder how many years that "multi-year" chipset agreement is, because that should tell you when Apple plans to have their own baseband. They bought up plenty of patents of their own and you know that they have no problems with paying for good engineering talent.
 


ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS