Too little, too late: Intel's legacy is eroding
- Reference: 1659725533
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2022/08/05/intel_is_late_again/
- Source link:
For those that haven't been following Intel product roadmap that closely, here's a quick recap of where things stand today. The company is stuck on an aging 10nm process; its desktop CPUs are ludicrously power hungry; its dedicated GPUs aren't particularly competitive, even when their drivers do work; its upcoming processor families are hopelessly behind schedule; and it just killed off Optane, which was arguably its [1]most promising development in recent memory.
Of course, none of that is Gelsinger's fault. All of these projects were well underway long before he agreed to return to Intel early last year. Even the decision to [2]shelve Optane had more to do with Micron pulling out of the arrangement and a lack of demand than anything.
[3]
But the fact remains that these are his problems now, and they appear to be catching up with him. Making matters worse, investors are undoubtedly losing patience with the x86 giant after the company's [4]disastrous second quarter saw Intel record a $454 million net loss for the three-month period.
[5]
[6]
In response to the dismal earnings and even more pessimistic outlook, Gelsinger offered this statement: "This quarter's results were below the standards we have set for the company and our shareholders," he said. "We must and will do better."
But how does a company like Intel do better when it faces declining demand across nearly every business unit and the strongest competition from rival chip giants in more than a decade?
[7]
Perhaps the more important question for Gelsinger is how do you instill confidence in a corporation that can't ship a product on time to save its life?
Intel is falling behind
Intel is a massive organization filled with brilliant scientists, electrical engineers, and software developers. And yet, despite all of this talent, the company is falling behind rival AMD and faces a mounting threat from Arm processor competitors, which have gained a [8]foothold in the lucrative cloud segment in recent years.
Intel's Sapphire Rapids Xeon Scalable processors are without a doubt its most ambitious chips ever. In a single generation, Intel committed to not only delivering DDR5, PCIe 5.0, and CXL to the datacenter market, but that it would employ a multi-die chiplet architecture that would close the core-count gap with AMD.
Based on the performance we've seen from Ice Lake, the chip would have been a formidable challenger to AMD's Milan-X had it shipped on time.
However, it appears that trying to perfect what took AMD years to get right wasn't as easy as Intel thought. And beginning in mid 2021, the company began [9]pushing the launch back first to Q1 2022, then to 1H 2022, then to 2H. And this week, it was revealed in NDAed documents [10]obtained by Igor's Lab that the chip may not be ready until Q1 2023.
[11]
What's more, the documents indicate that Intel has struggled to make the thing work, with the yet-to-ship chip said to be on its 12th stepping – twelfth – something I'm assured is rather atypical for a business at Intel's level. That means the server processor has gone through about a dozen revisions already, from A0 to E5, and still hasn't launched.
Given what's at stake, it's understandable why Intel would go to such lengths to make it work right.
However, it's hard to ignore Sapphire Rapid's absence when companies like AMD have been pushing ahead unabated. The House of Zen has enjoyed bumper Epyc server processor sales amid the absence of Sapphire Rapids, and is slated to [12]release its Ryzen 7000-series desktop, fourth-gen Epyc datacenter CPUs, and RDNA-3 GPUs this year.
If the reports of Sapphire Rapids latest delays are true, that's going to create an even more unfavorable comparison, especially among customers that have put off their server refreshes in anticipation of DDR5 and PCIe 5.0-compatible systems.
But it's not just Sapphire Rapids that Intel appears to be struggling with. A recent TrendForce report [13]indicates the GPU tile destined for its upcoming Meteor Lake CPUs may suffer more delays.
[14]Intel's first discrete GPUs won't be a home run
[15]AMD boasts of record sales, says 5nm Zen 4 Ryzen 7000 coming this quarter
[16]Ampere: Cloud biz buy-ins prove our Arm server CPUs are the real deal
[17]Why Intel killed its Optane memory business
The firm reports that the GPU tile has already been pushed back due to "process and design verification issues," but the reasons for the latest delay remain unknown.
Speaking of long delayed products that have only recently begun shipping, Intel's Arc dedicated GPUs recently became a point of controversy over the chipmaker's insistence on shipping them with unfinished and [18]borderline non-functional software and drivers.
It doesn't help that the cards face much the same fate as Sapphire Rapids from a competitive standpoint, with gaming stalwarts AMD and Nvidia expected to release their latest generation graphics cards this fall, and Intel is entering with a first-gen product.
Again, Intel is faced with a rather unfavorable comparison. Benchmarks [19]indicate middling performance, putting them on par with now two-year-old low-to-mid-tier cards from Nvidia and AMD. This isn't surprising — or even all that damning — for Intel's first meaningful attempt to break into the GPU market. And we know that plenty of players don't need the latest and greatest silicon to enjoy their games; low and mid tier is within their budget and will keep them happy. But it arguably underscores Intel's failure to execute.
Had its Arc GPUs shipped even a year ago, amid the worst of the chip shortage and booming crypto-mining craze, the comparison would have been much different. All Intel would have needed to do then was have a reasonably priced, lower-end GPU from its factories that people could actually buy. But Intel, as usual, missed its moment.
Intel 4 can't afford another delay
Intel's GPUs have at least one advantage over the rest of its lineup. Intel only has to worry about designing the chips and writing the software; the actual manufacturing is in TSMC's hands.
That's not the case for the rest of its product lineup, which is stuck on a 10nm process that's looking more and more dated by the quarter, and Intel's cheeky move to rebrand the process as Intel 7 isn't fooling anyone.
Gelsinger's [20]ascension to CEO can be attributed in large part to Intel's failure to bring a working 7nm process — now dubbed Intel 4 — to market on time. And in the 1.5 year since taking over, Gelsinger has managed to shift the conversation away from its long-delay process.
Intel can claim up and down that Intel 4 is on track to ship in 2023 with Meteor Lake, but the company's track record suggests that's wishful thinking.
Gelsinger hasn't made things any easier for himself in this regard. Opening Intel's fabs to contract manufacturing was a bold move, but who is going to buy your chips if your process tech never arrives on time? If Intel wants to steal share from TSMC for leading edge chip manufacturing, it needs a competitive process. As it stands, it doesn't look like it has one.
Intel must break the pattern
To put it bluntly, Intel has managed to squander its lead over rivals and its massive reserves of talent on over-ambitious projects that have time and again arrived late to the party.
And yet, this is a company that thinks it's worthy of the lion's share of the $52 billion in chip subsidies [21]passed by congress last month.
If Intel is to succeed, it must break this pattern of delivering too little too late, and that means developing competitive silicon on time for a change, even if it means forgoing features of debatable value or relevance. ®
Get our [22]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2022/08/01/optane_intel_cancellation/
[2] https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/29/intel_optane_memory_dead/
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/systems&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2Yu2TA1zD-6dkP@N84DcHjQAAAE0&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[4] https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/29/intel_q2_earnings/
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/systems&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Yu2TA1zD-6dkP@N84DcHjQAAAE0&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/systems&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Yu2TA1zD-6dkP@N84DcHjQAAAE0&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/systems&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44Yu2TA1zD-6dkP@N84DcHjQAAAE0&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/04/ampere_arm_cloud/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/08/intel_sapphire_rapids_delay/
[10] https://www.igorslab.de/en/never-ending-story-intels-sapphire-rapids-may-come-in-12-stepping-scheduled-shipping-a-growing-failure-list-and-possible-availability-in-2023/
[11] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_onprem/systems&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33Yu2TA1zD-6dkP@N84DcHjQAAAE0&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2022/08/03/amd_q2_results/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2022/08/03/amd_q2_results/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/18/intel_arc_gpu_comparison/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2022/08/03/amd_q2_results/
[16] https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/04/ampere_arm_cloud/
[17] https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/29/intel_optane_memory_dead/
[18] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjYSeT-T5uk
[19] https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/18/intel_arc_gpu_comparison/
[20] https://www.theregister.com/2021/02/17/pat_gelsinger_first_day_intel/
[21] https://www.theregister.com/2022/07/28/house_chips_act_passes/
[22] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Subsidies for multi-billion dollar companies ?
education, for example. Or healthcare.
Oh these things do make money, but indirectly. Educated and healthy worker will bring much more money to the Treasury than sick person with profound mental retardation induced by lack of education.
Re: Subsidies for multi-billion dollar companies ?
Agreed, but we are talking about for profit companies, There are many healthcare, educational and correctional institutions (prisons) in the US that are for profit companies. They really shouldn't be or at least be capped on how much they are allowed to take out of the system. I would rather see money go to assist those that make products vs. the last big bailout we had of companies like AIG. I would argue that the loss of Intel would be worse for the US than the loss of a company like AIG. What does "too big to fail" really mean for purely financial organizations when nearly identical products and services can be had from another that was "too smart to fail". From CBO.gov "The final net subsidy cost of TARP assistance to AIG was $15 billion." But hey, what's a few billion between friends?
Re: Subsidies for multi-billion dollar companies ?
By "at Wall Street", do you mean market capitalization, I.E. how much your entire company is worth when investors apply a multiple of what you actually have? If they value your company at a billion, you have much less than a billion in reserves and profits. Meanwhile, do you know how expensive semiconductor manufacturing plants are? Having a few million to throw at the problem won't get you there. Companies are certainly greedy and ask for and accept money they don't need or deserve, but your scale underestimates the costs of manufacturing at scale and overestimates what a billion in someone else's imagination can buy you.
"Diversity will destroy this company"
https://www.glassdoor.com/Reviews/Employee-Review-Intel-Corporation-RVW28224843.htm
"Prople getting hired and making decisions that are not qualified to make decisions"
"If you hire the right people to do the job you do not need diversity you will get a well rounded workforce"
A 300 million dollar budget for diversity and quotas implemented everywhere (I know this from a former employee). I think this started in 2015 or so, maybe this is one reason for the downfall of the company?
Re: "Diversity will destroy this company"
Conversely, there are plenty of other tech companies with robust diversity programs who are going gangbusters (Salesforce and Google leap immediately to mind). Maybe the cranky old white dudes should quit their bitching about having to work next to people not entirely like themselves and get back to work.
Or maybe something entirely else is at fault.
Re: "Diversity will destroy this company"
Yes the reason that Intel, headed by a white Ivy league MBA, is getting trounced by AMD, headed by a Taiwanese semiconductor PhD women, is because of woke culture
Re: "Diversity will destroy this company"
Show me a company on Glassdoor without some near-verbatim version of that criticism in the comments and I'll show you a company where nobody but HR are writing the reviews on pain of termination
It is hilarious
How lately anytime any business in the US hits even the slightest speedbump, the Trumpsters will say it is because they are "too woke". If Intel's profits are down "too woke". If a Marvel movie fails to earn $1 billion "too woke". Lather, rinse and repeat.
Fox News spoon feeds them the latest white man outrage and they parrot it all over the internet like a bird vomiting lunch for its hatchlings. A couple years ago everything was BLM or Antifa's fault, but they need to keep the outrage fresh so they can have a ready supply of IQ 45 stooges willing to commit election fraud in Trump's name by being a fake elector, or attempt to storm the US capital and hang the Vice President.
I wonder what the summer 2024 outrage will be, any bets?
Participation trophy
I think we should stop benchmarking Intel (and other products) and instead giving them participation trophies.
What if someone says that Intel CPU performs worse than AMD? They should be more inclusive and that not every CPU is built to perform and some CPUs are born disabled.
What if someone says that Intel CPU consumes too much energy? Well. First of all we should think of CPU positivity. Some CPUs are bigger and need more energy than others and we shouldn't engage in TDP shaming.
So what's the solution? Intel needs more subsidies to discover its true self. Maybe it is not a company that makes CPUs after all but it has been pressurised by the society to be that way and they are clearly unhappy! Maybe Intel always wanted to build wooden boats or craft güiros?
Re: Participation trophy
Intel just needs to regain a monopoly in server class chips ( CPUs and support chips) so it can threaten any PC makers if they use any other chips.
And we need to pivot back to a world where there is no cloud and we rely in in-house Xeon servers from IBM/Dell
Re: Participation trophy
I still have the review of Intel 11thGen chips in the ear... "Waste of Sand." I see the difference every day. My company machine is Intel 11870 (or so), which can be quite fast for about 10 seconds. After that it is only loud. As in LOUD. Most of the other tech here is AMD Ryzen 3000 or 5000. It is usually faster or way, waaay faster, and this sustainably without making much noise. A bit frustrating for even slightly compute-heavy tasks.
So called lead...
"Intel has managed to squander its lead over rivals and its massive reserves of talent on over-ambitious projects that have time and again arrived late to the party"
How come the i7-7500u launched Q3'16 is 2 cores 4 threads, TDP 15W, when the i5-8250u launched Q3'17 is 4 cores 8 threads, TDP 15W?
How come the press has not loudly applauded such a leap forward in a such short period of time?
Re: So called lead...
These are very much the same CPUs...
Re: So called lead...
No they are not. The i5 is better than the i7. They are comparable in single thread ratings but "obviously" the i5 is 2 times better than the i7 in multi threads rating.
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-7500U+%40+2.70GHz&id=2863
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i5-8250U+%40+1.60GHz&id=3042
This is an obvious example to show that Intel has been twiddling its thumbs for years profiting from the cash cow.
It's not over 'til the fat lady sings.
This is the sort of article usually written about Premier League football managers who're struggling in an attempt to get them sacked. It's easy to be an armchair critic...
The thing is : the analysis in this piece is absolutely correct. So the question is, what do you do when nobody wants what you've got to offer anymore? And the answer is : not have the hubris to continue regardless.
To be fair, I think Gelsinger absolutely understands that, and has made some fairly radical decisions:
- The tilt to fabbing, and to fabbing for any ISA is a smart move, especially since not every chip has to be produced at the smallest node. He absolutely knows that the way geopolitics looks at this moment : the US government is never going to give up on an American Tech giant.
- Helping companies with getting their designs to fruition seems to be a good way to use the talent at Intel too. And
- Starting to design using RISC-V, especially, is nothing short of revolutionary, but offers Intel the potential to take the battle right back to Arm, and give them a foothold in emerging markets in particular.
Re: It's not over 'til the fat lady sings.
Trouble is that will anyone trust Intel to fab anything?
Given that they compete in so many semiconductor areas, not just CPUs, nobody is going to be happy with Intel's engineers looking over their designs
Re: It's not over 'til the fat lady sings.
Impossible to say definitively, but
a) as I understand it, Intel's design and the fabbing units are completely separate entities and
b) Intel would face punitive costs if they were found guilty of infringing anyone else's intellectual property, not to mention the damage it would do to their reputation : they simply couldn't afford to do it.
I'd guess that, given the current chip shortage, companies would be pleased that there was a way to get chips produced.
I believe there are 2 or 3 RISC-V design companies currently working with Intel to get their designs fabbed.
Subsidies for multi-billion dollar companies ?
Honestly, I would think that, if your company has passed the billion dollar mark at Wall Street, you shouldn't be taking handouts any more.
You're a big boy now, you can manage on your own.
The Government needs to keep its funds for, oh, say, education, for example. Or healthcare.
Things that don't make money, but are sorely needed.