Nainstalovat Steam
přihlásit se
|
jazyk
简体中文 (Zjednodušená čínština)
繁體中文 (Tradiční čínština)
日本語 (Japonština)
한국어 (Korejština)
ไทย (Thajština)
български (Bulharština)
Dansk (Dánština)
Deutsch (Němčina)
English (Angličtina)
Español-España (Evropská španělština)
Español-Latinoamérica (Latin. španělština)
Ελληνικά (Řečtina)
Français (Francouzština)
Italiano (Italština)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonéština)
Magyar (Maďarština)
Nederlands (Nizozemština)
Norsk (Norština)
Polski (Polština)
Português (Evropská portugalština)
Português-Brasil (Brazilská portugalština)
Română (Rumunština)
Русский (Ruština)
Suomi (Finština)
Svenska (Švédština)
Türkçe (Turečtina)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamština)
Українська (Ukrajinština)
Nahlásit problém s překladem
Pravidla a pokyny k diskuzím
Nahlásit tento příspěvek
I think he was dealt a bad hand. He was never going to become a Lisa Su since Intel's issues were both different, and not immediately as dire, as AMD's were.
With Intel, this goes back over a decade. Intel rested on their laurels and invested into stock buybacks at the cost of investing into their fabrication, and then it fell behind the competition. We then got quad cores forever, 14nm forever, and so on. This is no doubt a big reason they started falling behind more and more.
Intel's former dominance in the PC space (both naturally due to just having far better performance than AMD at the time, and due to anti-competitive methods that allowed them have already established so much market/mind share) did allow them coast for many years, but it's been catching up to them with AMD having consistent competition or even the advantage now. Not only did Intel's past priorities come back to bite them, but AMD had an unbelievable turnaround as well.
The issues with the 13tth/14th generation and the lackluster performance of the new generation are just icing on the cake, or the straws that broke the camels back so to speak, and not the actual/only problems.
Anything Pat would have wanted to do (especially the more recent stuff) would likely have taken years to materialize since new ideas don't show results overnight. Maybe there's a fair argument that he wasn't righting the ship fast enough or making it worse, and they didn't want to risk it, but I don't think he had much of a chance either way, and he became a fall guy. Apparently the CEO before him did a lot of damage (and maybe that, too, is a long result of things tracing back a decade ago).
Intel, at least the fabrication part, won't be allowed to fail for obvious reasons, but it will be interesting to see if they split off their fabrication. Apparently that's been an on again, off again rumor.
Does this have anything to do with Intel f-ing up with their chips?
Honestly, not much.
The board cares about shareholders and Intel share price.
If Intel was selling broken chips and having good financial results, thay would be happy. If CEO was firing thousends people to improve financial results, they would be happy.
Intel was sleeping when the revolution was going on and the world was moving personal computing to mobile devices. Do you know any smartphone running on Intel? And all IOT, cars, home devices, TVs... anything running on Intel?
I'm quite sure, when there was time to start working on this, it was the board to hold and push not to spend money on R&D and prioritize short term profits.
intel has bet everything on ragaining the fabrication crown.
it was known before the margin for error was slim it was an win high or go bust sceme..
it is now 4 years in that 7 year process and we are just in the valley of dead..basicly when funds dry up and gains of the investment are yet some way away..
sure intel could have went another route ditched its fabs and went full on in design.. but it d
cant be said if that was wiser and it did not..
to now kick out your ceo and alter course is insanity.. the low gains and losses were perfectly expected in the 7 year plan back to fabrucation crown..
short sighted stockholders kill of intel by this firing.
if they wanted another course they should have done so 4 years ago.. but now the course is set.. and to alter now is insanity..
this means that instead of intel comingback in 2028.. the short sighted board just doomed intel completely.
I had intended to buy a new PC this year, but now all plans are off. I am still waiting to see if intel manage to sort out their train-wreck of a product release. In passing, I doubt they will, or they would have already done so.
Seems that AMD and NVIDIA can pretty much charge whatever they like now, and the future of gaming is once again blighted.
Good riddance to bad rubbish. I do not know much about how the man ran the company, but Intel knew their raptor lake parts were problematic before they even went out to market, sold them anyway and just hoped nobody would notice. Customers just can't trust a leader whom lets something like that happen under his watch.
R.I.P. Andy Grove. You actually knew how to treat your customers right[www.businessinsider.com] by issuing an active recall for known faulty product.
That's the sort of leadership we need back at Intel. Not this whole penny-pinching corporate executive scumlord garbage.
he does not leave.. he is forced to resign by short sighted idiotic board members.
it was known beforehand what the plan was.. sell off everthing but the kitchen sink.. invest that all in getting back the factory crown.. ignore using new tech for profit.. do ten 1.5 cycles each in 8 months
each turning being 3 years behind conpetion to being 3 years ahead.
prepare to have 7 years of massive losses.
we are now 4 years in and at the death valley of that plan.. just as intel will start to pull ahead in factory capability.. but long before payout of 7 years of investing will be there..
(death valley basicly is the moment in development when funds are reaching 0. but payout has barely started.. and the valley many bankrupt in)
all this was fully expected.. only an idiot would have expected payout now... this was the plan all along.. payout comes later...
all you do by pulling out now is doom amd destruction.. there are no funds for another plan (like selling the factories and fund development massively instead) anymore
so itsidiotic board members being idiotic.. it should have been the syock holdinh board that should get fired.. not the ceo..
1 produce for 7 year intels cpus at tsmc.. this is ment to reduce the financial bleeing not end it
2 sell everthing.. barebone everything except manufacturing R&A.
-new processes are onlyused to make a small batch of a single product to prove concept.. work on new process starts imediatly.
by puroselt not earning back the money from r&a you can r&a at rocketspeef and turn in 7 years a 3 years behind tsmc in a 3 year lead.
by having the best factories it can than steal orders from tsmc and have better chips themselces and with good margins as once again inhouse made.
we are 4 years into that and mostly on scedule.. to fire the ceo at this point.. is idiotic.
*it didn't work out*
AMD keeps gaining market share in everything.....on a side note they are even up to 37% of the CPU's used in steaming pile's own hardware survey....but real world there is no real reason to ever buy Intel garbage again.....they are behind and cant not beat AMD without being 3 times the power draw for at best a 10% increase in limited work loads.....they are taking massive gains in servers with the EPIC CPU's as well.....also saw a up take in GPU use......
so lets ask the real question.....go you still think intel is worth buying???.....for me its a no, i can not support the company any more.....