Skye Jacobs

Posts: 248   +7
Staff
Recap: Much ink has been spilled about Pat Gelsinger's missteps at Intel's helm. A new Reuters investigation uncovers some previously unreported details about his tenure, including how he botched a generous discount TSMC had given the US tech giant.

When Pat Gelsinger took the helm as Intel's CEO in February 2021, hopes were high for a revival of the company. However, three years into his tenure, Intel faces significant challenges and setbacks that have raised questions about its future and Gelsinger's leadership.

One of the earliest – and perhaps most significant – blunders by Gelsinger was his mishandling of Intel's relationship with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), according to an investigation by Reuters in which the news service interviewed about four dozen current and former Intel employees and executives.

Gelsinger's return to Intel, where he had spent 30 years earlier in his career, was initially met with enthusiasm. Investors cheered his appointment, and employees celebrated having a technologist back in charge. However, the optimism was short-lived as Gelsinger made several missteps that would impact Intel's relationships and business prospects, starting with TSMC.

According to sources, despite receiving deep discounts from TSMC for chip production, Gelsinger made public statements that offended the Taiwanese company. "You don't want all of your eggs in the basket of a Taiwan fab," Gelsinger said in May 2021, referring to Taiwan's geopolitical situation. He later said, "Taiwan is not a stable place," at a tech conference in December of that year where he encouraged chip manufacturers to remain in the US.

These comments led to TSMC revoking the generous terms it gave Intel – about 40 percent off the $23,000, 3-nanometer wafers on which TSMC would print chips for Intel – affecting Intel's profit margins.

Gelsinger's vision for Intel included transforming the company into a major player in the foundry business, competing directly with TSMC. He announced plans to invest billions in new factories and develop advanced manufacturing processes.

However, these ambitious plans have faced numerous obstacles. Intel's efforts to regain manufacturing leadership with its 18A chip-production process have encountered delays and technical problems. Some potential customers have been hesitant to adopt the new technology.

Intel told Reuters its 18A fabrication technologies are yielding good-quality chips and that it "expects to return to process leadership in 2025" with their formal launch.

Gelsinger's optimistic projections for AI-chip deals also came under scrutiny. While he publicly announced a pipeline of opportunities worth over $1 billion, internal forecasts were significantly lower, Reuters said.

"Our pipeline of opportunities through 2024 is rapidly increasing and is now over $1 billion and continuing to expand with Gaudi driving the lion's share," Gelsinger told analysts in July 2023. But sources familiar with the matter told Reuters that Intel did not have the necessary supply secured from TSMC to meet this target at the time of the announcement.

Intel's worsening outlook was also frightening off some clients. Gelsinger oversaw a deal to build custom chips for Alphabet's growing fleet of Waymo self-driving taxis, said three people familiar with the previously unreported plans. Gelsinger reportedly met with CEO Sundar Pichai in person to discuss the deal.

But in 2022, the company canceled the Waymo deal, two of the people said, and paid a fee to Alphabet after it threatened legal action.

Indeed, Intel's financial performance has suffered during Gelsinger's tenure. The company's revenue declined to $54 billion in 2023, a nearly one-third decrease from when Gelsinger took over. Analysts expect Intel to post its first annual net loss since 1986 this year.

The company's stock price has also taken a hit and is down 66 percent from its peak during Gelsinger's early months as CEO.

Meanwhile, Team Blue's problems were stacking up. It faced stiff competition in key markets. AMD has gained market share in the data center chip segment, while companies like Amazon and Google have increasingly designed their silicon in-house.

The rise of artificial intelligence has been another challenge. Nvidia's graphics processing units have become the preferred choice for AI applications, leaving Intel struggling to establish itself in this rapidly growing market.

In response, Intel announced plans to restructure and cut more than 15,000 jobs. The company has also implemented cost-saving measures, including salary cuts for mid-level workers and restrictions on promotions and bonuses. Gelsinger took a salary cut as well, but his total compensation, including stock awards, rose to $16.9 million in 2023 from $11.6 million the previous year.

Despite the challenges, Gelsinger remains optimistic about Intel's future. "Pat is leading one of the largest, boldest and most consequential corporate turnarounds in American business history. 3.5 years into the journey, we have made immense progress – and we're going to finish the job," the company said in a statement.

Gelsinger expressed confidence in the turnaround plan, telling Reuters in August, "I'm very confident that we're going to pull it off. Three years in, yeah. This one's going to happen, baby."

However, industry analysts remain skeptical. "If you care about performance today, tomorrow, next year, over the next couple of years, you are not making that bet," said Goldman Sachs analyst Toshiya Hari, referring to customers' reluctance to switch from TSMC to Intel for chip manufacturing.

Permalink to story:

 
They need to split up the company ASAP. Chip design and fabs should not be the same company. AMD learned this many years ago.

Also fabs needs to open up for customers. Tons of customers don't need the best node possible.

We might see Intel and Samsung work together here.
 
They need to split up the company ASAP. Chip design and fabs should not be the same company. AMD learned this many years ago.

Also fabs needs to open up for customers. Tons of customers don't need the best node possible.

We might see Intel and Samsung work together here.
AMD also showed, the hard way, that depending on external fabs can be disastrous. Does nobody else remember Bulldozer? Owning their own fabs allowed Intel to dominate, both on the market and at the bank, for 30+ years. Even now their per chip cost is significantly lower than AMDs since there is no middle man taking a sizeable cut.

that's before adding in restrictions. There is only so much TSMC available. AMD knows this, because their mobile lines and GPUs are hamstrung by it. Intel dominates in mobile, in no small part, because they can supply the tens of millions of chips necessary. AMD cant.

What intel really needs is to utterly gut their worthless boated middle management, and the leadership, and install some younger, more driven, engineers. the bloat at Intel is absolutely insane, and their corporate culture is one that drives away innovation. Fab or not, that is a recipe for disaster.
 
AMD also showed, the hard way, that depending on external fabs can be disastrous. Does nobody else remember Bulldozer? Owning their own fabs allowed Intel to dominate, both on the market and at the bank, for 30+ years. Even now their per chip cost is significantly lower than AMDs since there is no middle man taking a sizeable cut.

that's before adding in restrictions. There is only so much TSMC available. AMD knows this, because their mobile lines and GPUs are hamstrung by it. Intel dominates in mobile, in no small part, because they can supply the tens of millions of chips necessary. AMD cant.

What intel really needs is to utterly gut their worthless boated middle management, and the leadership, and install some younger, more driven, engineers. the bloat at Intel is absolutely insane, and their corporate culture is one that drives away innovation. Fab or not, that is a recipe for disaster.

Yes GlobalFoundries was crap back then, and still is.

First with Ryzen 3000 series, when AMD left GlobalFoundries behind, Ryzen became good.

Ryzen 1000 and 2000 was not a huge threat to Intel.

Without TSMC, AMD would not be where they are today. TSMC is also the reason we have Ryzen 3D too.
 
Yes GlobalFoundries was crap back then, and still is.
GF was not always bad. They fell behind TSMC. See the danger in relying on a third party fab?
First with Ryzen 3000 series, when AMD left GlobalFoundries behind, Ryzen became good.

Ryzen 1000 and 2000 was not a huge threat to Intel.

Without TSMC, AMD would not be where they are today. TSMC is also the reason we have Ryzen 3D too.
None of this has anything to do with my point. Good job bud : )
 
GF was not always bad. They fell behind TSMC. See the danger in relying on a third party fab?

None of this has anything to do with my point. Good job bud : )
GF was terrible for the most part, 12nm GloFo was worse than Intel 14nm ever was.

Still mad because you missed the train?
 
From the man that said AMD was in Intel's rear-view mirror, I'm not surprised he made some dumb business decisions and offended TSMC to this extent.
 
that's before adding in restrictions. There is only so much TSMC available. AMD knows this, because their mobile lines and GPUs are hamstrung by it. Intel dominates in mobile, in no small part, because they can supply the tens of millions of chips necessary. AMD cant.
That's BS. Intel had more serious supply problems on around 2018 than AMD has ever had. And that affected mobile chips very badly, wait times were 6 months or even more.

Also it's pretty funny that AMD can supply large Epyc chips like there is no tomorrow but then "struggles" with much smaller mobile chips.
 
GF was terrible for the most part, 12nm GloFo was worse than Intel 14nm ever was.
You always focus on that last little part. GloFo was around a lot longer than 12nm.
Still mad because you missed the train?
Still salty people call you out? Keep making yourself look like a fool : )
That's BS. Intel had more serious supply problems on around 2018 than AMD has ever had. And that affected mobile chips very badly, wait times were 6 months or even more.
Yeah, Intel was suffering from success and shipping more in a month then AMD was shipping in a year.

Apples and potatoes.
Also it's pretty funny that AMD can supply large Epyc chips like there is no tomorrow but then "struggles" with much smaller mobile chips.
It's not really that crazy, AMD is prioritizing their mos texpensive chips because they can only have os many wafers, so the highest margins always get priority. They would be throwing money away otherwise.

But, funnily enough, Intel had that supply issue then FIXED IT. So why is AMD still struggling with supply? Oh, right, they rely on TSMC, and have to compete with other brands.
 
Yeah, Intel was suffering from success and shipping more in a month then AMD was shipping in a year.

Apples and potatoes.

It's not really that crazy, AMD is prioritizing their mos texpensive chips because they can only have os many wafers, so the highest margins always get priority. They would be throwing money away otherwise.

But, funnily enough, Intel had that supply issue then FIXED IT. So why is AMD still struggling with supply? Oh, right, they rely on TSMC, and have to compete with other brands.
Intel had supply issues because they f*cked up 10nm tech. And they had not enough other capacity. Not delivering what is promised is supply problem, no matter how big amounts.

So AMD has higher priority on desktop chips than mobile chips? There is basically no shortage on AMD desktop products.

AMD supply problems, where? Server? No. Desktop? No. Haldhelds? No. Mobile? No. Where?
 
Damn, and I thought an engineer taking the lead role was just what intel needed... Maybe that's still true, but the answer was not this specific man...
 
Intel had supply issues because they f*cked up 10nm tech. And they had not enough other capacity. Not delivering what is promised is supply problem, no matter how big amounts.
Correct. Which intel later fixed. You keep missing that part.
So AMD has higher priority on desktop chips than mobile chips? There is basically no shortage on AMD desktop products.
AMD prioritizes servers first. AMD uses this thing called CCDs, they can be used across the board of desktop use cases.

Fascinating stuff really.
AMD supply problems, where? Server? No. Desktop? No. Haldhelds? No. Mobile? No. Where?
Mobile is in short supply and long has been. The handheld chips were on backorder for months when they came out. AMD themselves have come out, repeatedly, and stated that EPYC is prioritized over mobile CPUs or GPUs. Sorry you missed it, dont worry.
Damn, and I thought an engineer taking the lead role was just what intel needed... Maybe that's still true, but the answer was not this specific man...
Pat has long been a clown. Yeah, he designed the 486. Back when dinosaurs roamed the earth.

He was senior VP back when Netburst was blowing VRMs and melting down with voltage while AMD Was eating their lunch. He was VP during the bribery incident.

Surely this man can lead intel to the future! IDK why people thought this guy was the answer.....
 
Why has Gelsinger remained as Intel CEO as long as he has, with his track record of dumb decisions?
 
Correct. Which intel later fixed. You keep missing that part.
No, I don't miss that part. Again, Intel supply problems at that time were worse than AMD has ever had. Ever. And they lasted years.
AMD prioritizes servers first. AMD uses this thing called CCDs, they can be used across the board of desktop use cases.

Fascinating stuff really.
Oh, servers first and still there are no desktop shortage. Interesting. Because if servers take all CCDs, then what is left for desktop? Nothing.
Mobile is in short supply and long has been. The handheld chips were on backorder for months when they came out. AMD themselves have come out, repeatedly, and stated that EPYC is prioritized over mobile CPUs or GPUs. Sorry you missed it, dont worry.
Source for these "supply problems", please? Backorder when something comes out basically means most products have "supply problems". It's not supply problem if it gets solved within months. Again, source for AMD mobile supply problems? Have been asking these for many times and so far basically nothing.
 
No, I don't miss that part. Again, Intel supply problems at that time were worse than AMD has ever had. Ever. And they lasted years.
They were so bad intel continued out outsell AMD at a 10:1+ ratio during that time. Hmmm....

Almost like "shortage" and "no supply" are not synonyms.
Oh, servers first and still there are no desktop shortage. Interesting. Because if servers take all CCDs, then what is left for desktop? Nothing.
Do you not understand how parts sharing works? Yes, servers get priority. They are not the only thing getting made. Since they use the same CCD, they can use any parts that do not bin to server level or any leftovers for desktop chips, which primarily is catering to us power users, as business desktop use has fallen off a cliff. So they dont need to make many to maintain supply.

The actual desirable chips, the x3ds, are currently in short supply, as is indicated by their prices jumping up. But that's just FUD, right?
Source for these "supply problems", please? Backorder when something comes out basically means most products have "supply problems". It's not supply problem if it gets solved within months. Again, source for AMD mobile supply problems? Have been asking these for many times and so far basically nothing.
Nothing I could link you would ever cure your fervor. Dont worry, AMD is making tens of millions of mobile chips, and just keeping them in warehouses, just for you : ) AMD stating they were prioritizing servers was just FUD to throw you off! There's definitely no prioritization,t he market is FLOODED with mobile AMD parts everywhere! That's why everyone has AMD laptops right?
Why has Gelsinger remained as Intel CEO as long as he has, with his track record of dumb decisions?
Because the entirety of Intel is run by dinosaur clowns. Look at some of the glassdoor reviews sometime, the people leaving describe an environment where anyone who has new ideas or wants to change things is effectively pushed out of the company.
 
AMD also showed, the hard way, that depending on external fabs can be disastrous. Does nobody else remember Bulldozer? Owning their own fabs allowed Intel to dominate, both on the market and at the bank, for 30+ years.
Bulldozer was not bad because of external fab. It was a a bad architecture,. If Bulldozer was made today on TSMC 3nm that is the latest mass produced node for high performance chips then it would not make it better than Zen 1 for example.

Intel did not always dominate during those 30+ years or have you already forgotten Pentium 4, Itanium etc?
These were bad architectures and even having their own fabs did not save them.
Yes GlobalFoundries was crap back then, and still is.

First with Ryzen 3000 series, when AMD left GlobalFoundries behind, Ryzen became good.

Ryzen 1000 and 2000 was not a huge threat to Intel.

Without TSMC, AMD would not be where they are today. TSMC is also the reason we have Ryzen 3D too.
Having been produced on a better 7nm TSMC node certainly helped Zen 2 but id say the bigger reason was the unification of two 16MB L3 caches into one 32MB cache. This massively improved gaming performance.

Zen 1 and Zen+ were not threat per se but they were surprisingly good. Especially in multi-threaded workloads where they offered double the cores at half the price compared to Intel with IPC that was Broadwell level. Intel was at Skylake at the time.

It is also a false assumption that without TSMC AMD would be nowhere. Lets look at Arrow Lake - it's made on more advanced TSMC 3nm node compared to Zen 5's TSMC 4nm and yet loses to Zen 5. in performance and power efficiency.

This above all else should prove that having a good architecture is #1. All other consideration come much later.
And I hope this proves one and for all that AMD has had good architectures since Zen 1.
Their latest Zen 5 is the first major stumble as it did not improve as much as people were expecting.
Even so they managed to beat intel this gen while using older and cheaper node from the same manufacturer.
 
Why has Gelsinger remained as Intel CEO as long as he has, with his track record of dumb decisions?

He doesn't have a track record of dumb decisions. His decisions in general were well thought out, and might still bear fruit. He's a risk taker who also knows how to hedge his bets, and I think that's what Intel needed.
 
They were so bad intel continued out outsell AMD at a 10:1+ ratio during that time. Hmmm....

Almost like "shortage" and "no supply" are not synonyms.
So if Intel has serious supply problems, they don't exist because they sell more than other company? Like wtf?

To put it another way: Intel previously had supply for certain mobile CPU. Then it suddenly has wait time like 6 months. But this mobile CPU has no shortage because Intel sells more mobile CPUs than AMD.
Do you not understand how parts sharing works? Yes, servers get priority. They are not the only thing getting made. Since they use the same CCD, they can use any parts that do not bin to server level or any leftovers for desktop chips, which primarily is catering to us power users, as business desktop use has fallen off a cliff. So they dont need to make many to maintain supply.

The actual desirable chips, the x3ds, are currently in short supply, as is indicated by their prices jumping up. But that's just FUD, right?
OK, there is no server CPU shortage, no desktop shortage. Fine. Then it should be Very easy to find info about mobile shortage?

I think AMD has NOT released Zen5 3D cache models yet. No surprise AMD wants to clear older 3D cache CPU inventory. That's normal.
Nothing I could link you would ever cure your fervor. Dont worry, AMD is making tens of millions of mobile chips, and just keeping them in warehouses, just for you : ) AMD stating they were prioritizing servers was just FUD to throw you off! There's definitely no prioritization,t he market is FLOODED with mobile AMD parts everywhere! That's why everyone has AMD laptops right?
Intel is bribing manufacturers not to use AMD.

Once again: source for AMD mobile CPU shortage, please?
 
Lol; this reads like a political smear campaign more than honesty
 
Personally, the article writes very poorly of Pat, which I am not sure if it is factual. Sure, he may be in a way “big mouth” and offended TSMC. But I feel when you are technically competitors, it’s really tough to be a a friend at the same time. TSMC will do well at your expense, which is why I think Intel’s reliance on TSMC is quite an odd relationship. Outside of that, it sounded that Pat is trying to turn around a decade of poor management decision which led to Intel’s plight right now. Each mistake or inaction from previous managements build up over time. Some claims from Pat also sound like they are trying to maintain confidence in the company, and overpromised what they ultimately could deliver. I don’t think there’s magic here to turn this semi-submerged company around in just a few years. AMD did not make a comeback for many years after their successful AMD 64. For me, I do feel that Pat’s decision to focus on their foundry business to be extremely risky. I am not for it because foundry businesses are very costly and once you fall behind, you potentially will fall behind further. Case in point GF (which gave up on cutting edge node) and Samsung.
 
I guess the real question, all squabbles about AMD/Intel aside, should be "what is TSMC doing that nobody else can?" The funny part is that AMD was doing well when working with IBM, and the nest thing you know, they're selling the thing off (I'm sure Bulldozer was probably the biggest reason). And then GF folded their hand when Abu Dhabi decided the game was too rich for their blood. As for Intel, they were having problems long before 14nm. As I recall 14 was late to the party, 10nm was just so screwed up, nobody noticed. and with no pressure from AMD, nobody cared either. And here we are, with Samsung being the latest to shoot themselves in the foot, and leave TSMC as the only one still standing.

I think Pat's finally realizing that Intel can no longer sell the sizzle, and he's going to have to come up with a process that puts out competitive chips instead of renamed nodes and clever named features and chips that get released with major drawbacks. Not sure he can pull it off, but hope he does.

The funny part is, IBM is the only one that doesn't seem to have a problem making their own chips.
 
Damn, and I thought an engineer taking the lead role was just what intel needed... Maybe that's still true, but the answer was not this specific man...

What makes good engineering sense tends to make little financial sense. There's a reason why focusing on short-term gains instead of long-term engineering sends stock prices to the moon. For a decade or two.
 
I guess the real question, all squabbles about AMD/Intel aside, should be "what is TSMC doing that nobody else can?"

Throwing literally trillions of dollars at the problem. Yay for state subsidies and all that.
 
AMD also showed, the hard way, that depending on external fabs can be disastrous. Does nobody else remember Bulldozer? Owning their own fabs allowed Intel to dominate, both on the market and at the bank, for 30+ years. Even now their per chip cost is significantly lower than AMDs since there is no middle man taking a sizeable cut.

Bulldozer was just a flat out bad design. Very low IPC, very high cache latencies, and just all around not well thought out architecture. Heck, if anything the fabs did a wonderous job, given AMD managed to get close to 5GHz on the thing despite its architectural problems.
 
Intel had supply issues because they f*cked up 10nm tech. And they had not enough other capacity. Not delivering what is promised is supply problem, no matter how big amounts.

So AMD has higher priority on desktop chips than mobile chips? There is basically no shortage on AMD desktop products.

AMD supply problems, where? Server? No. Desktop? No. Haldhelds? No. Mobile? No. Where?
Intel did not have supply issues at all. They focus alot on mobile market, as laptops is way more profitable than desktop and Intel has like 90-95% x86 laptop marketshare.

Back during COVID lockdowns, Intel delivered millions of chips and AMD struggled hard with capacity at TSMC, meaning AMD lost out on alot of sales here. Intel could deliver, AMD could not.

Also, AMD mobile is a fragmented mess.
 

Similar threads