The decline of Intel..

Dragxito@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.world – 233 points –
The Tragic decline of Intel...
arktrek.shop
68

Pretty incisive article, and I agree.

In retrospect, I think the marketing/sales/finance corporate leadership idiocy that’s intensified over the last couple decades is the single biggest contributor to my deep sense of frustration and ennui I’ve developed working as a software engineer. It just seems like pretty much fucking nobody in the engineering management sphere these days actually values robust, carefully and thoughtfully designed stuff anymore - or more accurately, if they do, the higher-ups will fire them for not churning out half-finished bullshit.

That's why I like my steam deck so much: the design is so thoughtful and adapted to its own needs, and unfortunately that's a rare sight lately (not just in technology).

Would've probably turned out different if Valve was beholden to shareholders and the never-ending hunger for a higher stock price. The push to drive "shareholder value" is one of the most destructive forces if not the most destructive force we're dealing with these days.

Yeah… I’ve been thinking about popping for one for a while now. I should probably just go for it.

Out of curiosity, is the etched AR glass on the top end model actually worth it, or is that more of a gimmick?

I bought the LCD without and later switched to oled with. Honestly. I barely notice it. Go for the cheapest oled option. That is a change you will notice, unlike the the etching.

Good tip. Thanks, friend!

Just to add on to what others have already said, you can get an anti-reflective screen protector to accomplish the same task. If you think you'll be playing in environments with a lot of light, then I'd spring for it.

You can get a screen protector that has the same effect.

Admired AMD since the first Athlon, but never made the jump for various reasons--mostly availability. Just bought my first laptop(or any computer) with an AMD chip in it last year, a ryzen7 680m. There is no discrete graphics card and the onboard GPU has comparable performance to a discrete Nvidia 1050gpu. In a 13" laptop. The AMD chip far surpassed Intel's onboard GPU performance, and Intel laptop was ~30% more from any company. Fuck right off.

Why doesn't this matter to Intel? Part of why they always held mind space and a near monopoly is their OEM computer maker deals. HP, DELL, etc. it was almost impossible to find an AMD premade desktop, laptops were out of the question.

I believe my first amd was a desktop athlon around 2000. I needed a fast machine to crunch my undergraduate thesis and that was the most cost effective.

In recent years I can't buy amd for a strong desktop, went with xps and there's no options. Linux is a requirement for me, so it narrowed down my choices a lot. As you'd expect, it's a horrible battery life compounded by being forced to pay and not choose an NVIDIA card that also has poor drivers and power management.

x86 and it's successor amd86 instruction set is a Pandora box and a polished turd, hiding things such as micro instructions, a full blown small OS running in parallel and independent of BIOS, and other nefarious bad practices of over engineering that is at the roots of spectre and meltdown.

What I mean is I prefer AMD over Intel, but I prefer riscv over both.

1 more...
1 more...

Cheap intel stock going then

I'd be very surprised if they don't find a way to bounce back, they've done it before

Maybe. In the past they have always been able to rely on their dominance in the PC market. With consumers shifting away from this, I don't think it's so straight forward and in other emerging markets like AI they are way behind.

At least they are finally putting actual money into R&D. This article was a really good read. Will be interesting to see how and if Intels investments pay off.

Yup, they need to fund engineering. That's what AMD did, and it turns out that's a good strategy. Companies need to provide value to customers, and then marketing's job is easy.

I am also betting they will bounce back; hopefully this is indeed a good opportunity to buy the stock for cheap.

Investing in israeli companies right now is a high risk low reward move.

Intel is an American company.

If you're bothered by Israeli involvement you should avoid all the companies in that list, including AMD, as they are all invested in Israel and have Israeli teams.
Even large Chinese tech companies like Xiaomi, which has an R&D center in Israel, are invested in Israel.

Yeah and TikTok is a Singaporean company and has nothing to do with China.

There might be a reason why LTT videos of Intel tours go to israel. And why Intel is spending 25 Billion on building a chip factory in israel during the height of the israeli Genocide in Gaza.

2023-12-23 Intel will build $25 billion chip factory in Israel’s ‘largest investment ever’

The Israeli government and Intel confirmed plans to build a $25 billion chipmaking factory in the south of the country, an investment Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has described as the biggest in Israel’s history.

The American tech giant already employs 11,700 people in Israel and has invested more than $50 billion in the country over the last 50 years.

Intel now wants to expand its existing chipmaking factory at Kiryat Gat — about 16 miles northeast of Gaza — undeterred by the October 7 attacks and the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas. Reuters earlier reported the news.

“Intel has chosen to approve an unprecedented investment of $25 billion and to establish its new factory right here in Israel,” Israel’s finance minister Bezalel Smotrich wrote in a post on X on Tuesday.

Notice the praise from Netanyahu and Smotrich in there

Tiktok is owned by ByteDance, which is headquartered in China and was founded by Chinese.
Intel is headquartered in the USA and was founded by Americans.

Intel is investing in Israel for the same reason other companies like Nvidia do (who just acquired another Israeli startup last month and has 7 R&D centers in Israel). Innovation and talent.

Buying a startup and building a new factory are entirely different.

Intel is investing in israel because the board members and owners are israeli and they are ideologically motivated to support the Apartheid state.

It does not take a genius to realize that making your biggest investment ever in an active war zone where WW3 is likely to pop off is not a great plan. It would be like Russia starting a chip factory in the Donbass.

In any case the stock doesn't fall without reason. And unlike AMD with Ryzen there does not seem to be a magical comeback plan for Intel that is paying off over time. ARC has failed to deliver.

And if we wanna do semantics TikTok is not owned by China either

Nvidia is also currently building their most powerful supercomputer in Israel. And the CEO has also mentioned the Israeli startup Mellanox (which they acquired for 7 billion USD) as an important part of Nvidia's success.
He also said “Israel is home to world-leading AI researchers and developers creating applications for the next wave of AI,” as recently as the end of last year.
Considering that, their startup accelerator program with over 300 Israeli startups, and their 7 R&D centers in Israel (Intel has 4 facilities), I'd say that by your logic Nvidia is much more "pro-Israel" than Intel. And it's number 1 in the OP's article's list.

Don't see any Israelis in the board members or owners. Them and the founders all seem to be American. I did see Bangladeshi-born and Malaysian-born Americans on the board.

You're doing semantics with yourself.
I wrote that ByteDance is headquartered in China and was founded by Chinese. Nowhere did I write "owned by China".

1 more...
1 more...
1 more...
1 more...
1 more...
1 more...
1 more...

Intel GPUs are still ahead in some ways. They need to work on getting Intel GPUs in datacenters

I also like that they are working on creating a more open AI hardware platform

Maybe in some niche performance matrices. However they still are more expensive for the same performance. AMD is cheaper and same in terms of power.

While I used AMD since fx bulldozer and currently using laptop with Ryzen 7 5700u and really enjoying it, downfall of intel saddens me because they keeping the GPUs prices down, i mean, would AMD and Nvidia offer 16gb GPUs in 300$ price range if intel wouldn't bring a770 16gb for 300$ on the table first, p.s AMD always deserved first place and still deserves it now, while intel is good as catching up player which keeping the prices down

Either they make a phone chip ... or they continue to rot to obscurity.

Why? AMD doesn't make phone chips, yet they're dominating Intel. Likewise for NVIDIA, who is at the top of the chip maker list.

The problem isn't what market segments they're in, the problem is that they're not dominant in any of them. AMD is better at high end gaming (X3D chips especially), workstations (Threadripper), and high performance servers (Epyc), and they're even better in some cases with power efficiency. Intel is better at the low end generally, by that's not a big market, and it's shrinking (e.g. people moving to ARM). AMD has been chipping away at those, one market segment at a time.

Intel entering phones will end up the same way as them entering GPUs, they'll have to target the low end of the market to get traction, and they're going to have a lot of trouble challenging the big players. Also, x86 isn't a good fit there, so they'll also need to break into the ARM market a well.

No, what they need is to execute well in the spaces they're already in.

When AMD introduced the first Epyc, they marketed it with the slogan: "Nobody ever got fired for buying Intel. Until now."

And they lived up to the boast. The Zen architecture was just that good and they've been improving on it ever since. Meanwhile the technology everyone assumed Intel had stored up their sleeve turned out to be underwhelming. It's almost as bad as IA-64 vs. AMD64 and at least Intel managed to recover from that one fairly quickly.

They really need to come to with another Core if they want to stay relevant.

Actually, AMD do make phone chips. That is, they design the Exynos GPUs, which are inside some Samsung devices

Lol .... AMD dominates ? They have half the revenue .

Yes, and 5 years ago, they had very little of it. I'm talking about the trajectory, and AMD seems to be getting the lion's share of new sales.

I hope for the best for AMD ... they make great products... I own several AMD machines.

But ARM and the trust built around it ... continues to eat their market .... I see Intel as having more of a fighting chance.

IF THEY RESTRUCTURE ... or whatever the fuck their strategy is.

I don't really see ARM as having an inherent advantage. The main reason Apple's ARM chips are eating x86's lunch is because Apple has purchased a lot of capacity on the next generation nodes (e.g. 3nm), while x86 chips tend to ship on older nodes (e.g. 5nm). Even so, AMD's cores aren't really that far behind Apple's, so I think the node advantage is the main indicator here.

That said, the main advantage ARM has is that it's relatively easy to license it to make your own chips and not involve one of the bigger CPU manufacturers. Apple has their own, Amazon has theirs, and the various phone manufacturers have their own as well. I don't think Intel would have a decisive advantage there, since companies tend to go with ARM to save on costs, and I don't think Intel wants to be in another price war.

That's why I think Intel should leverage what they're good at. Make better x86 chips, using external fabs if necessary. Intel should have an inherent advantage in power and performance since they use monolithic designs, but those designs cost more than AMD's chiplet design. Intel should be the premium brand here, with AMD trailing behind, but their fab limitations are causing them to trail behind and jack up clock speeds (and thus kill their power efficiency) to stay competitive.

In short, I really don't think ARM is the right move right now, unless it's selling capacity at their fabs. What they need is a really compelling product, and they haven't really delivered one recently...

It's not just node, it's also the design. If I remember properly, ARM has constant instruction length which helps a lot with caching. Anyway, Apple's M CPUs are still way better when it comes to perf/power ratio.

Yes, it's certainly more complicated than that, but the lithography is a huge part since they can cram more transistors into a smaller area, which is critical for power savings.

I highly doubt instruction decoding is a significant factor, but I'd love to be proven wrong. If you know of a good writeup about it, I'd love to read it.

Here, I've found an article. M CPUs are also much more integrated, like a SoC, which gives them further performance/power advantages sacrificing extensibility.

Lol

The intel atom had a 4w tdp ... a snapdragon 855 has 5 w tdp ....

Intel is out of the smartphone market because Google built and optimized...( not as much as Apple ) ... android for the arm shit.

This fucked everyone and helped android... since now we are dependent on the chip vendors . Android can't be replaced on the damned things ... and every 3 years you ha e to buy another piece of crap.

They used to, but they weren't very good.

Lol ... If they don't manage to make a decent one ... they're done.

That being said I would love an "not so good " x86 smartphone with usb video out and desktop mode.

But clearly that ain't going to happen... all the ARM shit must be sold .

The reason for a lack of “not so good” x86 smartphone chips isn’t some desire to sell “all the ARM shit”. Device manufacturers have to pay to license the ARM instruction set, if there was a viable alternative they would be using it.

The issue is power consumption. Look at the battery life difference between the Intel and Apple Silicon ARM MacBooks. Look at the battery life difference between an x86 and ARM Windows laptop. x86 chips run too hot and need too much power to be viable in a smartphone.

What purpose would an x86 smartphone serve anyway? Also bro you gotta chill on the ellipses.

11 more...
11 more...
11 more...
11 more...

Don't you mean relative decline?

A decline is ALWAYS relative to something, otherwise it wouldn't make sense. So what is it really that you mean?

Intel used to be the undisputed leader both on CPU design and production process. Those positions are both lost, Intel also always used to have huge profits, but has had deficits lately, that used to be absolutely unheard of. They have lost both their economic and technological lead and they have lost marketshare, So how is that not a decline by every measure?

Actually no. If I am standing still and people move past me, I'm not moving backwards.

Your analogy is very incomplete. No one is saying that Intel's products or technology is "moving backwards", but rather that their market share and performance as a company are declining.

Take your person "standing still" and imagine they were previously in the lead during a marathon and suddenly stopped before the finish line. They're not moving backwards, but their position in the race is dropping from first, to second, to third, and they will eventually be last if they don't start moving again.

I tried to always use AMD, 386SX33, 486DX4/100, Duron 1000, Athlon XP 2200, then went a laptop life with Intel, but since COVID/WFH I went back to AMD, I have a 5600H in a miniPC

That has pretty much nothing to do with Intel's decline though. Losing the enthusiast market to AMD was a small blow, the bigger blow was losing a lot of server market to AMD. And now AMD is starting to dominate in pretty much every CPU market there is, outside of the very low power devices where ARM is dominant and expanding.