Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

Lose lips sink ships, Intel real strategy revealed.

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-our-goal-is-to-become-second-largest-foundry-by-2030

It’s pretty clear what the future of the company is with Randhir boasting.

Intel will be split in two, Foundry which realizes all of the x86 sales as it’s one revenue. That will easily make it number 2. That is good and bad, TMG can’t compete in scale, cost or technology and will be just like every other American semiconductor fab; IBM, AMD-GF, Motorola etc.

by
| 4321 views | | 9 replies (last November 7, 2022) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1jz65zyb

9 replies (most recent on top)

Foundry is a joke dream.

Intel can’t compete against TSMC at any node competitively even with government handouts.

Lots of boasting about being a leader and five nodes in four years. If you got a plan just execute, when you got nothing you talk a lot and boy Pat talks a lot, hasn’t reliever one thing but a plummet stock, contracting revenues and margins.

Like Apple, AMD and Nvidia will not push TSMC. TSMC ain’t a butch of arrogant and insular folks like LTD. Why is Intel any smarter or better? Oh yes I forgot the wonderful 10nm and 7nm delivered on time.

So fantasy of future technology leadership predicted on past track record and failure assumption of their competition. 2nd Eve if they execute what’s the business model. Sell at a loss, Intel can’t possible compete on scale or flexibility or ecosystem with the Foundry.

Talk of aspirations is cheap, why not build the fabs, delivery the technology and ship real revenue before you talk! I remember once a jacket that said “Just the Results”. Intel hasn’t shown anything but failure and layoffs in a decade

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1pkz+1jz65zyb

Agreed

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ibx+1jz65zyb

Intel has a track record going public saying they will be bold and aggressive and go into this new market or that. It is arrogance and hubris of the worst kind. What not execute quietly and delight customers?

Why would you announce to strongly entrenched competitors that you will enter the markets they are in? You warn them. You then embarrass yourself when you fail.

When Intel said they would enter discrete graphics, Nvidia CEO say, 'we will open a can of Whoop A-s' on Intel. And they have.

Now we say foundry business. TSMC Chairman said Pat is 'discourteous' after Pat made bad comments about Taiwan location for manufacturing. Why poke a bear in the eye with a sharp stick?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ziy+1jz65zyb

first they pass CHIPs act to give huge tax credits to Intel to build manufacturing in US. Then a month later it was the Inflation Reduction Act (lmfao)... In which companies are required to pay a minimum of 15% tax... (of which Intel only did 2 of last 5 years).

This kind of policy isn't sound. one hand giveth and the other taketh away... free market has lots of issues but government policy like this doesn't pass the red face test.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @tnh+1jz65zyb

IDM 2.0 is a cr-p shoot

  1. Intel process capacity is latest nodes. You want to be in foundry business you support old nodes.
  2. Intel cost is prohibitive. It works if you have high margin processors but when margin goes to zero. It breaks.
  3. Intel design and tools flow is fragile and narrow compared to TSMC ecosystem. Intel will have extreme difficulty trying to manage many customers with many SKUs
  4. Intel does o.k. with low SKU count. What happens when you get high SKU count across 8" and 12" multiple nodes?

Yes, Intel could spin out the fab but why? It doesn't unlock any shareholder value. Maybe it convinces outside customers to use it, but you still have to fix 1-4 above. Intel can raise capital so, spinning it out doesn't help that. Even if Intel needed more capital to expand manufacturing no investor of sound mind will fund the venture since there are no customers (besides Intel itself).

Intel Tick Tock model was to change the processor core OR the process node with each generation but not both. That was simple and during that time Intel execution was (mostly) on time. However, you you try to change your manufacturing model as the same time you are trying to add 4 nodes in 5 years to catch up, you are taking on the riskiest strategy ever attempted.

Yes, Intel could become a DoD US fab. But that relies on geopolitical disruption as the driver. I'd hate to build a strategy based on the assumption US is going to become isolationist country.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @jop+1jz65zyb

This shouldn’t even be speculation. CEO tries to say no with a straight face, but the wheels are already in motion.

Relevant case study, AMD and GF!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @zdo+1jz65zyb

Talk is cheap.
Let’s see the design wins before talking big.

We all know Intel’s recent track record and poor management.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @lco+1jz65zyb

Absurd interpretation! When company currently in second position only has 16%, Intel needs to get only to 18-20% to get to second place. No way this will Include Intel business. Unless TSMC grows 4x.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qvv+1jz65zyb

If you ain’t first, you’re last. intel will always be last lol

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cqf+1jz65zyb

Post a reply

: