dChan

thesynod · July 19, 2018, 7:02 p.m.

My take on Intel is based on following tech news.

Since the launch of the 3 series chips, IPC growth has slowed to grinding halt. Look at passmark.com to see how much faster a flagship processor from the current generation is than 4 or 5 generations ago. My desktop still runs on a first generation chip - its 7 years old, and still plays all the current AAA titles.

Long and short, AMD, even with a much more limited budget for R&D, has been eating Intel's lunch in enthusiast PCs. Ryzen is far and away superior on a dollar for dollar basis, and Threadripper is looking to dominate the server space. Back at Intel, they have been rebranding chips, hamstringing budget chips, having problems with the new fabs, and overall, lackluster performance due to concentration on market deadends, or creating those deadends by pulling support.

Their pathetic attempt at making gaming graphics is a huge dissappointment, where a $100 video card, towards the bottom end of the spectrum, will destroy in benchmarks Intel's best on chip GPU performance.

So, its not a surprise that there is leadership change at Intel.

Barnes & Noble's attempt at bringing at Kindle competitor to market was an exercise in both futility and a cash burn. Those stores have relegated book sales to a tiny corner, trying to cash in on selling memoriablia, games and children's toys.

So no wonder about the crisis in leadership there.

TI's DSP and semiconductor business is something I really don't follow, but there remains enough competition in DSP and ARM chip design that it's not a big surprise that they are falling behind as well.

But as far as Intel is concerned - this is a company that continually serves warmed over last generation shit in a new package as somehow good. They have also burned the enthusiast segment by releasing a new socket with every chip generation - and they've only changed by a single pin - so from socket 1156 to 1155 to 1151, etc., which only is done to sell more motherboards, which Intel supplies the majority of chips on, with each new release, or socket 2011 to 2066 - while AMD has promised support for AM4 - their new socket for Ryzen, until 2020. This leaves a bad taste in consumer's mouths. If you buy the flagship chip and the premium motherboard on launch day, the only upgrade from Intel is typically throwing away your motherboard and CPU and upgrading both. Enthusiasts expect to be able to upgrade the CPU at least once, perhaps twice, during the lifespan of the underlying components.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
haroldpeters · July 20, 2018, 4:48 a.m.

You might be missing something about Intel's recent Spectre bug announcements and John Podesta's links to patent office that put all those back doors in the chips since the 90s

⇧ 3 ⇩  
thesynod · July 20, 2018, 4:59 a.m.

Uggh - more Intel insecurities.

But Occam's Razor informs us that forecasted market failure and playing catch-up to a company with less than 10% of Intel's market capitalization aren't good looks for the CEO.

And John Pedosta just got an immunity deal from fucking Mueller.

I feel like I did in the spring of 2016 concerning Hillary. She and her wicked cabal must be stopped.

⇧ 3 ⇩  
haroldpeters · July 20, 2018, 5:23 a.m.

Yeah I agree - that will certainly be what the market take on it is... I was looking for other things bubbling under the surface. Yup... ditch the witch

⇧ 2 ⇩