Probably, except if the middle management is, again, doing the bad job, here.
In any way, he should have taken responsability for it in the name of the company, which he didn't.
Probably, except if the middle management is, again, doing the bad job, here.The decision to juice those to the max must have been made at the top via demand to get highest freq possible, somebody like Gelsinger must have known what the risks are.
They allegedly want to fire 20%, just how many middle managers can possibly be in a company in relative terms?Probably, except if the middle management is, again, doing the bad job, here.
They allegedly want to fire 20%, just how many middle managers can possibly be in a company in relative terms?
Unlikely to be 20% that's for sure
Intel consumer GPUs are going nowhere. Curious what made you think they are?Like at this point it should be clear to all of us that fabs are only one part of the entire equation. The progression from pentium to core, or bulldozer to zen, both exemplify how its design that really drives the overall performance. Design does have to consider the nodes available yes, but ultimately from a physics standpoint, there's only so many ways to get work done and speed is something you measure. You don't assume the top value of a gauge is the actual performance for most things in life.
Intel has had a massive middle management problem for a while now, and it continues to show. The fact that 13/14th gen chips had degradation issues, and the delay in getting angstrom chips out just goes to show that PG didn't fix the core problems. I truly believe intel has good engineers, good fabs, good designers, but something else is preventing everything from mixing coherently.
I really hope the company gets it together because a world where intel chips are way slower and hotter than the competition is very sad to me. If anything we're quickly approaching an age where intel GPUs are the real gangbuster and most people will be paring them with AMD CPUs, a complete population inversion of just 15 years go. And yet another symptom of total mismanagement.
In terms of improvement per year, its the best intel has executed in a long time. Sure, everything is in question now with the new CEO, but if intel could make as much progress in CPU arch as they did in GPU arch, core ultra might have been a consumer hit.Intel consumer GPUs are going nowhere. Curious what made you think they are?
Right, but that TSMC partnership is not independent of what I said. ARM + foundries blew holes in both of Intel's moats - proprietary x86 tied to the best process - which reinforced each other. Once enough dollars flowed into foundries like TSMC via mobile, they caught up quickly on process, and because AMD could also sell x86 they could chase competitive processes. And because ARM was licensable, a thousand flowers bloomed in that space for more narrowly tailored silicon than what a monolithic architecture could cover. AMD took advantage of the funding opportunity to TSMC that those competitors brought, but that also allowed Apple to later dump Intel, and then to some degree Microsoft.They stopped being paranoid
They were comfortably ahead of global foundries (& bulldozer)
But starting jaguar, bobcat (& zen) AMD pulled ahead with TSMC partnership
20% isn't hard to hit, tbh. Particularly when you are acquiring and throwing off so many new businesses as Intel did. You build up these layers to mange the new complexity but you don't fully remove them when you cast that complexity off.They allegedly want to fire 20%, just how many middle managers can possibly be in a company in relative terms?
Unlikely to be 20% that's for sure
The reason why both AMD and Intel are losing to Apple on performance potential is not because of management or engineering, but lack of control. Apple is able to shed a shit ton of technical debt because they can force changes on the software/OS side (ensure backward compatibility through software freeing up changes in hardware), on the developers (we're killing 32 bit, get over it), and so on. FFS, they've changed ISA 3 times. AMD/Intel generally lack that ability, and you can't reorganize into solving that problem. Apple on the compatibility vs performance trade off sides with performance, while Intel/AMD side with compatibility, and that's not an easy thing for them to change.In terms of improvement per year, its the best intel has executed in a long time. Sure, everything is in question now with the new CEO, but if intel could make as much progress in CPU arch as they did in GPU arch, core ultra might have been a consumer hit.
My point is the Xe teams were able to execute despite graphics NOT being a focus for intel. The only reason they aren't executing as well in CPU is not due to problems in node but entirely due to the CPU teams being mismanaged.
Probably, except if the middle management is, again, doing the bad job, here.
In any way, he should have taken responsability for it in the name of the company, which he didn't.
good decisions except RTO
It's part of the cost cutting. It'll get rid of a few. Hope they aren't the best.good decisions except RTO
Lip-Bu Tan said:Many teams are eight or more layers deep
6+ layers of middle management?
Intel is notorious for having managers for managers managing managers. Worse yet, I’ve heard from multiple former employees that most of that middle management is very light on technical skills/experience.