News Intel Expects Continued Market Share Loss Throughout 2023, Will Likely Exit More Businesses

Neilbob

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2014
109
121
18,770
2
I'm finding it hard to believe a single thing this guy says lately. A few things I raised an eyebrow at:

'Gelsinger remarked that while the new chips are 'better than the AMD alternatives" in power and performance and will win in some benchmarks'

In which metrics? AMD seem to be demonstrably more power efficient in large multi-threaded tasks. Even when comparing their older architectures.

'Well, when we deliver the Forest product line, we deliver power performance leadership versus all Arm alternatives, as well. So now you go to a cloud service provider, and you say, 'Well, why would I go through that butt ugly, heavy software lift to an ARM architecture versus continuing on the x86 family?'" Gelsinger said'

There have been similar claims made before. I'll believe it when I see it?

'Seventy percent of the leaders, or the leaders minus one, are new to the company or new to the role that they're in. So it's been a pretty dramatic rebuilding of the leadership team'

I'm not certain how having even more Managers and Vice Presidents will really help matters.

'Gelsinger's comments point to at least five more quarters of share losses — and perhaps more'

At least and perhaps more. Don't these two things basically mean the same thing? :p

<Sigh> Hopefully my own cynicism is blinding me to anything that could be positive in terms of competition.
 
Looks like AMD's not the only thing in the rear-view mirror, uh? Business Units are also gonna be left on the road. Sadge.

Then again, losing the "fat" could be helpful to re-focus on what Intel does best.

And as for the market share... Hm... Until AMD can figure out ML accelerators and add them into Zen, I think Intel will still have an edge. This being said, Zen5 is posed to include ML accelerators, if not Zen6. So I don't think they'll stop the bleeding. Maybe slow it down a bit more until they reach balance with AMD.

Regards.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
Then again, losing the "fat" could be helpful to re-focus on what Intel does best.
You don't want to cut too much 'fat' since you need it to immunize yourself against significant dips in any one specific market segment. Like right now, the client compute market is getting hit hard by the post-COVID sales lull while graphics is getting assaulted by supply chain over-stock thanks to the trifecta of imminent next-gen launches, the likely end of Ethereum PoS and waves of heavily discounted retired mining cards hitting the used market.
 

Jimbojan

Honorable
May 17, 2017
58
23
10,535
0
I'm finding it hard to believe a single thing this guy says lately. A few things I raised an eyebrow at:

'Gelsinger remarked that while the new chips are 'better than the AMD alternatives" in power and performance and will win in some benchmarks'

In which metrics? AMD seem to be demonstrably more power efficient in large multi-threaded tasks. Even when comparing their older architectures.

'Well, when we deliver the Forest product line, we deliver power performance leadership versus all Arm alternatives, as well. So now you go to a cloud service provider, and you say, 'Well, why would I go through that butt ugly, heavy software lift to an ARM architecture versus continuing on the x86 family?'" Gelsinger said'

There have been similar claims made before. I'll believe it when I see it?

'Seventy percent of the leaders, or the leaders minus one, are new to the company or new to the role that they're in. So it's been a pretty dramatic rebuilding of the leadership team'

I'm not certain how having even more Managers and Vice Presidents will really help matters.

'Gelsinger's comments point to at least five more quarters of share losses — and perhaps more'

At least and perhaps more. Don't these two things basically mean the same thing? :p

<Sigh> Hopefully my own cynicism is blinding me to anything that could be positive in terms of competition.
Leadership changes the business direction, like Gelsinger himself, will make a different. Actually, Intel's Meteor Lake will have better power efficiency than AMD's product; Raptor Lake is now already slightly better than AMD power efficiency with better performance.
I'm finding it hard to believe a single thing this guy says lately. A few things I raised an eyebrow at:

'Gelsinger remarked that while the new chips are 'better than the AMD alternatives" in power and performance and will win in some benchmarks'

In which metrics? AMD seem to be demonstrably more power efficient in large multi-threaded tasks. Even when comparing their older architectures.

'Well, when we deliver the Forest product line, we deliver power performance leadership versus all Arm alternatives, as well. So now you go to a cloud service provider, and you say, 'Well, why would I go through that butt ugly, heavy software lift to an ARM architecture versus continuing on the x86 family?'" Gelsinger said'

There have been similar claims made before. I'll believe it when I see it?

'Seventy percent of the leaders, or the leaders minus one, are new to the company or new to the role that they're in. So it's been a pretty dramatic rebuilding of the leadership team'

I'm not certain how having even more Managers and Vice Presidents will really help matters.

'Gelsinger's comments point to at least five more quarters of share losses — and perhaps more'

At least and perhaps more. Don't these two things basically mean the same thing? :p

<Sigh> Hopefully my own cynicism is blinding me to anything that could be positive in terms of competition.
Leadership changes the business direction, like Gelsinger himself, will make a different. Actually, Intel's Meteor Lake will have better power efficiency than AMD's product; Raptor Lake is now already slightly better than AMD power efficiency with better performance.
 
Reactions: shady28

Neilbob

Distinguished
Mar 31, 2014
109
121
18,770
2
Leadership changes the business direction, like Gelsinger himself, will make a different. Actually, Intel's Meteor Lake will have better power efficiency than AMD's product; Raptor Lake is now already slightly better than AMD power efficiency with better performance.
How do you know this, when neither Raptor nor Zen 4, let alone Meteor Lake, are released yet?

Also, we're talking servers and not consumers here.
 
Reactions: jp7189 and LuxZg

JayNor

Reputable
May 31, 2019
362
54
4,760
0
Intel taped in Sierra Forest, Intel-3 process, prior to q1 earnings call. They expected to have it back in the lab sometime this quarter.

Meteor Lake, Intel-4 process, is "now broadly sampled to customers", according to the q2 earnings call.
 

rluker5

Distinguished
Jun 23, 2014
255
117
18,860
0
AMD needs to find a solution to SQUIP.
I don't know how many companies are allowed to process their customers data on insecure processors. Google has an unofficial fix that locks cores to processes which will cost some efficiency and performance depending on the use, and the processors can be made secure by turning off SMT and becoming very close to e-cores. But really I would think the rules corporate has to follow matter more. You can promise security to your customers or not. You need a secure processor (has fixes for the flaws they have) to do that. And most businesses don't have the resources to have an IT team good enough to fix this themselves other than turning off SMT.

I don't want my bank account info on a publicly accessible or shared server that is proven insecure. All AMD has to do is come up with a fix that works. Maybe test and certify Google's approach. Intel had their own fix for a while and I think the OS's went with Google's fix eventually so we might almost be there already. I know my info is almost certainly on some AMD servers, they should do their job and fix their problem before the owners of their server chips get sued for the consequences of knowingly putting their customers at risk.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: shady28
Times are tough for Chipzillah __ abandoning 10+++++ for 7nm . . .
in 2023 o_O (after 8 years?) Can you say, "Tick--Tock--Splat ??"

I suspect Rory Read did a number on Intel by swooping-in to capture the "Freedom Fabric" from SeaMicro. The process difficulties were tough enough, but EMIB (and Foveros) was a shot night in the ruts to Chipzillah's future server compute density and bandwidth . . .
 

shady28

Distinguished
Jan 29, 2007
385
244
19,090
8
AMD needs to find a solution to SQUIP.
I don't know how many companies are allowed to process their customers data on insecure processors. Google has an unofficial fix that locks cores to processes which will cost some efficiency and performance depending on the use, and the processors can be made secure by turning off SMT and becoming very close to e-cores. But really I would think the rules corporate has to follow matter more. You can promise security to your customers or not. You need a secure processor (has fixes for the flaws they have) to do that. And most businesses don't have the resources to have an IT team good enough to fix this themselves other than turning off SMT.

I don't want my bank account info on a publicly accessible or shared server that is proven insecure. All AMD has to do is come up with a fix that works. Maybe test and certify Google's approach. Intel had their own fix for a while and I think the OS's went with Google's fix eventually so we might almost be there already. I know my info is almost certainly on some AMD servers, they should do their job and fix their problem before the owners of their server chips get sued for the consequences of knowingly putting their customers at risk.
This has been in the back of my mind since I saw that, and saw AMDs weak response. Testers were able to steal a 4096 bit encryption key from one VM using another VM on the same hardware (running on same CPU).

This makes any store or corporation using a cloud provider who uses AMD is a ticking time bomb for massive liability until a fix is implemented. Many companies use insurance for this as well, and insurance companies could jack up rates or refuse coverage if a fix is not implemented.

The first storefront that gets hacked this way & sued into oblivion will be the sign. With disabling SMT being the only known fix right now, AMD could quite literally be crippled by this overnight.
 
Reactions: rluker5

waltc3

Reputable
Aug 4, 2019
334
174
4,860
0
Intel is once again reduced to talking about the future--because even though Intel has products Intel says--or, rather Pat says, "are better than the AMD alternatives" they unfortunately aren't good enough to bring to market against those AMD alternatives. Too bad, Pat. (Sure thing there, Pat--keeping up with that Alzheimer's medicine? Maybe you should hit up Biden for some of his antipsychotics...;)) Intel marketing is fairly sickening these days--Gelsinger has no clue, and he's just lost, frankly.

The biggest problem Intel has at present is the fact that AMD is a perpetually moving target. They're not sitting still for a few years waiting on Intel to catch up and move ahead. Which is very off-putting for Intel. Because just when Intel thinks it has an AMD beater--oooops, AMD is releasing newer CPUs that move it ahead again. Rinse and repeat. One of the things I found very interesting about the August Zen4 reveal was how much Papermaster and Su, both, if memory serves, emphasized the fact that AMD would continue in this huge R&D vein post Zen5. One or both of them said it more than once, which I thought was interesting, as it was letting competitors and investors know that AMD has plenty more up its sleeves. They've said it before, of course, but this time it seemed like they really wanted to stress it more than they have.
 
Reactions: Mandark

ottonis

Commendable
Jun 10, 2020
89
72
1,610
0
I am sorry for the Optane business, as Optane was the most ingenious memory solution in its time. Unprecedented latencies and durability.
 
sorry for what? Oh you mean how Intel priced it out of the market due to pure greed?
Optane was so great nobody cares or bought it.

We are witnessing their downfall. And I don’t think they’re going to recover. Hasn’t been getting better. All they have is a TINY SUPER TINY gaming advantage with one cpu, and a super crap gpu now. 😂with horrible drivers
 
Last edited:

tomachas

Distinguished
Oct 12, 2014
93
11
18,535
0
"Gelsinger remarked that while the new chips are 'better than the AMD alternatives" in power and performance ". I doubt if repeating this mantra will fill the void he is in but keep on doing it mate.
 

ottonis

Commendable
Jun 10, 2020
89
72
1,610
0
sorry for what? Oh you mean how Intel priced it out of the market due to pure greed?
Optane was so great nobody cares or bought it.

We are witnessing their downfall. And I don’t think they’re going to recover. Hasn’t been getting better. All they have is a TINY SUPER TINY gaming advantage with one cpu, and a super crap gpu now. 😂with horrible drivers
I wanted to say that it is a pity (for the consumers) that Optane is gone. It was a great invention and well executed.
 
sorry for what? Oh you mean how Intel priced it out of the market due to pure greed?
Optane was so great nobody cares or bought it.
The market was flooded with cheap storage that's what killed optane, of course intel wanted it be theirs alone and that played into it as well but nothing they would have done would have been able to stop the onslaught of super chepo storage from asia and customers go for cheap all the time just look at how many mac dowell's there are in your region compared to good restaurants.
We are witnessing their downfall. And I don’t think they’re going to recover. Hasn’t been getting better. All they have is a TINY SUPER TINY gaming advantage with one cpu, and a super crap gpu now. 😂with horrible drivers
You should ask your doc to rebalance you meds...
What does intel even have to recover from ?!
They made 19bil in net income in the last 12 months including this terrible last quarter, which is in line with their previous years.
Now they are going to corner the market on FABs for high end CPUs as well, if AMD want's to increase the amount of CPUs or GPUs that they will be able to sell in the future they will have to be paying intel for fabbing them or forever stay a tiny company that can only sell that much product.
Looks like Intel will rebrand Alder Lake as 13-series parts from the i5 non-K and down, because Alder Lake did not sell as well as they expected it to.

Regards.
Intel did the same with 11th gen, they only made i5 and up, did they do that also because they had 10th gen CPUs left over?!
If they are going to offer any CPUs below i5 at all it's going to be an improvement, if the CPUs are a newer stepping and have 100Mhz or so more it's going to be even better.
 
Reactions: ottonis

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
Intel did the same with 11th gen, they only made i5 and up, did they do that also because they had 10th gen CPUs left over?!
i3 and below use a different die than i5 and up. Since Intel had been in a 2-3 years long chip shortage of its own, it likely couldn't spare wafers for the low-end range at the time and decided to skip it altogether.
 
Intel did the same with 11th gen, they only made i5 and up, did they do that also because they had 10th gen CPUs left over?!
If they are going to offer any CPUs below i5 at all it's going to be an improvement, if the CPUs are a newer stepping and have 100Mhz or so more it's going to be even better.
Correct me if I'm remembering incorrectly, but they didn't rebrand any 10th gen into 11th gen, did they? What Tom explains here is they'll be grabbing higher binned Alder Lake parts (with and without E-cores) and then placing them as 13-series in the lower bracket.

I don't see this as a bad thing, but I also don't recall Intel having to do this before for anything above i3. What matters at the end of the day is the performance of those parts and not what specific die they use.

Regards.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
I don't see this as a bad thing, but I also don't recall Intel having to do this before for anything above i3. What matters at the end of the day is the performance of those parts and not what specific die they use.
I despise when Nvidia and AMD re-brand old GPUs as lower entries into the new generation since it obfuscates what you are actually buying into, especially when the new generation has features the older ones didn't have. Since Raptor and Alder cores will behave significantly differently due to substantially different L2$ sizes, people who unknowingly buy Alder Lake "13th-gen" will get cheated out of 10+% performance. Sounds dangerously close to fraud to me.
 
Reactions: ottonis
I despise when Nvidia and AMD re-brand old GPUs as lower entries into the new generation since it obfuscates what you are actually buying into, especially when the new generation has features the older ones didn't have. Since Raptor and Alder cores will behave significantly differently due to substantially different L2$ sizes, people who unknowingly buy Alder Lake "13th-gen" will get cheated out of 10+% performance. Sounds dangerously close to fraud to me.
I mean... The only real difference between Alder and Raptor is a smidgen of IPC increase (mainly via cache) and... Maybe a better IMC with DDR5 support and that's it? It's not like they're introducing a lot of new things that Alder Lake can't already do, no? Specially since these CPUs won't even be aimed at the Z platform, so most of the goodies in the 700-series chipsets won't be translated to tangible new things, unless I'm dead wrong there?

I don't disagree on principle with you, but in this context, I just don't see it as a terrible thing to do? Specially if at the end of the day the rebrands perform better than the same parts in the segment they're replacing.

Regards.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator
I don't disagree on principle with you, but in this context, I just don't see it as a terrible thing to do?
I personally think that selling drastically different hardware under the same brand and product series which requires reading fine print or external documentation to find out about is fraud, which is very bad no matter what the excuses for doing it may be. If Intel wants to make the old i5/i7 12th-gen into discounted "13th-gen" chips, it should just discount the old chips instead of misleading people into thinking the re-branded chips are new to sell their old "new" stock people didn't want to buy the first time around.
 
I personally think that selling drastically different hardware under the same brand and product series which requires reading fine print or external documentation to find out about is fraud, which is very bad no matter what the excuses for doing it may be. If Intel wants to make the old i5/i7 12th-gen into discounted "13th-gen" chips, it should just discount the old chips instead of misleading people into thinking the re-branded chips are new to sell their old "new" stock people didn't want to buy the first time around.
But that's the thing. Alder Lake is not "drastically different" from Raptor Lake, unless I'm missing something here? For me the news around it is they're doing it for i5 non-K stuff and under, which is a new "up-shift" in SKU rebranding for them. They've always done it for Celerons and Pentiums, as well as mixing lower power parts from laptop IIRC with those, but, again, this is a first from what I recall.

Regards.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY