Pat Gelsinger explains how his initials ended up etched into every i386 processor ever made

[hist78]

"Pat Gelsinger has shared the story of how his initials remained on the Intel 386 silicon die, despite them being spotted by the top brass during a pre-production design review session. Creating such inscriptions "was not done," during this era at Intel, remembers Gelsinger. Nevertheless, the legendary true-blue Intel man says he uttered “some complete nonsense about substrate tap configuration experiments” to swerve a comment on the 'PG' silicon markings by the gruff (then-CEO) Andy Grove. The end result is that Pat Gelsinger's initials are etched directly into the silicon of every 386 processor ever made."

https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/cpus/gelsingers-i386-initials-gambit-ex-intel-ceo-explains-how-he-bluffed-andy-grove-to-keep-his-mark-on-the-legendary-chips-silicon

 

[Xebec]

Getting this by Grove is an achievement in itself!

Now I'm curious if any i386 clones... also have "PG" embedded in them

 

[hist78]

Getting this by Grove is an achievement in itself!

Now I'm curious if any i386 clones... also have "PG" embedded in them

The PG initials on the chips are of less concern in the broader scale of the i386 business. But I wonder whether Andy Grove’s tolerance of Pat Gelsinger’s BS explanation helped a young but accomplished engineer grow into a better leader later on at Intel. Yet this perspective raises another question: did Andy Grove’s approach also contribute to the impression and to a long, widespread practice that BS is acceptable at Intel, as long as leaders and team members choose to ignore it?

 

[siliconbruh999]

The PG initials on the chips are of less concern in the broader scale of the i386 business. But I wonder whether Andy Grove’s tolerance of Pat Gelsinger’s BS explanation helped a young but accomplished engineer grow into a better leader later on at Intel. Yet this perspective raises another question: did Andy Grove’s approach also contribute to the impression and to a long, widespread practice that BS is acceptable at Intel, as long as leaders and team members choose to ignore it?

I clearly don't get that impression from Andy Grove though...

 

[Daniel Payne]

I worked at Intel at the same time as Pat Gelsinger from 1982-1986, and our chip was an early graphic co-processor dubbed the 82786, and yes, all of us design engineers had our initials hidden on the chip, it was a right of passage at Intel, commonly done.

 

[Xebec]

I clearly don't get that impression from Andy Grove though...

I agree here with SB; at least in his book "Only the Paranoid Survive", he talked a lot about addressing cultural issues that would hold the company back.

On the flip side, the book does mention some "BS" was happening as Intel's memory market share was tanking in the early 80s, and senior leadership was slow to respond.

Andy was a close mentor of Pat's - so that may also have tapered the "PG" allowance for the i386.

 

[Xebec]

I worked at Intel at the same time as Pat Gelsinger from 1982-1986, and our chip was an early graphic co-processor dubbed the 82786, and yes, all of us design engineers had our initials hidden on the chip, it was a right of passage at Intel, commonly done.

Very cool! I never heard of the chip, but it looks fairly capable for the time. Thanks for sharing!

Intel’s 82786 Intel’s First Discrete Graphics Coprocessor

The Graphics Chip Chronicles: Vol. 1 No. 3 - Intel delivered its first discrete graphics coprocessor, the 82786.

www.electronicdesign.com

 

[MKWVentures]

Very common practice back in the day. Once on a test chip, I may or may not have put a Van Halen logo on the poly mask.

Ah.... the good ole days

 

[hist78]

Very common practice back in the day. Once on a test chip, I may or may not have put a Van Halen logo on the poly mask.

Ah.... the good ole days

I worked at Intel at the same time as Pat Gelsinger from 1982-1986, and our chip was an early graphic co-processor dubbed the 82786, and yes, all of us design engineers had our initials hidden on the chip, it was a right of passage at Intel, commonly done.

Yes, it used to be a common practice, and it is less of a concern as I mentioned in the previous post. For those people who are interested in the names, initials, doodles, or "Easter Eggs" printed on those old chips, there is a YouTube channel that explores them a lot.

EvilmonkeyzDesignz

I'm a Computer Engineer that loves electronics. Video content that I post may include: * Electronics tear-downs * Component close-ups under the microscope * Circuitboard design * Anything else electronics related that I think other people might enjoy. If you are looking for more, check out my...

www.youtube.com

My question is not about the PG initials embedded on the chips. Instead, my question is how Pat Gelsinger explained it and how Andy Grove tolerated Pat Gelsinger's bullshit explanation.

I have witnessed several big companies’ downfalls where their leaders tolerated BS or even said a lot of BS themselves. Once the BS culture started spreading and being tolerated at all levels of the business, it was too late for them to recover.