Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/index.php?threads/pat-gelsinger-fought-the-cloud-before-he-embraced-it.14963/
        )

    [addOns] => Array
        (
            [DL6/MLTP] => 13
            [Hampel/TimeZoneDebug] => 1000070
            [SV/ChangePostDate] => 2010200
            [SemiWiki/Newsletter] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/WPMenu] => 1000010
            [SemiWiki/XPressExtend] => 1000010
            [ThemeHouse/XLink] => 1000970
            [ThemeHouse/XPress] => 1010570
            [XF] => 2021270
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

    [wordpress] => /var/www/html
)

Pat Gelsinger fought the cloud before he embraced it

count

Well-known member
Back in the early 2010s, when AWS was first starting to go mainstream, Pat Gelsinger and VMWare saw it as a threat. But overtime he Pat realized the cloud was inevitable and pivoted the business to providing key enabling services for cloud computing. My opinion is that Pat has the wrong strategy with IDM 2.0 but he is no dummy and has shown that he's open the change when the market demands it. Over time I believe Intel, under Pat Gelsinger will embrace the fabless model and that will be the beginning of an Intel turnaround. Just my 2 cents.

 

hist78

Well-known member
I really hope Pat can continuously reinvent Intel and himself.

One major difference I'd like to point out is that changing strategy to make a turnaround in software business is often quicker and easier than in hardware business, such as semiconductor industry.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VCT

Daniel Nenni

Admin
Staff member
Back in the early 2010s, when AWS was first starting to go mainstream, Pat Gelsinger and VMWare saw it as a threat. But overtime he Pat realized the cloud was inevitable and pivoted the business to providing key enabling services for cloud computing. My opinion is that Pat has the wrong strategy with IDM 2.0 but he is no dummy and has shown that he's open the change when the market demands it. Over time I believe Intel, under Pat Gelsinger will embrace the fabless model and that will be the beginning of an Intel turnaround. Just my 2 cents.

I agree, Pat can pivot, but remember the IDM 2.0 strategy is what got him the CEO job. The board offered Pat a seat and Pat slipped into the CEO slot. I don't think Intel will ever be fabless but I do believe they will be 50/50. In fact they will be more than 50% fabless when the Intel N3 products hit full speed in 2023. Hopefully Intel will be back in competition whith 20a. Maybe Pat will go with a new IDM 50/50 strategy.
 
P

Portland

Guest
Intel needs to work with the "fabless ecosystem." People don't want cpus they want chiplets with multiple ips. Intel has been living off reputation for a while the public use to buy Intel in an innate manner now they use more intuition.
 

tooLongInEDA

Moderator
I agree, Pat can pivot, but remember the IDM 2.0 strategy is what got him the CEO job. The board offered Pat a seat and Pat slipped into the CEO slot. I don't think Intel will ever be fabless but I do believe they will be 50/50. In fact they will be more than 50% fabless when the Intel N3 products hit full speed in 2023. Hopefully Intel will be back in competition whith 20a. Maybe Pat will go with a new IDM 50/50 strategy.
How is sitting on the fence a strategy in anything beyond the short term ? This is about the most capital intensive business there is - if you're going to compete, you surely have to be all-in. That's precisely why TI, ST and everyone else threw in the towel on leading edge fabs.
 

lilo777

Active member
Back in the early 2010s, when AWS was first starting to go mainstream, Pat Gelsinger and VMWare saw it as a threat. But overtime he Pat realized the cloud was inevitable and pivoted the business to providing key enabling services for cloud computing. My opinion is that Pat has the wrong strategy with IDM 2.0 but he is no dummy and has shown that he's open the change when the market demands it. Over time I believe Intel, under Pat Gelsinger will embrace the fabless model and that will be the beginning of an Intel turnaround. Just my 2 cents.

This IDM stuff is way above my pay grade but I still want to add my two cents here. Intel definitely has the volume to support cap investments into FABs and process development but nowadays this is probably not enough to succeed. All CPUs now are SOCs and Intel needs to have access to IP developed by other companies to have competitive TAT. That is something the foundries ecosystem is good at. Perhaps this is one of the reasons Intel is moving into this business. If they succeed there this would give them the advanatages provided by both worlds.
 

count

Well-known member
Intel definitely has the volume to support cap investments into FABs and process development.

I disagree. Intel is not even in the top 5 when it comes to wafer volumes. Combine that with stagnant growth and market share loss and starts to look like Intel does not have the volumes to support the capex. Remember that each improvement in node size is exponentially more expensive than the last and therefore needs exponentially more volume to justify the expense. This is why Intel is trying (once again) to open up it's foundries to outside parties - because they don't have enough volume on their own. It didn't work last time, so Intel just ended up buying the volume through acquisitions. This time if they fail, Intel can no longer buy it's way out.
 
Top