You are currently viewing SemiWiki as a guest which gives you limited access to the site. To view blog comments and experience other SemiWiki features you must be a registered member. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
A shuffle in Globalfoundries’ management team has prompted speculation that the firm’s CEO, Thomas Caulfield, is going to take the helm at Intel or Intel’s foundry division, which may or may not be spun out. Caulfield stepped down as CEO on Wednesday to become the foundry’s executive chairman. He’s succeeded by Tim Breen, who is currently chief operating officer.
A shuffle in Globalfoundries’ management team has prompted speculation that the firm’s CEO, Thomas Caulfield, is going to take the helm at Intel or Intel’s foundry division, which may or may not be spun out.
bits-chips.com
Don't know anything about him, but his resume seems to check most of the boxes to turn Intel around.
While Intel is still hunting for a new CEO, one candidate stands out to revive its foundry business. Following the leadership shake-up of GlobalFoundr...
FWIW Pat Gelsinger will be 64 next month. I'm not sure why people think Hoc Tan at 72 is a good choice, but Caulfield at 66 isn't? The articles I've seen are all quick to point out his lack of design experience, but I'm not sure there is a candidate that has expertise in both design and manufacturing. I think the candidate the board eventually chooses will tell us a lot about their long term plans.
Intel's turnaround is going to take more than a few years. I don't think 66 is all that old these days, assuming you have healthy habits and good genes, but I strongly suspect the Intel BoD is looking for someone capable for at least 10 years with confidence.
Larry Ellison is a co-founder of Oracle and he owns something like 42% of the company. He makes his own rules. He personally picked Safra Catz as CEO (Originally co-CEO with Mark Hurd. Catz is a great choice, IMO.)
Hock Tan is a force of nature, for sure, but unlike Dan I'm not convinced he'd be a good CEO for Intel. Anyway, he'd be 82 in 10 years, where the odds of being effective get a lot longer.
Warren Buffett is 94 and still CEO of Berkshire-Hathaway. But how many 94 year-olds can do that?
Intel's turnaround is going to take more than a few years. I don't think 66 is all that old these days, assuming you have healthy habits and good genes, but I strongly suspect the Intel BoD is looking for someone capable for at least 10 years with confidence.
Larry Ellison is a co-founder of Oracle and he owns something like 42% of the company. He makes his own rules. He personally picked Safra Catz as CEO (Originally co-CEO with Mark Hurd. Catz is a great choice, IMO.)
Hock Tan is a force of nature, for sure, but unlike Dan I'm not convinced he'd be a good CEO for Intel. Anyway, he'd be 82 in 10 years, where the odds of being effective get a lot longer.
Warren Buffett is 94 and still CEO of Berkshire-Hathaway. But how many 94 year-olds can do that?
i am also not convinced with hock tan doing the right things he will just kill half the open source stuff at intel and will charge insane royalty. I won't doubt he can clear the thing but more in the abuse cause Intel has way more than Broadcom stuff to milk from
FWIW Pat Gelsinger will be 64 next month. I'm not sure why people think Hoc Tan at 72 is a good choice, but Caulfield at 66 isn't? The articles I've seen are all quick to point out his lack of design experience, but I'm not sure there is a candidate that has expertise in both design and manufacturing. I think the candidate the board eventually chooses will tell us a lot about their long term plans.
I agree. There hasn't been an Intel CEO with fabrication and design experience, and I doubt such a candidate exists. It would be nice if whomever the BoD chooses had more erudition and less ego than their predecessor. And the intelligence to choose strong, experienced leaders for both fab and products, so that Intel is run more like GE and Berkshire than Oracle.
Tom does, I know him fairly well. The problem is that he has missed quite a few events including the last GF foundry day due to "family" issues which could be health issues. Tom may be done with his career. I would like to see someone younger lead Intel if possible. More energy, different outlook, someone disruptive.
GlobalFoundries, the world's third-largest contract chipmaker, said on Wednesday it has appointed Tim Breen as its chief executive officer. Breen, who has been with the company since 2018 and served as its chief operating officer since 2023, will succeed Thomas Caulfield in the top role...
Tom's experience with GF was to cut back on many projects that Sanjay Jha had started ... stop leading edge technology development ... and focus on "boutique" (their word ... niche) technologies. When Pat was let go, Intel BOD said something like "Intel is #1 a product company." Tom doesn't have that product experience. To me it only makes sense if Intel plans to split foundry as separate company -- and Tom would run that.
Tom's experience with GF was to cut back on many projects that Sanjay Jha had started ... stop leading edge technology development ... and focus on "boutique" (their word ... niche) technologies. When Pat was let go, Intel BOD said something like "Intel is #1 a product company." Tom doesn't have that product experience. To me it only makes sense if Intel plans to split foundry as separate company -- and Tom would run that.
Tom's experience with GF was to cut back on many projects that Sanjay Jha had started ... stop leading edge technology development ... and focus on "boutique" (their word ... niche) technologies. When Pat was let go, Intel BOD said something like "Intel is #1 a product company." Tom doesn't have that product experience. To me it only makes sense if Intel plans to split foundry as separate company -- and Tom would run that.
HIs focus was to fix GF. GF was broken spending billion on new technologies and still being 2nd or third choice. Clear waste of money. Realizing that Intel foundry is not competitive even if they have 18A would be a improvement. To pay for leading Edge, you need many customers who want that. GF didnt have many. Intel doesnt have many
Intel's current forecast for 18A foundry sales is less than half of what it was 3 year ago).... So 18A (internal and external) won't pay for fabs and development cost either. They will try again at 14A and see if that will break even.
Tom could fix foundry at Intel if they spin it off and he was given power to find what they can make money at.
Intel Product group will be fine for Client and DC CPUs whoever the CEO is.... just dont ask them to do DC AI or Mobile.
HIs focus was to fix GF. GF was broken spending billion on new technologies and still being 2nd or third choice. Clear waste of money. Realizing that Intel foundry is not competitive even if they have 18A would be a improvement. To pay for leading Edge, you need many customers who want that. GF didnt have many. Intel doesnt have many
Intel's current forecast for 18A foundry sales is less than half of what it was 3 year ago).... So 18A (internal and external) won't be pay for fabs and development cost either. They will try again at 14A and see if that will break even.
Tom could fix foundry at Intel if they spin it off and he was given power to find what they can make money at.
Intel Product group will be fine for Client and DC CPUs whoever the CEO is.... just dont ask them to do DC AI or Mobile.
HIs focus was to fix GF. GF was broken spending billion on new technologies and still being 2nd or third choice. Clear waste of money. Realizing that Intel foundry is not competitive even if they have 18A would be a improvement. To pay for leading Edge, you need many customers who want that. GF didnt have many. Intel doesnt have many
Intel's current forecast for 18A foundry sales is less than half of what it was 3 year ago).... So 18A (internal and external) won't be pay for fabs and development cost either. They will try again at 14A and see if that will break even.
Tom could fix foundry at Intel if they spin it off and he was given power to find what they can make money at.
Intel Product group will be fine for Client and DC CPUs whoever the CEO is.... just dont ask them to do DC AI or Mobile.
Downsizing was not necessarily Tom's idea, Abu Dhabi turned off the money spigot. I would not view putting GF out to pasture a disruptive move but Tom did a very nice pivot.
Downsizing was not necessarily Tom's idea, Abu Dhabi turned off the money spigot. I would not view putting GF out to pasture a disruptive move but Tom did a very nice pivot.
HIs focus was to fix GF. GF was broken spending billion on new technologies and still being 2nd or third choice. Clear waste of money. Realizing that Intel foundry is not competitive even if they have 18A would be a improvement. To pay for leading Edge, you need many customers who want that. GF didnt have many. Intel doesnt have many
Intel's current forecast for 18A foundry sales is less than half of what it was 3 year ago).... So 18A (internal and external) won't be pay for fabs and development cost either. They will try again at 14A and see if that will break even.
Tom could fix foundry at Intel if they spin it off and he was given power to find what they can make money at.
Intel Product group will be fine for Client and DC CPUs whoever the CEO is.... just dont ask them to do DC AI or Mobile.
where is that forecast? if anything foyndry is being run better now they just need to hook few customers Intel in itself is a big customer as long as Intel products don't use TSMC much the foundry will have a chance
In relation to just how low Broadcom got at the time it was purchased, Intel still has waaay more to lose. And Tan had helping hands inside Broadcom, helping to beat down the price for him further.
Tan of course would want to pull the same mouse-swallows-the-elephant trick with Intel too, it's just no one will allow him to with Intel.
bits-chips.com
Don't know anything about him, but his resume seems to check most of the boxes to turn Intel around.
