Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/threads/%E2%80%98i%E2%80%99m-not-done%E2%80%99-former-intel-ceo-pat-gelsinger-returns-to-oregon-to-speak-on-faith-and-technology.22534/
        )

    [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] => 2021770
            [XFI] => 1050270
        )

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

‘I’m not done’: Former Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger returns to Oregon to speak on faith and technology

osnium

Active member
When prominent CEOs lose their jobs, they sometimes go into a period of virtual hibernation. They retreat from public view, nursing their wounds. Sometimes they never re-emerge.

That hasn’t been the case with Pat Gelsinger, forced from his job as Intel’s chief executive last fall. Gelsinger was back on social media almost immediately, inviting prayers for his former colleagues at Intel and championing new technologies and ideas.

In recent weeks he’s been at tech conferences and on cable TV news, advancing his own views on the future of innovation. Gelsinger, 64, recently signed on with a venture capital firm and as board chair for two young tech companies.

And on Tuesday, Gelsinger was back in Oregon to speak at George Fox University on how his Christian faith shapes his view of technology, reflect on his time at Intel and address his abrupt exit at the beginning of December.

“Dec. 1 began just as a most dreadful few days for me,” Gelsinger told a packed auditorium. He didn’t delve into the circumstances that triggered his ouster but made clear he didn’t see it coming.

After being forced into retirement, Gelsinger said, he was often “pissed off, angry and bitter with the board.” But other times, he said, he felt “God’s on the throne and he has a plan.”

Gelsinger joined Intel at age 18 and spent the first 30 years of his career at the company, most of that time in Oregon, rising to be its first chief technology officer. He left in 2009 and later became CEO of Silicon Valley software maker VMware. Gelsinger returned to Intel in 2021 as CEO, charged with reviving the chipmaker’s lagging technology.

The turnaround plan Gelsinger brought with him called for spending tens of billions of dollars in new factories in the U.S. and around the world. He helped guide the CHIPS Act through Congress in 2022 and negotiated $7.9 billion in government subsidies for Intel.

Intel’s spending spree coincided with slumping demand for Intel’s PC chips and a shift away from its conventional microprocessors toward advanced chips for artificial intelligence. That’s a market where Intel has no presence.

The result was a steep decline in Intel’s revenue and share price, which fell by half in Gelsinger’s last year running the company. The company eliminated 15,000 jobs in the fall to slash costs.

Neither Intel nor Gelsinger has explained what led to his ouster in December. Last month, the company named former Intel board member Lip-Bu Tan to take over.

While Gelsinger didn’t offer any thoughts on Intel’s future at Wednesday’s talk, it was plain that the company is still central to his identity. His 40-minute talk turned repeatedly back to the company’s founders and leaders and technology he worked on while at the chipmaker.

And Gelsinger focused on the future of artificial intelligence, which he said will be “way more important” than the internet.

“For the history of computing, we have been adapting to the computer’s language. With AI, the computers adapt to us,” Gelsinger said.

It’s a hopeful message, but Gelsinger said the merits of any new technology depend on how it’s used. He said social media has been a “disaster,” a failing he attributed in part to people of faith not showing up to participate and set a positive tone online.

Classical computing, artificial intelligence and the emerging field of quantum computing represent a “trinity” of technologies, he said, that can “solve the world’s hardest problems.” But Gelsinger said it’s up to people of faith, including him, to ensure the technology is applied as a force for good.

“I’m not done,” he said.

-- Mike Rogoway covers Oregon technology and the state economy. Reach him at mrogoway@oregonian.com or 503-294-7699.

 
Pat's newfound vibe of faith guiding tech feels a bit off-key when you look back at his Intel stint.

You’d expect faith, tied to honesty, to mean keeping it real, but he kept spinning a rosy tale while the numbers crashed and rivals smoked them.

If faith’s his jam now, where was that straight-shooter vibe back then?

Makes you wonder, less rash talk might’ve saved him some grief.

Kind of makes his halo flicker like a bad bulb.
 
Pat's newfound vibe of faith guiding tech feels a bit off-key when you look back at his Intel stint.

You’d expect faith, tied to honesty, to mean keeping it real, but he kept spinning a rosy tale while the numbers crashed and rivals smoked them.

If faith’s his jam now, where was that straight-shooter vibe back then?

Makes you wonder, less rash talk might’ve saved him some grief.

Kind of makes his halo flicker like a bad bulb.
I think Dylan Patel had an interesting take about Gelsinger being God’s bravest soldier. Bravery sometimes requires optimism even at the expense of accuracy.

1744295489677.jpeg
 
Pat's newfound vibe of faith guiding tech feels a bit off-key when you look back at his Intel stint.

You’d expect faith, tied to honesty, to mean keeping it real, but he kept spinning a rosy tale while the numbers crashed and rivals smoked them.

If faith’s his jam now, where was that straight-shooter vibe back then?

Makes you wonder, less rash talk might’ve saved him some grief.

Kind of makes his halo flicker like a bad bulb.

Given he grew up in PA Dutch / Amish country, and has said his entire family had little idea what he did professionally, or why he was doing it.. He's probably at a point where he's reconciling his life experiences with his upbringing and thoughts of his family.

Unfortunately for him (from an outsider view), the mentors he had in his 20s at Intel seem to have taught him that arrogance is a valid leadership style. (and it can often appear successful -- producing short term results, at the expense of long term gains). By staying at Intel basically his whole career (CEO slot at VMWare aside), he had less chance of growing out of that than others who have moved around and seen more.

At least he hasn't given up on tech, I think he's dealing with this transition in a healthier way than many.

(Crooked halo is a good description :) ).
 
Pat's newfound vibe of faith guiding tech feels a bit off-key when you look back at his Intel stint.
You’d expect faith, tied to honesty, to mean keeping it real, but he kept spinning a rosy tale while the numbers crashed and rivals smoked them.
If faith’s his jam now, where was that straight-shooter vibe back then?
Makes you wonder, less rash talk might’ve saved him some grief.
Kind of makes his halo flicker like a bad bulb.

Pat and I are the same age. Legacy is a big deal and he does not want to end his story as a fired CEO. I understand that completely. The other dilemma is when do you end your story? Hopefully before you go completely bananas otherwise you will be forever known as a banana.
 
Pat and I are the same age. Legacy is a big deal and he does not want to end his story as a fired CEO. I understand that completely. The other dilemma is when do you end your story? Hopefully before you go completely bananas otherwise you will be forever known as a banana.


It’s too late baby. After stepping up as Intel’s CEO, slipping into that used-car salesman wolf suit, and strutting in front of millions, only to screw the pooch and get canned in the spotlight, Pat’s legacy is pretty much cemented.

Now he wants to whip off the mask and play the humble sheep? Good luck with that.

Only a handful of folks will catch this late reveal, while the world’s still got him pegged as the guy who hawked a lemon and drove it off a cliff. :ROFLMAO:
 
It’s too late baby. After stepping up as Intel’s CEO, slipping into that used-car salesman wolf suit, and strutting in front of millions, only to screw the pooch and get canned in the spotlight, Pat’s legacy is pretty much cemented.

Now he wants to whip off the mask and play the humble sheep? Good luck with that.

Only a handful of folks will catch this late reveal, while the world’s still got him pegged as the guy who hawked a lemon and drove it off a cliff. :ROFLMAO:
Sometimes legacies can be defined a while after the fact. Nixon left the white house in disgrace, but he opened up trade with China. Consider how that has changed perception of him over time; certainly Nixon's legacy is complicated, but the trade with China helped us to end the cold war eventually with the "red nation states".

Jimmy Carter left the whitehouse disliked by many but then (legitimately) earned a Nobel Peace prize 20 years later.

Could Pat have done better? absolutely. On the flip side, there's a narrative that Intel may have been permanently doomed once they lost the Mobile and AI markets - decisions made before Pat was CEO.

We really won't know for another 10-20 years what Pat's full legacy at Intel is/was. I'm looking forward to 18A being the highest (transistor) performance node of any foundry .. at least for a little while.
 
Sometimes legacies can be defined a while after the fact. Nixon left the white house in disgrace, but he opened up trade with China. Consider how that has changed perception of him over time; certainly Nixon's legacy is complicated, but the trade with China helped us to end the cold war eventually with the "red nation states".

Jimmy Carter left the whitehouse disliked by many but then (legitimately) earned a Nobel Peace prize 20 years later.

Could Pat have done better? absolutely. On the flip side, there's a narrative that Intel may have been permanently doomed once they lost the Mobile and AI markets - decisions made before Pat was CEO.

We really won't know for another 10-20 years what Pat's full legacy at Intel is/was. I'm looking forward to 18A being the highest (transistor) performance node of any foundry .. at least for a little while.

That's a long reveal, and probably won't cover up his current tarnished legacy.

As for the 18A success, Intel BOD's and Tan have apparently not been able to convince The White House or Wall Street, else the blackmail and coercion towards TSMC would be muted.
 
Last edited:
That's a long reveal, and probably won't cover up his current tarnished legacy.

As for the 18A success, Intel BOD's and Tan have apparently not been able to convince The White House or Wall Street, else the blackmail and coercion towards TSMC would be muted.
They just need to set up a $1 million dinner with Trump like Jensen Huang:

 
Sometimes legacies can be defined a while after the fact. Nixon left the white house in disgrace, but he opened up trade with China. Consider how that has changed perception of him over time; certainly Nixon's legacy is complicated, but the trade with China helped us to end the cold war eventually with the "red nation states".

Jimmy Carter left the whitehouse disliked by many but then (legitimately) earned a Nobel Peace prize 20 years later.

Could Pat have done better? absolutely. On the flip side, there's a narrative that Intel may have been permanently doomed once they lost the Mobile and AI markets - decisions made before Pat was CEO.

We really won't know for another 10-20 years what Pat's full legacy at Intel is/was. I'm looking forward to 18A being the highest (transistor) performance node of any foundry .. at least for a little while.


Probably it won't need 10 years to find out his impacts. On the other hand I think Intel put too much expectations on Intel 18A. The most important thing for Intel is to offer competitive products that the market needs, and needs a lot.

For a long time, Qualcomm, MediaTek, Apple, Nvidia, and Broadcom were using TSMC's inferior nodes (compare to Intel's) and they were doing exceptionally well. It proves that product design and features are so critical to a company's success, maybe even more important than the manufacturing nodes.
 
Last edited:
Probably it won't need 10 years to find out his impacts. On the other hand I think Intel put too much expectations on Intel 18A. The most important thing for Intel is to offer competitive products that the market needs, and needs a lot.

For a long time, Qualcomm, MediaTek, Apple, Nvidia, and Broadcom were using TSMC's inferior nodes (compare to Intel's) and they were doing exceptionally well. It proves that product design and features are so critical to a company's success, maybe even more important than the manufacturing nodes.
This also means Intel products were carried by the fabs not the designs being amazing.
 
Probably it won't need 10 years to find out his impacts. On the other hand I think Intel put too much expectations on Intel 18A. The most important thing for Intel is to offer competitive products that the market needs, and needs a lot.

For a long time, Qualcomm, MediaTek, Apple, Nvidia, and Broadcom were using TSMC's inferior nodes (compare to Intel's) and they were doing exceptionally well. It proves that product design and features are so critical to a company's success, maybe even more important than the manufacturing nodes.
Intel design team lost to AMD even before intel lost its process node advantage. People just conveniently blamed the process node development for intel's collapse. Pat Gelsinger once spoke in the interview back in late 2023 (?) that his top priority was to fix process development and intel would not be able to deliver good product without industry leading process node. In the same interview he also stated intel design team was a mess too and spent a lot of effort to fix it. He concluded Intel's design team was no longer considered "broken". Funny enough intel's own ceo thought the design arm was broken. I think that was surprising for a lot of analysts/investors.
 
Intel design team lost to AMD even before intel lost its process node advantage. People just conveniently blamed the process node development for intel's collapse. Pat Gelsinger once spoke in the interview back in late 2023 (?) that his top priority was to fix process development and intel would not be able to deliver good product without industry leading process node. In the same interview he also stated intel design team was a mess too and spent a lot of effort to fix it. He concluded Intel's design team was no longer considered "broken". Funny enough intel's own ceo thought the design arm was broken. I think that was surprising for a lot of analysts/investors.
Well this is all due to the spoiling with the Fabs I have Heard that if the design was bad the process has to be adjusted to meet the requirements. It should have been done few years ago Intel would have been in a much better position.
More Tape outs than needed/ Hot Lots and what not 10nm was a one time fiasco.

To Intel design credits they have always been forefront of change in x86 even x64 which they created internally but not wanting to use stuff like AVX1/2/512/AMX/APX and not to mention the software to support those.

Also the atom design team is better one than In Haifa Israel.
 
Last edited:
167K Big Macs buys you a lot of cred.

To me this is play the player and not the game. I think CC Wei handled his time with POTUS extremely well. Jensen and CC are friends and Jensen is also very strategic (chess versus checkers). Let's see who else lines up for POTUS time. Apple should be next. Lip-Bu may be in line as well, he has billionaire status. Exciting times!
 
Back
Top