Semiwiki on LinkedIn Semiwiki on Facebook Semiwiki on Twitter Register / Log in 
Array
(
    [content] => 
    [params] => Array
        (
            [0] => /forum/threads/former-intel-ceo-pat-gelsinger-says-ai-is-a-bubble-that-wont-pop-for-several-years.23787/
        )

    [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] => 2030770
            [XFI] => 1060170
        )

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

Former Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger says AI is a bubble that won't pop for 'several years'

Daniel Nenni

Daniel Nenni

Admin
Staff member
Former Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger.

Former Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger.I-HWA CHENG/AFP via Getty Images
  • Ex-Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger says we are in an AI bubble, but it won't burst for "several years." Gelsinger told CNBC that businesses have yet to see material benefits from AI investments. Other tech leaders, including Sam Altman, have also suggested we may be in an AI bubble.
Former Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger is the latest voice to say the AI bull run is a bubble — but he said it won't burst for "several years."

"Are we in an AI bubble? Of course. Of course we are," Gelsinger told CNBC's "Squawk Box" in a Monday interview. "I mean, we're hyped. We're accelerating. We're putting enormous leverage into the system."

However, Gelsinger said he doesn't see the bubble ending for "several years."

Some investors and analysts have become increasingly vocal about the AI market being overheated and have questioned whether massive infrastructure investments from tech companies will pay off, if company valuations are too high, and whether AI tools are providing value for businesses.

Gelsinger said that, while there has been an "industry shift to AI," businesses have "yet to really start materially benefiting from it."

Gelsinger departed Intel in December 2024 after the US chipmaker struggled to keep up in the AI chip race.

Gelsinger, who is now a general partner at venture capital firm Playground Global, addressed his nearly four years as CEO of Intel, telling CNBC that the company "made a set of bad decisions over 15 years" and was "late on AI as well."

Other tech leaders who have suggested there is an AI bubble include OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, while Alibaba cofounder Joe Tsai said he was "beginning to see some kind of bubble."

Jensen Huang, the CEO of Nvidia — arguably the biggest winner of the AI boom — has dismissed comparisons between the dot-com bubble in 2000 and the AI market.

 
Out of the CEOs mentioned I would side with Jensen Huang. He separates training from inference or tokens. Yes there is a training infrastructure build up but the tokens being used will grow exponentially in my opinion. I use Grok and ChatGPT side by side and get great results and it is getting better every month.

No it is not like the Dot Com bubble or the Bitcoin mining bubble. AI will touch every aspect of our lives and it has just begun. AI will be a years long "bubble". The big AI bubble I see is the hype. The trillions of dollars that people are saying they will spend versus what they will actually spend. AI truly is an arms race and like any arms race there is a lot of smoke and mirrors involved.

As much as I admire Pat Gelsinger I do not feel he is the one to ask about AI.
 
Daniel Nenni said:
Former Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger.

Former Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger.I-HWA CHENG/AFP via Getty Images
  • Ex-Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger says we are in an AI bubble, but it won't burst for "several years." Gelsinger told CNBC that businesses have yet to see material benefits from AI investments. Other tech leaders, including Sam Altman, have also suggested we may be in an AI bubble.
Former Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger is the latest voice to say the AI bull run is a bubble — but he said it won't burst for "several years."

"Are we in an AI bubble? Of course. Of course we are," Gelsinger told CNBC's "Squawk Box" in a Monday interview. "I mean, we're hyped. We're accelerating. We're putting enormous leverage into the system."

However, Gelsinger said he doesn't see the bubble ending for "several years."

Some investors and analysts have become increasingly vocal about the AI market being overheated and have questioned whether massive infrastructure investments from tech companies will pay off, if company valuations are too high, and whether AI tools are providing value for businesses.

Gelsinger said that, while there has been an "industry shift to AI," businesses have "yet to really start materially benefiting from it."

Gelsinger departed Intel in December 2024 after the US chipmaker struggled to keep up in the AI chip race.

Gelsinger, who is now a general partner at venture capital firm Playground Global, addressed his nearly four years as CEO of Intel, telling CNBC that the company "made a set of bad decisions over 15 years" and was "late on AI as well."

Other tech leaders who have suggested there is an AI bubble include OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, while Alibaba cofounder Joe Tsai said he was "beginning to see some kind of bubble."

Jensen Huang, the CEO of Nvidia — arguably the biggest winner of the AI boom — has dismissed comparisons between the dot-com bubble in 2000 and the AI market.

Click to expand...

After watching Pat Gelsinger’s interview, I’m convinced that Intel’s board of directors made the wrong decision in hiring him as CEO in 2021, and the right decision in firing him in 2024.

Without acknowledging his own massive and careless spending or the over hirng that brought Intel to its knees, Pat Gelsinger is now blaming the Biden administration for not giving Intel billions in taxpayer money quickly enough and without milestone requirements attached.

He’s someone begging for free money from society while believing he’s the smartest person alive and that he deserves it more than anyone else.
 
Daniel Nenni said:
Former Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger.

Former Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger.I-HWA CHENG/AFP via Getty Images
  • Ex-Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger says we are in an AI bubble, but it won't burst for "several years." Gelsinger told CNBC that businesses have yet to see material benefits from AI investments. Other tech leaders, including Sam Altman, have also suggested we may be in an AI bubble.
Former Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger is the latest voice to say the AI bull run is a bubble — but he said it won't burst for "several years."

"Are we in an AI bubble? Of course. Of course we are," Gelsinger told CNBC's "Squawk Box" in a Monday interview. "I mean, we're hyped. We're accelerating. We're putting enormous leverage into the system."

However, Gelsinger said he doesn't see the bubble ending for "several years."

Some investors and analysts have become increasingly vocal about the AI market being overheated and have questioned whether massive infrastructure investments from tech companies will pay off, if company valuations are too high, and whether AI tools are providing value for businesses.

Gelsinger said that, while there has been an "industry shift to AI," businesses have "yet to really start materially benefiting from it."

Gelsinger departed Intel in December 2024 after the US chipmaker struggled to keep up in the AI chip race.

Gelsinger, who is now a general partner at venture capital firm Playground Global, addressed his nearly four years as CEO of Intel, telling CNBC that the company "made a set of bad decisions over 15 years" and was "late on AI as well."

Other tech leaders who have suggested there is an AI bubble include OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, while Alibaba cofounder Joe Tsai said he was "beginning to see some kind of bubble."

Jensen Huang, the CEO of Nvidia — arguably the biggest winner of the AI boom — has dismissed comparisons between the dot-com bubble in 2000 and the AI market.

Click to expand...

Profound!

Its like he can see into the future.
 
Daniel Nenni said:
Out of the CEOs mentioned I would side with Jensen Huang. He separates training from inference or tokens. Yes there is a training infrastructure build up but the tokens being used will grow exponentially in my opinion. I use Grok and ChatGPT side by side and get great results and it is getting better every month.

No it is not like the Dot Com bubble or the Bitcoin mining bubble. AI will touch every aspect of our lives and it has just begun. AI will be a years long "bubble". The big AI bubble I see is the hype. The trillions of dollars that people are saying they will spend versus what they will actually spend. AI truly is an arms race and like any arms race there is a lot of smoke and mirrors involved.

As much as I admire Pat Gelsinger I do not feel he is the one to ask about AI.
Click to expand...
Daniel Nenni said:
Out of the CEOs mentioned I would side with Jensen Huang. He separates training from inference or tokens. Yes there is a training infrastructure build up but the tokens being used will grow exponentially in my opinion. I use Grok and ChatGPT side by side and get great results and it is getting better every month.

No it is not like the Dot Com bubble or the Bitcoin mining bubble. AI will touch every aspect of our lives and it has just begun. AI will be a years long "bubble". The big AI bubble I see is the hype. The trillions of dollars that people are saying they will spend versus what they will actually spend. AI truly is an arms race and like any arms race there is a lot of smoke and mirrors involved.

As much as I admire Pat Gelsinger I do not feel he is the one to ask about AI.
Click to expand...
PG has little to admire. He screwed up larrabee ppa so badly and that alone should disqualify from any ceo role.
 
Gelsinger is often blamed for a lot of things he did not do. For example a lot of people claim he was responsible for Itanium but that is BS.

Gelsinger's Exodus from Intel -- A Veteran Departs | Channel Insider

About four years ago, soon after Pat Gelsinger had switched roles at Intel, I got to sit down with him and my then boss, both of us working for another
www.channelinsider.com www.channelinsider.com

After Itanium was launched and was a flop Intel kicked out the people in charge of the enterprise division and put Gelsinger there. Under his tenure Itanium 2 was launched, which was a lot better product, and the Intel x86-64 compatible processors came to compete against AMD.

Larabee was something made by the same team which developed Itanium. To be honest back then it looked like a solution in search of a problem. Later Xeon Phi products were better designed but the HPC niche was not enough to make the work financially viable then. Rather curiously it did have AI acceleration.
 
essiah said:
PG has little to admire. He screwed up larrabee ppa so badly and that alone should disqualify from any ceo role.
Click to expand...
In the first place, it was Gelsinger himself who was disappointed when the Larrabee project was canceled.
He's frustrated, a sad victim of a stupid board of directors.
 
hist78 said:
Without acknowledging his own massive and careless spending or the over hirng that brought Intel to its knees, Pat Gelsinger is now blaming the Biden administration for not giving Intel billions in taxpayer money quickly enough and without milestone requirements attached.
Click to expand...
Milestone should have processed sooner he is not wrong about waiting for a time. If it was Taiwan/China/Korea money would have been already poured in the companies.
 
AI/ML is still in its infancy and will advance far faster and farther as its achievements compound on themselves. Compounding is among the greatest force in just about everything when applied to a task and AI/ML/Advanced Robotics/Automation will change everything it the tightest and most far-reaching revolution in human history.
 
hist78 said:
After watching Pat Gelsinger’s interview, I’m convinced that Intel’s board of directors made the wrong decision in hiring him as CEO in 2021, and the right decision in firing him in 2024.

Without acknowledging his own massive and careless spending or the over hirng that brought Intel to its knees, Pat Gelsinger is now blaming the Biden administration for not giving Intel billions in taxpayer money quickly enough and without milestone requirements attached.

He’s someone begging for free money from society while believing he’s the smartest person alive and that he deserves it more than anyone else.
Click to expand...
not to defend the guy, but was LBs first move NOT bending knee to the new admin to get the money faster while giving away stock and having lots of the requirements removed?
Pat tried to play by the rules and respect the last admin as they tried to do things legit way through legislation. Bureaucratic slowdown clearly impacted the expected rollout time of the grants. Previous admin seemed to think they had much longer to work with Intel to ensure labor laws were being respected and money wasnt being used unethically.

Again, Pat made a lot of mistakes, but he is not wrong that if the previous admin had seen the urgency and knew that they had the amount of executive power the current admin is allowed to get away with (they dont, SCOTUS clearly views them differently, look at PPP loan forgiveness vs student loan forgiveness reasonings, contradictions everywhere) that its possible intel could have started its recovery faster

I recognize money =/= execution or anything, 18A delay root causes are debatable, but IMO having 2 huge layoffs and 3 restructures in 3 years is what had the biggest impact on 18A delays. Teams have been in chaos since August 24 at least. This money was meant to keep intel afloat while they ramped, but the money got delayed almost a year, so intel drained more cash and it lead to layoffs so ramp was understaffed and had lost knowledge.

I also just dont understand how it can be considered "free money" when the literal reason he didnt get it was because there were so many requirements to ensure local and state economies were getting strong and robust support - i.e. the entire point of the deal at all. It is supposed to be intel bumping manufacturing to help create jobs etc and now its become intel giving away parts ownership to government to stay alive, with no guarantees about jobs created or economic spend or anything.

IMO Tax payers get less out of LBs deal than they do Pats even if Intel stock skyrockets. What will the federal government do with that money? Probably not all of the things it wouldve done at the state/local levels. Yeah it wasnt a direct cash for stock trade, but it wasnt "free money" otherwise Pat wouldve gotten it right away for nothing.... the meaning of free lol
 
I agree RE: AI is a bubble and I also agree RE: It won't burst for years.

Bubbles don't burst until they grow so big that they can no longer be financed, and I think there is a lot of money left to pump into this thing. At least for the next couple of years.

I think the bubble top will be marked by OpenAI/Anthropic/Perplexity IPOs, and I don't think that will happen until 2027 at the earliest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top