Samsung has a fab. Anyone knows why they don't want to enter the game and create an AI chip.
https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20231121VL206/samsung-electr...
CEO: Jim Keller.
You mention their iGPUs, but their iGPUs actually got radically better in the timespan you mention; Iris, if properly cooled and not memory-choked, was actually pretty decent for a lot of purposes.
It does and historically has had a pretty terrible board, and its management hasn't been the greatest, but people who complain about them doing nothing for most of a decade generally are making a reactionary take about the lack of post-Skylake microarchitectures, while ignoring that pretty much everyone's performance gains got swallowed by vulnerability mitigations for years because they care about video games more than safety.
That's the expected case when you have tons of cash and market dominance.
> are making a reactionary take about the lack of post-Skylake microarchitectures
Or about the general inability of large monopolies to effectively compete and continue to deliver according to market expectations.
> or years because they care about video games more than safety.
And yet, they still had a "server chips" division for much of that time.
Interestingly the chips bigger than those found in the 3090 (so GA100s for A100s) were made by TSMC on a 7 nm node.
Maybe Samsung's yield was not high enough to produce those large chips (AD100 is 826 mmsq and would probably be even bigger on Samsung's node).