Intel stock dropping toward 50 year low amid restructuring news
marketwatch.com
marketwatch.com
https://old.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1ehjuzj/i_b...
I believe that he is a math major or something, everyone on WSB told him that this was a bad idea... there are so many reasons why he should have known better than to do this. Then, in 24 hours he loses 20%. Guh-adjacent.
https://amphetamem.es/meme?id=seinfeld_04_20_53×tamp=0%...
700k down to 492K. They are taking it like a champ though. I hope that this issue is now resolved for my subconscious.
https://old.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1eiktnw/ok_...
He hasn't learnt his lesson either and is keeping the money all in Intel!
There is good reason the SOTA semi foundry market is basically TSMC, some Samsung, and a touch of intel. No one with big money wants to deal with foundries. Way more profitable to do pretty much anything else.
On the flipside, the US gov wants domestic SOTA semi manufacturing, and it will not let intel disappear. Most reasonable americans should want this too, as pretty much everyone uses a TSMC chip everyday - often all day.
Intel has 20a/18a shipping end of this year and early next year. The success of failure of those chips will be telling.
Still an achievement though, they're at least making am attempt. That's more then can be said for I.e. Europe or India
"Intel Core"?
"Raptor Lake" is the codename for the 13th and 14th generation processors, which are in the current news cycle for being buggy and Intel not recalling them.
These days AMD has been playing that same tactic up in spades. Strix Point is a very very nice monolithic APU, but everywhere else they have an IO-Die and then a varying number of Core Complex Die. They're just dropping down variable numbers of cores.
Intel by compare is building interesting bespoke chiplet configurations, is taking on X2 like challenges. And I believe in the eventual gains here. They have parcelled up responsibilities in a really interesting way with Meteor Lake, a CPU, and GPU, a SoC (with its own e-cores as well!), and a io chiplet. Intel's got tons of value add from this. Gobs of usb4 that AMD is nowhere near delivering, a massive image/video processor, the ability to easily drop in new cores or new gpu's as they increment. The modular design is ambitious and interesting. https://www.anandtech.com/show/20046/intel-unveils-meteor-la...
And Intel seems well ahead in the packaging game. Rather than big interposer dies, Intel's using smaller sized & much finer EIMB bridges between chips. Which helps them save power as well as reducing size. They have Foveros for much more heterogenous chip stacking than what most are pulling off.
Architecturally it feels like Intel's been very much refining & iterating across the multichip era for a long time, from the drastically underrated old Lakefield, to the very very highly integrated upcoming Lunar Lake. AMD is doing a great job making cores and gpu's, but Intel's been doing remarkably good, especially considering their 10nm+++ Intel 7 process, especially with the E-cores being a modest sized nicely performing core.
I also want to complement Intel on their really interesting architecture innovations. But I have severe doubts that their various on-chip accelerators are going to reach critical adoption levels where the developers that matter are excited about spending time optimizing for these awesome luxuries. Like Ponte Vecchio, very interesting tech, and something the hyperscalers and supercomputer can be excited about, but it's hard to see a path towards long term success.
I'd love to see Intel ship photonics-intergated solutions again. Their EIMB tech should complement that well, and that used to be a huge high value offering they had.
They innovated a lot. Until 2022 or 23 they were the company that obtained the most patents every year.
I am personally bullish on Intel long term under the current leadership, but man are they taking a beating.
TSMC is far, far more transparent than Intel—which is backwards. Intel is who needs more customers. Intel's silence on 18A's specifics is not inspiring.
Qualcomm resoundingly rejected Intel 18A, according to the Wall Street Journal, due to Intel missing multiple promised 18A milestones.
>Qualcomm, which designs chips and outsources manufacturing, wanted to work with Intel, and assigned a team of engineers to work toward making mobile-phone chips at Intel’s factories. It was particularly interested in a cutting-edge chip-making technology that Intel hopes will be the most advanced in the world by late next year.
>In early 2022, Intel’s foundry arm sent a delegation to Qualcomm’s San Diego headquarters, where they met with CEO Cristiano Amon. Then Intel missed a June performance milestone toward producing those chips commercially. It missed another in December.
>Qualcomm executives concluded Intel would struggle making the kind of cellphone chips they wanted, even if it succeeded in making high-performance processors. Qualcomm told Intel it was pausing work while it waits for Intel to show progress, according to people involved in the discussions.
Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/intel-gelsinger-nvidia-turnarou...
//
We have a long way to go. Intel only expects 18A high-volume manufacturing (HVM) in 2026, with "small amounts of 18A wafers [in 2025]".
Source: https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/manufacturing/int...
//
Without Qualcomm, Intel has only found one real customer after a half-decade of hype: UMC's design subsidiary Faraday is an "evaluation [sever] platform" with Arm Neoverse cores, while Microsoft is making a vague "custom" chip.
Faraday won't even sell those CPUs (it's an ASIC firm primarily) and Microsoft couldn't be bothered to give a single word of detail of what they are producing.
I'm not hopeful, yet, until someone actually ships a key product on Intel 18A.
https://www.intc.com/stock-info/stock-splits
They basically keep doubling the number of shares which halves the price.
I'm not seeing the domestic pipeline. What is the pathway for a high school graduate today to work on the line at one of these chip fabs that are coming up? Would any bright young person choose to do that today?
I hear a different by similar version of this same idea, which is that a lot of fab engineers and semiconductor engineers have retired. I wonder if the US lacks the ecosystem to churn out these engineers. I don't mean just the schools but also the non-leading edge foundries that aren't as sophisticated to help new college grads gain experience before they get employed at leading edge foundries.
WFH and make $180k/yr with elite benefits or commute to a lab full of dangerous/hazardous stuff and make $100k with crap benefits?
The wildcard is how effectively they can leverage the national-security angle. I can imagine them tapping government funds to pay ridiculous money to create a supply chain of vetted fourth-generation pure blood citizens to make rad-hardened Pentiums for the Navy or something.
Intel is in actual trouble, but that's because they can't ration the supply of good x86 on one side because AMD leapfrogged them, and they can't limit high performance highly compatible to x86 anymore because not only did they kill their own x86 rebirth (atom) to save absurd margin, they also denied license to everyone who wanted in so they all went with arm.
Intel is in trouble because if I want a laptop or desktop or server chip I have the choice between a powerful arm not from them or a powerful x86 not from them, or their chip that uses twice the energy of the competitor and now it turns out they melt themselves.
My heart will not bleed for their demise.
Not trying to argue with you just a funny parallel. I don't really have a horse in this race but it’s clear there’s a lot of uncertainty out there for intel right now.
I don't think AMD would get enough out of that to make it worth for them. And that's before you take into account that a condition of that merger would be spinning off the x86 CPU business to a separate entity to avoid a monopoly there.
The big loss maker here is the fab business - and AMD realized a long time ago they're better off without their own fab (and got heavily criticized back then) - so why would consider investing a shitload of money for a bit of IP just for having to deal with spinning of fab business yet again?
1) ownership stake of Intel, including governance, for xx years
2) stock buyback ban
3) stock dividend ban
4) golden parachute ban
5) far more public disclosures of progress, setbacks, and other problems
If Intel—who's spent BILLIONS on buybacks—can't find enough money from the debt or equity or private markets, then, yes, serious strings should be required.
Currently, CHIPS only receives some profit sharing and that's it.
There were way too many alternative ways to implement this and we're paying the price of picking a "winner" that is massively cocky and arrogant with abysmal results. Major mistake and unlikely to deliver because it got wads of cash with very few serious strings attached.
Just exposed yesterday:
>The company is permanently grounding the Intel Air Shuttle, which flies workers between its major sites in Hillsboro, Silicon Valley and Arizona.
>The company stopped the flights last year then resumed flying in April. The shuttle was especially prized by Oregon employees, who sought to avoid the 30-mile drive across the metro area to Portland International Airport.
>The decision to permanently ground the shuttle, just five months after reinstating it, suggests that Intel executives didn’t recognize the severity of their financial situation until very recently.