On the other hand, if Intel is still committed to the AI business, it all hinges on the GPUs at the moment.
Too risky to go all in on AI now when Nvidia already has a stronghold monopoly that even AMD can't break.
But the "AI bubble"? Are we going to discover that none of the LLM-based applications that are being developed now actually works (despite many having already been working for years, e.g. copilot) AND at the same time that further improvements, both in the LLMs themselves and in the code surrounding them, are impossible- in other words, that LLMs, after four or five years of development at most are already a mature technology? Are we not going to find any new use cases for agents that have almost the skills of specialists, minus some kind of cognitive impairment? Honest question, I don't understand.
Large corps and FAANGS are spending billions on Nvidia HW and on ML training but all those LLMs aren't earning them any money, in fact they're still loosing money just to capture the market share and consumer mindset, but there's doesn't seem to be a profit light at the end of the tunnel.
Once they've bled enough money with no chance of RoI, they'll put a halt on ML expansion and stop buying Nvidia HW. Intel entering at that point would be suicide.
The spend seems to be based on faith that there will be some kind of major breakthrough...but that does appear to be entirely faith based. We don't have any evidence to indicate that it's likely.
I think that rather than being a matter of having or not faith in a future breakthrough, the difference is between those who believe that there's already been a major breakthrough in the last few years and those who deny it.