Thursday, August 11th 2022

Intel GPU Business in a $3.5 Billion Hole, Jon Peddie Recommends Sell or Kill

Jon Peddie Research (JPR) provides some of the most authoritative and informative market-research into the PC graphics hardware industry. The firm just published a scathing editorial on the future of Intel AXG (Accelerated Computing Systems and Graphics), the business tasked with development of competitive discrete GPU and HPC compute accelerators for Intel. Founded to much fanfare in 2016 and led by Raja Koduri since 2016; AXG has been in the news for the development of the Xe graphics and compute architecture, particularly with the Xe-HP "Ponte Vecchio" HPC accelerator; and the Arc brand of consumer discrete graphics solutions. JPR reports that Intel has invested several billions of Dollars into AXG, to little avail, with none of its product lines bringing in notable revenues for the company. Xe-LP based iGPUs do not count as they're integrated with client processors, and their revenues are clubbed with CCG (Client Computing Group).

Intel started reporting revenues from the AXG business since Q1-2021, around which time it started selling its first discrete GPUs as the Intel DG1 Xe MAX, based on the same Xe-LP architecture powering its iGPUs. The company's Xe-HPG architecture, designed for high-performance gaming, was marketed as its first definitive answer to NVIDIA GeForce and AMD Radeon. Since Q1-2021, Intel has lost $2.1 billion to AXG, with not much to show for. The JPR article suggests that Intel missed the bus both with its time-to-market and scale.
A sizable launch of Arc "Alchemist" in 2021 or early-2022, in the thick of the GPU supply crisis, would have enabled Intel to cash in on sales to whoever is in the market for a graphics card. With the supply crisis over in the wake of the crypto-currency mining demand for dGPUs, Intel finds Arc "Alchemist" competing with GeForce and Radeon products purely on gaming performance, where its fastest "Alchemist" product matches their mid-range products. Both NVIDIA and AMD are ready to ship their next-generation, which is bound to widen the performance gap with Intel even further. Besides graphics, NVIDIA and AMD are ready with even their next-generation scalar compute products, with NVIDIA's Hopper, and AMD's CDNA3, increasing the performance gap with "Ponte Vecchio."

With the recent axing of the Optane Memory business, which rode on the promise of the pioneering 3D XPoint memory technology that Intel invented, it's open-season on non-performing Intel businesses, especially with CEO Pat Gelsinger seeing favorable outcomes in Washington DC for legislation that makes business favorable for Intel and increases government subsidies for the company. JPR recommends that in light of the losses faced by AXG, Intel should consider selling the entire division off and exiting this market.

The JPR editorial can be read from the source link below.
Source: Jon Peddie Research
Add your own comment

112 Comments on Intel GPU Business in a $3.5 Billion Hole, Jon Peddie Recommends Sell or Kill

#101
regs
trparkyI blame Raja for it. He was a failure at AMD, and now he's a failure at Intel. It's obvious he doesn't belong in an executive position. He couldn't organize a kegger in a brewery or an orgy in a whorehouse let alone a graphics card division.
Navi was made under his watch. How is that a failure? And here main to blame s TSMC for years of delaying N6.
Posted on Reply
#102
Jism
regsNavi was made under his watch.
The cards prior was under his watch too. The problem was they created computational based chips on which the ones that did'nt meet Quality standards where sold as a graphics card chip.

We see the same happening now at Intel. Compute based tiles or whatever the F they are doing, the ones not meeting the computational quality standards are being resold as Arc's. Its just one line served for 2.

The downside of putting computational cards into graphics consumer cards is that, often the power is higher, the performance comes with quite some overhead and its behind the competition.

AMD used todo that (Vega > Instinct) but they are actually making graphics vs computational based cards, RDNA / CDNA. The difference is pretty big if i can say.
Posted on Reply
#103
Mussels
Freshwater Moderator
It's a short term loss for long term dominance.
Any tech and IP they develop will be used in their IGPs, and they could end up in the mobile and console worlds too.

Nothing stops them from being the PS6 hardware, if they sort the kinks out
Posted on Reply
#104
medi01
Xex360Given the bribing of Intel I don't think it would've helped to have a better CPU, Athlons were way better than Pentium 4 yet AMD struggled to gain market share.
Indeed. AMD simply was not given a chance to benefit from having superior product (frustratingly, similar situation is still quite visible in OEM space).

And on the opposite, GPU business is what had saved AMD. (the semi-custom business with major console manufacturers, for instance)


I still cannot wrap my hand about amazing comeback. I get the perfect storm of new design from AMD coming in parallel with Intel's new fab node underdelivering, but... heck, what a little miracle had happened.
PalladiumSurprise, capitalists with short-termism "ANYTHING FOR A PROFIT NOW" brains are bad economists.
I think it is more nuanced than that and it is not necessarily caused by not understanding what is going on.

There are people who own stock who could not give a flying... fruit about elusive long term prospect. They've bought stock here and now and need Intel to deliver here and now.

CEOs, on the other hand, cannot be sure they will even last for long enough for good strategic decisions to pay off.

So at the end of the day we have situation when key stakeholders are only interested in short term, at best, mid term results.
Posted on Reply
#105
ThrashZone
Hi,
Best thing about hitting rock bottom is they can only go up from here right or can it get worse :eek:
Posted on Reply
#106
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
medi01Indeed. AMD simply was not given a chance to benefit from having superior product (frustratingly, similar situation is still quite visible in OEM space).

And on the opposite, GPU business is what had saved AMD. (the semi-custom business with major console manufacturers, for instance)


I still cannot wrap my hand about amazing comeback. I get the perfect storm of new design from AMD coming in parallel with Intel's new fab node underdelivering, but... heck, what a little miracle had happened.


I think it is more nuanced than that and it is not necessarily caused by not understanding what is going on.

There are people who own stock who could not give a flying... fruit about elusive long term prospect. They've bought stock here and now and need Intel to deliver here and now.

CEOs, on the other hand, cannot be sure they will even last for long enough for good strategic decisions to pay off.

So at the end of the day we have situation when key stakeholders are only interested in short term, at best, mid term results.
AMD already has a superior product and people only ever hear of nvidia, intel.
Posted on Reply
#107
Bomby569
yes, invest all the money, and sell before it gives you any money. A financial genius this one
Posted on Reply
#108
DeathtoGnomes
Bomby569yes, invest all the money, and sell before it gives you any money. A financial genius this one
who exactly is the financial genius? Asking for a friend...:D
Posted on Reply
#109
MikeMurphy
zlobbyI really lost it at 'more secure' :D
It's hard probe security on custom ARM64 chips when you have none to test with.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
May 31st, 2024 20:35 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts