Monday, December 2nd 2024

Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger Retires, Company Appoints two Interim co-CEOs

Intel Corporation (NASDAQ: INTC) today announced that CEO Pat Gelsinger retired from the company after a distinguished 40-plus-year career and has stepped down from the board of directors, effective Dec. 1, 2024. Intel has named two senior leaders, David Zinsner and Michelle (MJ) Johnston Holthaus, as interim co-chief executive officers while the board of directors conducts a search for a new CEO. Zinsner is executive vice president and chief financial officer, and Holthaus has been appointed to the newly created position of CEO of Intel Products, a group that encompasses the company's Client Computing Group (CCG), Data Center and AI Group (DCAI) and Network and Edge Group (NEX). Frank Yeary, independent chair of the board of Intel, will become interim executive chair during the period of transition. Intel Foundry leadership structure remains unchanged.

The board has formed a search committee and will work diligently and expeditiously to find a permanent successor to Gelsinger. Yeary said, "On behalf of the board, I want to thank Pat for his many years of service and dedication to Intel across a long career in technology leadership. Pat spent his formative years at Intel, then returned at a critical time for the company in 2021. As a leader, Pat helped launch and revitalize process manufacturing by investing in state-of-the-art semiconductor manufacturing, while working tirelessly to drive innovation throughout the company."
Yeary continued, "While we have made significant progress in regaining manufacturing competitiveness and building the capabilities to be a world-class foundry, we know that we have much more work to do at the company and are committed to restoring investor confidence. As a board, we know first and foremost that we must put our product group at the center of all we do. Our customers demand this from us, and we will deliver for them. With MJ's permanent elevation to CEO of Intel Products along with her interim co-CEO role of Intel, we are ensuring the product group will have the resources needed to deliver for our customers. Ultimately, returning to process leadership is central to product leadership, and we will remain focused on that mission while driving greater efficiency and improved profitability."

Yeary concluded, "With Dave and MJ's leadership, we will continue to act with urgency on our priorities: simplifying and strengthening our product portfolio and advancing our manufacturing and foundry capabilities while optimizing our operating expenses and capital. We are working to create a leaner, simpler, more agile Intel."

Gelsinger said, "Leading Intel has been the honor of my lifetime - this group of people is among the best and the brightest in the business, and I'm honored to call each and every one a colleague. Today is, of course, bittersweet as this company has been my life for the bulk of my working career. I can look back with pride at all that we have accomplished together. It has been a challenging year for all of us as we have made tough but necessary decisions to position Intel for the current market dynamics. I am forever grateful for the many colleagues around the world who I have worked with as part of the Intel family."

Throughout Gelsinger's tenure at Intel across a variety of roles, he has driven significant innovation and advanced not only the business but the broader global technology industry. A highly respected leader and skilled technologist, he has played an instrumental role in focusing on innovation while also creating a sense of urgency throughout the organization. Gelsinger began his career in 1979 at Intel, growing at the company to eventually become its first chief technology officer.
Zinsner and Holthaus said, "We are grateful for Pat's commitment to Intel over these many years as well as his leadership. We will redouble our commitment to Intel Products and meeting customer needs. With our product and process leadership progressing, we will be focused on driving returns on foundry investments."

Zinsner has more than 25 years of financial and operational experience in semiconductors, manufacturing and the technology industry. He joined Intel in January 2022 from Micron Technology Inc., where he was executive vice president and CFO. Zinsner served in a variety of other leadership roles earlier in his career, including president and chief operating officer at Affirmed Networks and senior vice president of finance and CFO at Analog Devices.

Holthaus is a proven general manager and leader who began her career with Intel nearly three decades ago. Prior to being named CEO of Intel Products, she was executive vice president and general manager of CCG. Holthaus has held a variety of management and leadership roles at Intel, including chief revenue officer and general manager of the Sales and Marketing Group, and lead of global CCG sales.
Add your own comment

217 Comments on Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger Retires, Company Appoints two Interim co-CEOs

#76
Darmok N Jalad
RandallFlaggGames aren't known for using the E-cores much.

Games @ 1440p:


Like I said, the AMD fanboi's really hated to see Raptor Lake be this good.
*This good, at cost of long term chip stability.
Posted on Reply
#77
sLowEnd
Wow, and his seat on the board too
Posted on Reply
#78
Nhonho
(the incompetent) Pat Gelsinger took control of Intel when the company had already been destroyed by two terrible CEOs before him: Bob Swan and, especially, Brian Krzanich.
Posted on Reply
#79
ThomasK
lexluthermiesterUnlike the fanboying nonsense being displayed in some of the comments
Your entire comment was, what I think, is the most "fanboying nonsense" here.
Posted on Reply
#80
Nhonho
DavenHe failed and probably knows something really bad is coming. Pat's got a legacy to protect so he's out before the coming storm.
Man, your post and Intel's future are like the end of the movie "The Terminator" (1984).
Posted on Reply
#81
ScaLibBDP
john_I wonder if this is an indication that his plan to make Intel a manufacturing behemoth to go against TSMC is failing. They scrapped A20, probably to focus more on A18, I wonder if A18 is also bad. If A18 was in a very good position, that alone could keep him in the CEO position. If this is also failing, then I can understand why he is stepping down.
Then again we had the 14K fiasco, the 200 Ultra fiasco, the failed attempt with ARC to get market share in discrete GPU market, the Raja server GPU that was a failure, the AURORA.....damn, they are many...
>>...the AURORA...

I'd like to clarify that 'John_' has mentioned the US Department of Energy the Aurora supercomputer.

That is a Complete Disaster since a real performance of the Aurora supercomputer is ~49% lower than expected!

Rmax performance ( real ) is only 1.012 ExaFLOPs vs. Rpeak performance ( theoretical ) as 1.980 ExaFLOPs. ( Performance R-numbers are from www.top500.org/lists/top500/2024/11/ )
Posted on Reply
#82
RandallFlagg
Vya DomusYour chart was for applications not games and it doesn't really matter because AMD got Intel soundly beaten in that area without using E cores or a lot of cores in general and high TDPs.

What I am pointing out is that Intel's main advantage in non gaming scenarios comes from having more cores and that advantage could easily be wiped out by AMD should they want to.
Soundly beaten? Look again, even the latest Zen 5 is only a few percent faster on apps overall vs RL. In fact, Arrow Lake was likely a victim of a highly optimized Alder Lake (in the form of RL), as RL was never intended to exist when Arrow Lake was first on the drawing board.

But all that said, yes indeed I suspect Intel as an x86 vendor of scale will die now. Intel is a victim of 劣幣驅逐良幣.

AMD fans may be about to learn a different lesson rather quickly though. "After a time, you may find that having is not so pleasing a thing after all as wanting.." seems to apply here.
Posted on Reply
#83
Vya Domus
RandallFlaggSoundly beaten? Look again, even the latest Zen 5
In gaming ? 7800X3D, 9800X3D don't exist ?
Posted on Reply
#84
theouto
RandallFlaggSoundly beaten? Look again, even the latest Zen 5
In gaming, a 1440p benchmark, a more GPU limited resolution. There's a reason why cpu benchmarks are done at 1080p, and it's to prevent GPU bottlenecks while still using a popular resolution.
Posted on Reply
#85
RootinTootinPootin
Neo_MorpheusSo no, AMD wont have a monopoly.
if the price is right for its products, else at this point in time, everyone feels drained about economic issues and milking these issues will surely go a very long way if AMD has no competition on the Processor space, I highly doubt Ngreedia would "directly" compete with them knowing they'd be busted for sure.
Neo_MorpheusI dont hear such complains about the Ngreedia monopoly...
its a given, AMD concedes that's why they can dictate the higher price tag + market AI bull crap
Neo_MorpheusAnd the power consumption of those marvelous Intel cpus?
to be fair, between 80 and 120w of power consumption I can't/couldn't care less as long there's FPS when I play, and regardless of what I use.
Posted on Reply
#86
RandallFlagg
Vya DomusIn gaming ? 7800X3D, 9800X3D don't exist ?
Do you not know how to read a chart?

The 9800X3D is the absolute fastest you can get, and it is a whopping 4.1% faster than a 14900K in games at 1440P with a $3000 4090.

Meanwhile the 14900K obliterates it by almost 20% in apps:




Posted on Reply
#88
AusWolf
AnotherReaderPat Gelsinger is an engineer.
Oh. My bad.
RandallFlaggDo you not know how to read a chart?

The 9800X3D is the absolute fastest you can get, and it is a whopping 4.1% faster than a 14900K in games at 1440P with a $3000 4090.

Meanwhile the 14900K obliterates it by almost 20% in apps:




At what power consumption, heat and price? There's always a context.
Posted on Reply
#89
Vya Domus
RandallFlaggThe 9800X3D is the absolute fastest you can get, and it is a whopping 4.1% faster than a 14900K in games at 1440P with a $3000 4090.

Meanwhile the 14900K obliterates it by almost 20% in apps:
You keep flip flopping between gaming and non gaming figures. The fact of the matter is AMD has got the fastest gaming chips with a lot fewer cores and power consumption, beating Intel in those few multithreaded benchmarks is simply a mater of them deciding to do it or not, a 10 or 12 core chiplet would wipe out almost every advantage they got in those workloads.

Intel is ironically finding themselves in a similar position AMD was with first gen Zen where they offered compelling productivity performance but not so great gaming performance, except much worse. You're touting this "20%" advantage as if it's a big deal but it turns out nobody really cares or is impressed by that, a CPU with 16 more cores consuming 2-3 the power being better at rendering is not blowing anyone away.

And I'll remind you that the 7950X (or the X3D variant), 14900K's actual competing product is beating it in a good number of those benchmarks with less cores and lower TDP.

Posted on Reply
#90
RandallFlagg
AusWolfAt what power consumption, heat and price? There's always a context.
Yes well, if this is what everyone really believes is important, they should absolutely love Arrow Lake now shouldn't they? I mean the 285K is nearly a dead ringer for a 9950X in terms of both performance and power usage. It's never even 5% off on either of them, merely trades a few blows.

Right?

Oh but yeah, Arrow Lake sucks because - it wasn't faster than Raptor Lake.

I forgot..

I sometimes wonder if some Intel engineers read forums like this one, and were stupid enough to think that people really want power efficiency and hence gave them 'what they wanted'.

If they had given 20% more performance instead, Arrow Lake would be the bees knees.

But I digress, more charts :



Posted on Reply
#91
DavidC1
L'EliminateurBut it's true that intel cannot stop fucking up, their gamble with e-cores is a total failure, i'm amazed people buy that crap that belong in a celeron as a premium expensive CPU that instead of advancing performance they go slower "but with more cores". That's the same tactic that sparc made with their super multithreaded "light thread" CPUs that were an utter failure. Instead of advancing IPC intel releases slow celerons as "premium" cpus.
The latest "Skymont" E core is nothing like you portray. It's actually the P core design and team that should be gone, because it's barely faster per clock while being 3x the size. Compared to AMD it's more obvious - The Intel P core is larger while being on a more dense process, clocks the same, and doesn't even have HT.
Posted on Reply
#92
AusWolf
RandallFlaggYes well, if this is what everyone really believes is important, they should absolutely love Arrow Lake now shouldn't they? I mean the 285K is nearly a dead ringer for a 9950X in terms of both performance and power usage. It's never even 5% off on either of them, merely trades a few blows.

Right?

Oh but yeah, Arrow Lake sucks because - it wasn't faster than Raptor Lake.

I forgot..

I sometimes wonder if some Intel engineers read forums like this one, and were stupid enough to think that people really want power efficiency and hence gave them 'what they wanted'.

If they had given 20% more performance instead, Arrow Lake would be the bees knees.

But I digress, more charts :



In my opinion, Arrow Lake is a failure not only because it isn't faster than Raptor Lake, but also because it still isn't as efficient as it should be, combine that with the new socket and exclusive DDR5 support. But that's just me.
Posted on Reply
#93
1d10t
Now I know why he insisted on CHIPS act.
Posted on Reply
#94
mechtech
Well he milked that $160mill/yr in change.
Posted on Reply
#95
lexluthermiester
piloponthWhoever next saves Intel
I really wish people would stop with silly, misinformed comments like this. Stop with the disinformation!

Intel doesn't need to be "saved". It's need time to recover, nothing more.
Posted on Reply
#96
DavidC1
AusWolfIn my opinion, Arrow Lake is a failure not only because it isn't faster than Raptor Lake, but also because it still isn't as efficient as it should be, combine that with the new socket and exclusive DDR5 support. But that's just me.
Arrowlake inherited Meteorlake's bad design but originally it was scheduled before Lunarlake. They didn't screw up on Lunarlake, but Arrowlake got delayed. Instead of Raptorlake refresh, it should have been Arrowlake. 1 year would have made a noticeable difference. It would have been against 13900K and 7950X. Also delays usually mean being unpolished so it might have performed a bit better too.

The thing is, Raptorlake itself is a replacement for Meteorlake. The real original roadmap was:
Alderlake, Meteorlake, Arrowlake.

Intel is in trouble now. Gelsinger being fired means it's worse than we expected though.
lexluthermiesterIntel doesn't need to be "saved". It's need time to recover, nothing more.
What "disinformation"? Or are you using the word because it's word-of-the day?

They've had internal political issues for years! Early 2000's there were articles about this. This isn't like losing with Pentium 4. They lost the process lead, they are rapidly losing marketshare(PC is at 80% so still long ways to go lower), and in 10 years they went through massive management changes and 3 CEOs.

They may not go under immediately, they are too big for that. But their future may be numbered, and not too long.
Posted on Reply
#97
lexluthermiester
Dr. DroIt's not TPU if no one is rushing to the defense of AMD while simultaneously blasting Intel and Nvidia for simply existing haha
That doesn't mean it's a good thing and it should be countered in kind. This article is about a CEO, who did some good things and contributed positively to their company and the world, retiring. This is not about Intel itself. The people needlessly fanboying and making negative comments are embarrassing themselves by failing to grasp this very simple context. It's more than a bit graceless and pathetic IMPO.
DavidC1Or are you using the word because it's word-of-the day?
Seriously? That's the best response you got?
DavidC1They've had internal political issues for years!
How is that different from any other company? Your point isn't one. Just stop..
Posted on Reply
#98
:D:D
Maybe time for Intel to do some poaching? Looking at you Lisa Su... :D
Posted on Reply
#99
lexluthermiester
trparkyPat didn't retire; he got retired.

Pat was given an ultimatum: either retire (with a semblance of honor) or be handed a box, told to clean out his desk, and unceremoniously shown the door. Pat chose the first option.
Citation or it didn't happen.
(Sidenote: Really? You're better than this kind of thing, what the hell?)
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Mar 2nd, 2025 10:12 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts