Pat Gelsinger: "Intel Has to be Better at Making CPUs Than That Lifestyle Company"

[bug]

With respect to x86, it is high noon for slashing legacy modes and legacy features, and revisiting some over-complicated features. I am not a fan of ARM's business model, but x86 better do something.

Exactly. Intel indeed "has to be better", but can they beat a fresh, unencumbered design while dragging compatibility features dating back to 8086 (that's about 45 years ago)? Is that all that silicon that goes to AVX and heats up like crazy under load worth it?
And if you want a "clean slate", I figure it will be nearly impossible to come up with another in-house instruction set when AArch64 and RISC-V are already around.
I'm glad I'm not tasked with solving this problem, but if this guy can, hats off.

 

[mtcn77]

For a decade they stopped making CPUs without iGPU which was a very suspect move to me. It does not make any sens commercially.

At the time of Haswell, the previous gen Broadwell G offered better ipc if you would disable the gpu function and used the esram for L4. It could have been a distinguishing factor in the line up. Fortunately, since chip launches are just cheap publicity, nobody cared. It seems Intel is deliberately not competing with its own success.

 

[Totally]

Apple is a hardware company... How many devices do they need to have a stranglehold on for people to understand that.

They'll never be a hardware company, it's possible they were at one point in time but hardware generates a tiny fraction of their revenue. Nearly all of their money comes from from software and services therefore they are a Software company. Why is that difficult to understand?

 

[Arc1t3ct]

Perhaps he is not the CEO Intel needs...

 

[bug]

They'll never be a hardware company, it's possible they were at one point in time but hardware generates a tiny fraction of their revenue. Nearly all of their money comes from from software and services therefore they are a Software company. Why is that difficult to understand?

Apple revenue streams/segments by quarter 2024 | Statista

Apple generated over 46 billion U.S.

www.statista.com

However, the initial assertion is not about whether Apple is a hardware or a services company. The original assertion is that the CPU is not a central product in Apple's lineup, while it's supposed to be Intel's bread and butter.

 

[Lucas_]

Apple is a hardware company... How many devices do they need to have a stranglehold on for people to understand that.

I know right.... Apple not only an OS....

 

[voltage]

shame this new ceo wasn't at the company sooner. say five or 7 years ago. that said, I am optimistic. I do hope for now Intel sees the first step to by pass 7nm and go straight to 5, 5 offers better yields and so do what needs to be done and skip 7 to "get back into the game.

 

[Rictorhell]

Just amazed at all the trouble Intel has had the last few years. It would be impressive if they were able to fix all of their node issues at some point and catch up or even surpass TSMC. That's a longshot at this point, but the thought of it excites me. AMD and Apple are firing on all cylinders and we know that competition is good, for all of us. An Intel that was revived and rejuvenated, able to competently execute and make steady, consistent progress, again, would be awesome, the best thing for everyone. As long as they didn't get so far ahead, again, that they were able to be ridiculous with pricing, and just super arrogant and obnoxious. If Intel could get their act together again, and AMD and Apple could keep their designs and annual IPC improvements at a comparable or consistently superior level to Intel's, that would make for very exciting times.

We're in 2021. This is the "future" that we've all heard about, time and time again, but I'm not excited by recent technology. I watch Star Trek Discovery. On that show, based hundreds of years in the future, the actors are playing with the gadgets and interfaces and technologies that I would like to see, NOW.

If we're so advanced right now, that we can realistically fake all of this tech through special effects and possibly some very early prototypes, how far away are we, realistically, from seeing some of this stuff "in the flesh", so to speak?

When are we going to make some real progress and see some real advancements beyond just slightly faster processors and slightly better IPC than the previous year?

Where are my holograms and 3D interfaces? When is that stuff coming? When do I get my self-aware, fully autonomous, AI virtual assistant, that is with me 24-7, knows everything I know, knows what I want and need, at the same time I want and need it, or before, and can wirelessly control my home/apartment and automobile, without lag, instantaneously.

Maybe all of this is far-fetched, but you know what I'm getting at. Are we ever going to see an actual exciting future, fully-realized?

 

[Fatalfury]

Lifestyle Company as in "Apple" or "AMD".
Not Impressive Mr Pat.. Not impressive

Not looking good for Intel..

 

[Fouquin]

That used to be true. Apple is now a hardware and services company. They have cloud storage, music, TV, Arcade, and now a fitness plan that people can subscribe to. In this age of "good enough" computing, Apple knows they can't ride hardware sales alone anymore.

They'll never be a hardware company, it's possible they were at one point in time but hardware generates a tiny fraction of their revenue. Nearly all of their money comes from from software and services therefore they are a Software company. Why is that difficult to understand?

Every service is tied to hardware.
Fitness+ > Apple Watch
Home entertainment/automation > Homepod, Apple TV
Personal entertainment/music > Homepod, iPod, Airpod
iOS+apps > iPhone
iPadOS+apps > iPad
macOS+apps > Mac Computers

Every single thing they do is centered around their in house first party devices. I don't know how much more focused on hardware they could possibly be.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Every service is tied to hardware.
Fitness+ > Apple Watch
Home entertainment/automation > Homepod, Apple TV
Personal entertainment/music > Homepod, iPod, Airpod
iOS+apps > iPhone
iPadOS+apps > iPad
macOS+apps > Mac Computers

Every single thing they do is centered around their in house first party devices. I don't know how much more focused on hardware they could possibly be.

That is beside the point I am making. The point is that these services are another revenue stream for Apple that isn’t hardware. Yes, they target customers with Apple hardware primarily (though not exclusively, especially TV+), but it’s revenue that isn’t from hardware sales. Less than 10 years ago, they had no such subscriptions, and subscriptions are services. Recent revenue statements for Apple has nearly 20% of their revenue coming from services, and it’s been slowly growing. That’s more revenue than Mac, Wearables, and iPad segments, and it makes them a hardware and services company.

 

[Totally]

Every service is tied to hardware.
Fitness+ > Apple Watch
Home entertainment/automation > Homepod, Apple TV
Personal entertainment/music > Homepod, iPod, Airpod
iOS+apps > iPhone
iPadOS+apps > iPad
macOS+apps > Mac Computers

Every single thing they do is centered around their in house first party devices. I don't know how much more focused on hardware they could possibly be.

The hardware is a means to an end. You've somehow got it backwards consumers aren't buying their products for the hardware.

 

[rutra80]

I would like that slogan if Intel wasn't a company going head first into diversity, rainbow and similar BS

 

[1d10t]

That statement is rather vague and weak, so in future Intel will start producing smartphones, washing machines, rice cookers, smart home technology, TVs, monitors, and cars ? Come to think of it it maybe funny for Intel entering smart home, instead shouting "Hi Google/ Siri/ Alexa" , among other we shouted " Hey moar cores"

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

Every service is tied to hardware.
Fitness+ > Apple Watch
Home entertainment/automation > Homepod, Apple TV
Personal entertainment/music > Homepod, iPod, Airpod
iOS+apps > iPhone
iPadOS+apps > iPad
macOS+apps > Mac Computers

Every single thing they do is centered around their in house first party devices. I don't know how much more focused on hardware they could possibly be.

I dont consider those items listed as hardware, IOT devices sure but not hardware.

 

[Arc1t3ct]

I dont consider those items listed as hardware, IOT devices sure but not hardware.

What would you consider as hardware?

 

[bug]

I dont consider those items listed as hardware, IOT devices sure but not hardware.

I take it in your head "things" means something immaterial?

 

[thesmokingman]

That's ironic cuz Pat called them that "lifestyle" company not that other hardware company.

 

[Frick]

I dont consider those items listed as hardware, IOT devices sure but not hardware.

Mobile phones, tablets, computers and media players isn't hardware?

That is beside the point I am making. The point is that these services are another revenue stream for Apple that isn’t hardware. Yes, they target customers with Apple hardware primarily (though not exclusively, especially TV+), but it’s revenue that isn’t from hardware sales. Less than 10 years ago, they had no such subscriptions, and subscriptions are services. Recent revenue statements for Apple has nearly 20% of their revenue coming from services, and it’s been slowly growing. That’s more revenue than Mac, Wearables, and iPad segments, and it makes them a hardware and services company.
View attachment 184185

That does not preclude a company to be counted as a hardware company.

They'll never be a hardware company, it's possible they were at one point in time but hardware generates a tiny fraction of their revenue. Nearly all of their money comes from from software and services therefore they are a Software company. Why is that difficult to understand?

In the end the distinction is meaningless to be honest. They make hardware. Are hardware companies - whatever that means - morally superior than software/services companies?

 

[medi01]

Does one pay for such ninja-advertisment-for-overhyped-5nm-25W-ARM-chip-that-loses-to-7nm-yet-smaller-15W-4800u, does it work via Apple fans being so much into hyping it into ad nauseum?

"Reportedly" Jesus freaking Christ...

 

[bug]

Does one pay for such ninja-advertisment-for-overhyped-5nm-25W-ARM-chip-that-loses-to-7nm-yet-smaller-15W-4800u, does it work via Apple fans being so much into hyping it into ad nauseum?

"Reportedly" Jesus freaking Christ...

Where did you see the M1 compared to Ryzen? I've barely seen it compared to intel, I'd like to read some more.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Where did you see the M1 compared to Ryzen? I've barely seen it compared to intel, I'd like to read some more.

The 2020 Mac Mini Unleashed: Putting Apple Silicon M1 To The Test

www.anandtech.com

There’s not a whole lot to go on since there aren’t a ton of benchmarks for MacOS, but they ran what they could.

 

[r9]

shame this new ceo wasn't at the company sooner. say five or 7 years ago. that said, I am optimistic. I do hope for now Intel sees the first step to by pass 7nm and go straight to 5, 5 offers better yields and so do what needs to be done and skip 7 to "get back into the game.

Maybe they should go for 3nm then ? When we pooling stuff out our asses might as well go all the way.

 

[bug]

The 2020 Mac Mini Unleashed: Putting Apple Silicon M1 To The Test

www.anandtech.com

View attachment 184318
There’s not a whole lot to go on since there aren’t a ton of benchmarks for MacOS, but they ran what they could.

"Not a whole lot to go on" is being generous.
It's a concern of mine that, by controlling what you can install on it, Apple will simply reject benchmarks that don't paint them in nice colors, sometime in the future. Already many Android benchmarks do not have an iOS counterpart.

Also, this particular benchmark does not show the M1 losing to Ryzen. It shows Rosetta emulation losing to Ryzen Regardless, anyone who took statistics 101 knows what to do with a sample of 1.

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

"Not a whole lot to go on" is being generous.
It's a concern of mine that, by controlling what you can install on it, Apple will simply reject benchmarks that don't paint them in nice colors, sometime in the future. Already many Android benchmarks do not have an iOS counterpart.

Also, this particular benchmark does not show the M1 losing to Ryzen. It shows Rosetta emulation losing to Ryzen Regardless, anyone who took statistics 101 knows what to do with a sample of 1.

Is there evidence that Apple is blocking benchmarks? I don’t think they are all that concerned, to be honest. All Apple needs to do is prove to its customer base that the M1 Macs are viable upgrades. Even IF there was no generational performance gain from M1, the battery life gains were a monumental upgrade. Reviewers seemingly are walking away impressed with the M1 line of Macs, and they don’t have to pretend. Apple is not immune to negative reviews, but they executed well with M1. Now they just need to prove they can keep doing it. The M1 is by no means a simple chip, so succeeding it won’t be a simple task.