Welcome Notice

Register Log in

Sad day for Intel and America...

S

server

Guest
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:04:11 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
<trader4@optonline.net> wrote:

On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 10:11:59 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 04:01:42 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/28/2020 9:43 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:13:54 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/28/2020 7:52 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:08 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
trader4@optonline.net> wrote:


https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/


\"Intel Corp’s plan to outsource manufacturing is the end of an era in US tech
When most other US chip companies shut or sold domestic plants years ago, Intel held out, a strategy that is now in tatters, with the company’s factories struggling to keep up.\"

CEO Bob Swan made the stunning announcement on Friday, during an earnings
call. It sent Intel down 16%, AMD up 16%. Bottom line, Intel first screwed
10nm, they are only now recovering and catching up on that. Meanwhile
Swan announced that 7nm is all screwed up, yields are terrible, it has
slipped another 6 months on top of at least six months earlier. Intel
won\'t be in production until 2022/23. MEanwhile AMC is producing 7nm
via TSMC right now. By the time Intel is on 7nm, TSMC will be on 3 nm.
In short, Intel has gone from being a node ahead to a node behind.
And Swan says the answer is Intel is considering outsourcing production
to other companies!

I remember discussing this here a couple years ago, warning that this is
what happens when you let accountants take over high tech companies.
I remember the usual suspects here arguing it was no big deal, it\'s just
\"managing\". Well, the idiot bean counter from Ebay that somehow would
up running Intel sure has screwed this up really badly. It\'s unlikely
Intel will ever recover. And it validates AMD being apparently right
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Intel.
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.



Intel screwed up the transition to EUV somehow. I think the problem
was mostly technical.

That said, Intel\'s management seems to be very rigid.

Intel\'s other problem is that x86 is ancient and buggy, and biggies
like Apple and Google can roll their own Arm-based chips and come out
ahead on price and performance.

I think Samsung is going to drop $1e10 or something amazing on a new
EUV-based fab too.


They tried making an x86 low-power derivative to compete with the ARM
market segment at one point, it was called Atom and it kinda sucked

Intel\'s value has always been superb lithography cranking out bad
architectures, and now they don\'t have the lithography.




I think a solid argument could be made that x86 has been a kludgy dog
since about 1988. Or at least since the last major opportunity they had
to not double down on it, on the Pentium.

It\'s always been a klugey dog. It evolved directly from 4004, 8008,
and 8080. When x86 was evolved (not invented) there were much better
architures around, like PDP-11 and 68K and others.

x86 has always been weak on hardware protections, and the ones that it
has are rarely used. So we get buffer overflow exploits, cache
exploits, all those crashes and viruses and trojans and ransomware and
patch-fests.

IF true, then it\'s odd that so much of the internet and modern computing
runs so successfully on it.
Not so much odd as sad. IBM picked the wrong cpu for the PC.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
 
S

server

Guest
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 7:29:25 AM UTC-7, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 6:54:28 PM UTC+10, edward....@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 1:33:12 AM UTC-7, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:
Am 29.07.20 um 09:32 schrieb edward....@gmail.com:
On Tuesday, July 28, 2020 at 11:43:59 PM UTC-7, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Tue, 28 Jul 2020 18:35:07 -0700 (PDT)) it happened
edward....@gmail.com wrote in
0a405a10-fa99-4ef7...@googlegroups.com>:

Why?

TSMC is building new fab in AZ,USA and listen to US gov to ditch Huawei.

Listening to an idiot PreCedent is not a good sign.
Same effect as a cookies baker in control of a tech company.

I don\'t think you understand the U.S. system. The President is just picking consensus from other government officials. The decision to ditch Huawei come from many branches of the government, representing the people\'s will.

It\'s more that he is picking government officials who blindly
say yes to his weird hallucinations. And they have a short
survival span when they note they have lost contact with reality.
You are ignoring the bi-partisan bills with overwhelming supports.
Samsung OTOH is planning to fab for Huawei.

The whole anti China jive from the current US dictator has brought nobody anything.
The next US government (dems or reps) will probably start a war in the Chinese sea
or there about and draft all the unemployed as cannon feed like Vietnam.

So, you agree that the current CCP polices is independent from the President.

It is a bit sad that your commie-nuke-ation system is now downgraded just to pester Huawei.
Shooting your own foot so to speak.

No, we are just waking up from the 50 years war plan from the CCP. Starting from Mo\'s era, CCP has been following Sun Tzu\'s \"The Art of War\". Which means lies and deceptions to take advantages of others at all cost.

Which describes US politics in a nut shell.

Like Northstream2, or denying export of Covid tests to Iran,
or weapons of mass destruction.

We are technically at war with Iran, who wants to destroy us and many others.

Really? There hasn\'t been a declaration of war. Iran may want to be free to try to convert the rest of the world to their brand of Islam, but they don\'t seem to be interested in destroying anybody for destruction\'s sake. It\'s more a matter of discouraging other people from trying to stop them doing their thing.
Like ISIS? They didn\'t declare war explicitly, but the actions speak of itself.
 
B

bitrex

Guest
On 7/29/2020 12:27 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:04:11 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
trader4@optonline.net> wrote:

On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 10:11:59 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 04:01:42 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/28/2020 9:43 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:13:54 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/28/2020 7:52 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:08 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
trader4@optonline.net> wrote:


https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/


\"Intel Corp’s plan to outsource manufacturing is the end of an era in US tech
When most other US chip companies shut or sold domestic plants years ago, Intel held out, a strategy that is now in tatters, with the company’s factories struggling to keep up.\"

CEO Bob Swan made the stunning announcement on Friday, during an earnings
call. It sent Intel down 16%, AMD up 16%. Bottom line, Intel first screwed
10nm, they are only now recovering and catching up on that. Meanwhile
Swan announced that 7nm is all screwed up, yields are terrible, it has
slipped another 6 months on top of at least six months earlier. Intel
won\'t be in production until 2022/23. MEanwhile AMC is producing 7nm
via TSMC right now. By the time Intel is on 7nm, TSMC will be on 3 nm.
In short, Intel has gone from being a node ahead to a node behind.
And Swan says the answer is Intel is considering outsourcing production
to other companies!

I remember discussing this here a couple years ago, warning that this is
what happens when you let accountants take over high tech companies.
I remember the usual suspects here arguing it was no big deal, it\'s just
\"managing\". Well, the idiot bean counter from Ebay that somehow would
up running Intel sure has screwed this up really badly. It\'s unlikely
Intel will ever recover. And it validates AMD being apparently right
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Intel.
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.



Intel screwed up the transition to EUV somehow. I think the problem
was mostly technical.

That said, Intel\'s management seems to be very rigid.

Intel\'s other problem is that x86 is ancient and buggy, and biggies
like Apple and Google can roll their own Arm-based chips and come out
ahead on price and performance.

I think Samsung is going to drop $1e10 or something amazing on a new
EUV-based fab too.


They tried making an x86 low-power derivative to compete with the ARM
market segment at one point, it was called Atom and it kinda sucked

Intel\'s value has always been superb lithography cranking out bad
architectures, and now they don\'t have the lithography.




I think a solid argument could be made that x86 has been a kludgy dog
since about 1988. Or at least since the last major opportunity they had
to not double down on it, on the Pentium.

It\'s always been a klugey dog. It evolved directly from 4004, 8008,
and 8080. When x86 was evolved (not invented) there were much better
architures around, like PDP-11 and 68K and others.

x86 has always been weak on hardware protections, and the ones that it
has are rarely used. So we get buffer overflow exploits, cache
exploits, all those crashes and viruses and trojans and ransomware and
patch-fests.

IF true, then it\'s odd that so much of the internet and modern computing
runs so successfully on it.

Not so much odd as sad. IBM picked the wrong cpu for the PC.
It\'s pretty fast _now_ in part because about a billion man-hours over
several decades were dumped into writing very good compilers for an odd
duck of an architecture.

Imagine where mainstream computing could be at if the same man-hours had
been put into writing very good compilers for an inherently more
efficient and less compromised architecture.

You can build a racing snail but there\'s an opportunity cost to doing this.
 
S

server

Guest
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 08:58:26 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
<trader4@optonline.net> wrote:

On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 4:01:48 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/28/2020 9:43 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:13:54 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/28/2020 7:52 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:08 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
trader4@optonline.net> wrote:


https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/


\"Intel Corp’s plan to outsource manufacturing is the end of an era in US tech
When most other US chip companies shut or sold domestic plants years ago, Intel held out, a strategy that is now in tatters, with the company’s factories struggling to keep up.\"

CEO Bob Swan made the stunning announcement on Friday, during an earnings
call. It sent Intel down 16%, AMD up 16%. Bottom line, Intel first screwed
10nm, they are only now recovering and catching up on that. Meanwhile
Swan announced that 7nm is all screwed up, yields are terrible, it has
slipped another 6 months on top of at least six months earlier. Intel
won\'t be in production until 2022/23. MEanwhile AMC is producing 7nm
via TSMC right now. By the time Intel is on 7nm, TSMC will be on 3 nm.
In short, Intel has gone from being a node ahead to a node behind.
And Swan says the answer is Intel is considering outsourcing production
to other companies!

I remember discussing this here a couple years ago, warning that this is
what happens when you let accountants take over high tech companies.
I remember the usual suspects here arguing it was no big deal, it\'s just
\"managing\". Well, the idiot bean counter from Ebay that somehow would
up running Intel sure has screwed this up really badly. It\'s unlikely
Intel will ever recover. And it validates AMD being apparently right
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Intel.
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.



Intel screwed up the transition to EUV somehow. I think the problem
was mostly technical.

That said, Intel\'s management seems to be very rigid.

Intel\'s other problem is that x86 is ancient and buggy, and biggies
like Apple and Google can roll their own Arm-based chips and come out
ahead on price and performance.

I think Samsung is going to drop $1e10 or something amazing on a new
EUV-based fab too.


They tried making an x86 low-power derivative to compete with the ARM
market segment at one point, it was called Atom and it kinda sucked

Intel\'s value has always been superb lithography cranking out bad
architectures, and now they don\'t have the lithography.




I think a solid argument could be made that x86 has been a kludgy dog
since about 1988. Or at least since the last major opportunity they had
to not double down on it, on the Pentium.

It did leave a lot of competing architectures in the dust
performance-wise but it\'s not inherently elegant like the Shinkansen
bullet-train or anything, it\'s like that Budd RDC they mounted jet
engines to, as an engineering analogy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saG-QQSiG4I

So it left a lot of competing architectures in the dust performance wise,
it maintained code compatibility with the huge X86 base, it was enormously
successful, but it was a \"kludgy dog\" because it was not inherently elegant. Wow. And IDK how you make something inherently elegant, whatever that even
means, when you have to maintain the existing X86 architecture.
The biggest markets for CPUs are cell phones and embedded gadgets, and
they don\'t use X86. Intel blew it in both. The big market for
crunching is in server farms, and they are drifting away from x86.

Computing is just too cheap nowadays to support Intel\'s premium-price
business model.

Intel bought Altera to defend its server market, to add hardware boost
to the clumsy x86. I wonder how that is working out.

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/313208-weve-never-seen-intel-struggle-like-this

Sounds complex.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard
 
R

Ricketty C

Guest
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 11:48:56 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 01:54:24 -0700 (PDT), edward.ming.lee@gmail.com
wrote:

On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 1:33:12 AM UTC-7, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:
Am 29.07.20 um 09:32 schrieb edward.ming.lee@gmail.com:
On Tuesday, July 28, 2020 at 11:43:59 PM UTC-7, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Tue, 28 Jul 2020 18:35:07 -0700 (PDT)) it happened
edward.ming.lee@gmail.com wrote in
0a405a10-fa99-4ef7-8cb5-1d98bfd2df6do@googlegroups.com>:

Why?

TSMC is building new fab in AZ,USA and listen to US gov to ditch Huawei.

Listening to an idiot PreCedent is not a good sign.
Same effect as a cookies baker in control of a tech company.

I don\'t think you understand the U.S. system. The President is just picking consensus from other government officials. The decision to ditch Huawei come from many branches of the government, representing the people\'s will.

It\'s more that he is picking government officials who blindly
say yes to his weird hallucinations. And they have a short
survival span when they note they have lost contact with reality.

You are ignoring the bi-partisan bills with overwhelming supports.

Samsung OTOH is planning to fab for Huawei.

The whole anti China jive from the current US dictator has brought nobody anything.
The next US government (dems or reps) will probably start a war in the Chinese sea
or there about and draft all the unemployed as cannon feed like Vietnam.

So, you agree that the current CCP polices is independent from the President.

It is a bit sad that your commie-nuke-ation system is now downgraded just to pester Huawei.
Shooting your own foot so to speak.

No, we are just waking up from the 50 years war plan from the CCP. Starting from Mo\'s era, CCP has been following Sun Tzu\'s \"The Art of War\". Which means lies and deceptions to take advantages of others at all cost.

Which describes US politics in a nut shell.

Like Northstream2, or denying export of Covid tests to Iran,
or weapons of mass destruction.

We are technically at war with Iran, who wants to destroy us and many others.

As if the list of countries who
actually have used nukes against civilians had more than one entry.

We were at war with Japan, and nukes were ways to end it, and to ensure not to use them again.


The US proposed a nuke-free world at the end of WWII. The USSR
wouldn\'t agree.
You mean when we had all the nukes?

Though forward-thinking in many aspects, the Baruch Plan had several drawbacks. The most controversial one was probably its insistence that the United States retain its nuclear stockpile (which then consisted of nine weapons) until it was satisfied with the effectiveness of the international control system.

I can\'t imagine why other powers would feel at all threatened by that.

--

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
R

Ricketty C

Guest
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 11:58:31 AM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 4:01:48 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/28/2020 9:43 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:13:54 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/28/2020 7:52 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:08 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
trader4@optonline.net> wrote:


https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/


\"Intel Corp’s plan to outsource manufacturing is the end of an era in US tech
When most other US chip companies shut or sold domestic plants years ago, Intel held out, a strategy that is now in tatters, with the company’s factories struggling to keep up.\"

CEO Bob Swan made the stunning announcement on Friday, during an earnings
call. It sent Intel down 16%, AMD up 16%. Bottom line, Intel first screwed
10nm, they are only now recovering and catching up on that. Meanwhile
Swan announced that 7nm is all screwed up, yields are terrible, it has
slipped another 6 months on top of at least six months earlier. Intel
won\'t be in production until 2022/23. MEanwhile AMC is producing 7nm
via TSMC right now. By the time Intel is on 7nm, TSMC will be on 3 nm.
In short, Intel has gone from being a node ahead to a node behind.
And Swan says the answer is Intel is considering outsourcing production
to other companies!

I remember discussing this here a couple years ago, warning that this is
what happens when you let accountants take over high tech companies.
I remember the usual suspects here arguing it was no big deal, it\'s just
\"managing\". Well, the idiot bean counter from Ebay that somehow would
up running Intel sure has screwed this up really badly. It\'s unlikely
Intel will ever recover. And it validates AMD being apparently right
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Intel.
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.



Intel screwed up the transition to EUV somehow. I think the problem
was mostly technical.

That said, Intel\'s management seems to be very rigid.

Intel\'s other problem is that x86 is ancient and buggy, and biggies
like Apple and Google can roll their own Arm-based chips and come out
ahead on price and performance.

I think Samsung is going to drop $1e10 or something amazing on a new
EUV-based fab too.


They tried making an x86 low-power derivative to compete with the ARM
market segment at one point, it was called Atom and it kinda sucked

Intel\'s value has always been superb lithography cranking out bad
architectures, and now they don\'t have the lithography.




I think a solid argument could be made that x86 has been a kludgy dog
since about 1988. Or at least since the last major opportunity they had
to not double down on it, on the Pentium.

It did leave a lot of competing architectures in the dust
performance-wise but it\'s not inherently elegant like the Shinkansen
bullet-train or anything, it\'s like that Budd RDC they mounted jet
engines to, as an engineering analogy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saG-QQSiG4I

So it left a lot of competing architectures in the dust performance wise,
it maintained code compatibility with the huge X86 base, it was enormously
successful, but it was a \"kludgy dog\" because it was not inherently elegant. Wow. And IDK how you make something inherently elegant, whatever that even
means, when you have to maintain the existing X86 architecture.
Current x86 processors don\'t \"maintain\" the x86 architecture. They are internally a RISC design and emulate the x86 instruction set via microcode.

Words like \"elegant\" and \"kludgy\" have no engineering value. The only thing that is important are the measurable parameters.

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
W

Whoey Louie

Guest
On Tuesday, July 28, 2020 at 8:04:09 PM UTC-4, Anthony Stewart wrote:
On Tue. 28 Jul.-20 7:40 p.m., Whoey Louie wrote:

https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/


\"Intel Corp’s plan to outsource manufacturing is the end of an era in US tech
When most other US chip companies shut or sold domestic plants years ago, Intel held out, a strategy that is now in tatters, with the company’s factories struggling to keep up.\"

CEO Bob Swan made the stunning announcement on Friday, during an earnings
call. It sent Intel down 16%, AMD up 16%. Bottom line, Intel first screwed
10nm, they are only now recovering and catching up on that. Meanwhile
Swan announced that 7nm is all screwed up, yields are terrible, it has
slipped another 6 months on top of at least six months earlier. Intel
won\'t be in production until 2022/23. MEanwhile AMC is producing 7nm
via TSMC right now. By the time Intel is on 7nm, TSMC will be on 3 nm.
In short, Intel has gone from being a node ahead to a node behind.
And Swan says the answer is Intel is considering outsourcing production
to other companies!

I remember discussing this here a couple years ago, warning that this is
what happens when you let accountants take over high tech companies.
I remember the usual suspects here arguing it was no big deal, it\'s just
\"managing\". Well, the idiot bean counter from Ebay that somehow would
up running Intel sure has screwed this up really badly. It\'s unlikely
Intel will ever recover. And it validates AMD being apparently right
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Intel.
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.




I can imagine the technical challenges with this takes so much
experience with high E-field ionization prevention with unavoidable
invisible contamination to get high yields. I can\'t imagine anyone else
competing with TMSC.
So what makes TSMC so special? It\'s not like Intel is some small company
without access to the same process eqpt, without funds to pay for whatever
it takes, without access to whatever it takes. They were ahead for decades,
so why is only TSMC capable now? I\'m sure books will be written about this
in the years to come. My best guess is that it\'s the result of bad management,
choosing accountants to run a leading edge, high tech company.
 
W

Whoey Louie

Guest
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 4:18:02 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/29/2020 2:43 AM, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:08 -0700 (PDT)) it happened Whoey Louie
trader4@optonline.net> wrote in
dc4a803b-e1d8-46a7-a453-02b5d3aee005o@googlegroups.com>:


https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Intel.
...
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.

Also because US national debt is now worse than that of many third world countries.
And that debt is increasing.

Intel CPUs also suffer from one security bug after the other.
Indeed top down failure.

And on \'top down\':
A reality show host as PreCedent!

PS writing this on my CORE i5 laptop.. No problems there.



Just by raw number of cores shipped the biggest CPU manufacturer in the
world is probably Qualcomm; what doesn\'t have some ARM-derivative
Qualcomm SoC with a 15 year old ATI GPU core along with in it, nowadays.
Except for the fact that Qualcomm doesn\'t actually manufacture any CPUs at all.
 
S

server

Guest
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 10:07:20 AM UTC-7, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Tuesday, July 28, 2020 at 8:04:09 PM UTC-4, Anthony Stewart wrote:
On Tue. 28 Jul.-20 7:40 p.m., Whoey Louie wrote:

https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/


\"Intel Corp’s plan to outsource manufacturing is the end of an era in US tech
When most other US chip companies shut or sold domestic plants years ago, Intel held out, a strategy that is now in tatters, with the company’s factories struggling to keep up.\"

CEO Bob Swan made the stunning announcement on Friday, during an earnings
call. It sent Intel down 16%, AMD up 16%. Bottom line, Intel first screwed
10nm, they are only now recovering and catching up on that. Meanwhile
Swan announced that 7nm is all screwed up, yields are terrible, it has
slipped another 6 months on top of at least six months earlier. Intel
won\'t be in production until 2022/23. MEanwhile AMC is producing 7nm
via TSMC right now. By the time Intel is on 7nm, TSMC will be on 3 nm.
In short, Intel has gone from being a node ahead to a node behind.
And Swan says the answer is Intel is considering outsourcing production
to other companies!

I remember discussing this here a couple years ago, warning that this is
what happens when you let accountants take over high tech companies.
I remember the usual suspects here arguing it was no big deal, it\'s just
\"managing\". Well, the idiot bean counter from Ebay that somehow would
up running Intel sure has screwed this up really badly. It\'s unlikely
Intel will ever recover. And it validates AMD being apparently right
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Intel.
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.




I can imagine the technical challenges with this takes so much
experience with high E-field ionization prevention with unavoidable
invisible contamination to get high yields. I can\'t imagine anyone else
competing with TMSC.

So what makes TSMC so special? It\'s not like Intel is some small company
without access to the same process eqpt, without funds to pay for whatever
it takes, without access to whatever it takes. They were ahead for decades,
so why is only TSMC capable now? I\'m sure books will be written about this
in the years to come. My best guess is that it\'s the result of bad management,
choosing accountants to run a leading edge, high tech company.
It\'s the need for custom clean room. Both Samsung and Intel are under-estimating the yield issues. TSMC spend lots of time and effort in cleaning, and taking Samsung and Intel to the cleaner. I heard that TSMC is 100x cleaner than the competitors.
 
G

Gerhard Hoffmann

Guest
Am 29.07.20 um 17:58 schrieb Whoey Louie:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 4:01:48 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/28/2020 9:43 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:13:54 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/28/2020 7:52 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:08 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
trader4@optonline.net> wrote:


https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/


Intel\'s other problem is that x86 is ancient and buggy, and biggies
like Apple and Google can roll their own Arm-based chips and come out
ahead on price and performance.



They tried making an x86 low-power derivative to compete with the ARM
market segment at one point, it was called Atom and it kinda sucked

Intel\'s value has always been superb lithography cranking out bad
architectures, and now they don\'t have the lithography.




I think a solid argument could be made that x86 has been a kludgy dog
since about 1988. Or at least since the last major opportunity they had
to not double down on it, on the Pentium.

It did leave a lot of competing architectures in the dust
performance-wise but it\'s not inherently elegant like the Shinkansen
bullet-train or anything, it\'s like that Budd RDC they mounted jet
engines to, as an engineering analogy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saG-QQSiG4I

So it left a lot of competing architectures in the dust performance wise,
it maintained code compatibility with the huge X86 base, it was enormously
successful, but it was a \"kludgy dog\" because it was not inherently elegant. Wow. And IDK how you make something inherently elegant, whatever that even
means, when you have to maintain the existing X86 architecture.
The 8086 was not even really ugly once you had grogged that the
segment registers were no registers but the MMU. It was a one-address
machine that was easy to maintain and was just twice the number of
transistors of the Z80 (16000 vs 8000). The 68K had 4 times the number
of transistors of the 8086, and they had a shitty yield. It was on the
border of impossible. At that time, Intel\'s slogan was \"Intel delivers\"
an that got them the IBM design win. IBM took what existed _really_.

Moto kept adding features in the style \"double memory indirect +
scale + bla\" that nobody needed and finally it was easy to write an
instruction that might never end, with segmentation violations,
page faults and other exceptions all in a single instruction and
maybe with multiple memory accesses. That was the time when they
knew they could no longer support this.

Intel never succumbed to this featurism. They removed the
real drawback, and that was the small memory space and
concentrated on computation power.

Oh-so-wonderful-and-so-much-better Intel roadkills:
68K
Fairchild Clipper
MicroVAX
DEC Alpha
NS 16032 / 32032
Western 32k (?)
z8000/ z80000 (made AMD leave & then crawl back)
HP Snakes
sparc
MIPS ( I liked that one, maybe still Zombie state)
TI99K
Transputer (I had quite a T800 cluster then)
Intel 432 (wonderful machine, just too slow to implement
with the cache technology of the day)
Intel 860 (really HP\'s idea when the snakes ran out of steam)

It seems, Intel\'s X86 decisions were better than average.

Today, X86 is just a multiple RISC with hundreds of renaming registers
and a 860 style instruction bundle decoder that smells like X86.
You won\'t find an EAX in it.

And this legion of ARMs are mostly simplistic CPUs. The few
tries with speculative execution had their share of problems
too.

Gerhard
 
B

bitrex

Guest
On 7/29/2020 12:56 PM, Ricketty C wrote:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 11:58:31 AM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 4:01:48 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/28/2020 9:43 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:13:54 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/28/2020 7:52 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:08 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
trader4@optonline.net> wrote:


https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/


\"Intel Corp’s plan to outsource manufacturing is the end of an era in US tech
When most other US chip companies shut or sold domestic plants years ago, Intel held out, a strategy that is now in tatters, with the company’s factories struggling to keep up.\"

CEO Bob Swan made the stunning announcement on Friday, during an earnings
call. It sent Intel down 16%, AMD up 16%. Bottom line, Intel first screwed
10nm, they are only now recovering and catching up on that. Meanwhile
Swan announced that 7nm is all screwed up, yields are terrible, it has
slipped another 6 months on top of at least six months earlier. Intel
won\'t be in production until 2022/23. MEanwhile AMC is producing 7nm
via TSMC right now. By the time Intel is on 7nm, TSMC will be on 3 nm.
In short, Intel has gone from being a node ahead to a node behind.
And Swan says the answer is Intel is considering outsourcing production
to other companies!

I remember discussing this here a couple years ago, warning that this is
what happens when you let accountants take over high tech companies.
I remember the usual suspects here arguing it was no big deal, it\'s just
\"managing\". Well, the idiot bean counter from Ebay that somehow would
up running Intel sure has screwed this up really badly. It\'s unlikely
Intel will ever recover. And it validates AMD being apparently right
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Intel.
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.



Intel screwed up the transition to EUV somehow. I think the problem
was mostly technical.

That said, Intel\'s management seems to be very rigid.

Intel\'s other problem is that x86 is ancient and buggy, and biggies
like Apple and Google can roll their own Arm-based chips and come out
ahead on price and performance.

I think Samsung is going to drop $1e10 or something amazing on a new
EUV-based fab too.


They tried making an x86 low-power derivative to compete with the ARM
market segment at one point, it was called Atom and it kinda sucked

Intel\'s value has always been superb lithography cranking out bad
architectures, and now they don\'t have the lithography.




I think a solid argument could be made that x86 has been a kludgy dog
since about 1988. Or at least since the last major opportunity they had
to not double down on it, on the Pentium.

It did leave a lot of competing architectures in the dust
performance-wise but it\'s not inherently elegant like the Shinkansen
bullet-train or anything, it\'s like that Budd RDC they mounted jet
engines to, as an engineering analogy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saG-QQSiG4I

So it left a lot of competing architectures in the dust performance wise,
it maintained code compatibility with the huge X86 base, it was enormously
successful, but it was a \"kludgy dog\" because it was not inherently elegant. Wow. And IDK how you make something inherently elegant, whatever that even
means, when you have to maintain the existing X86 architecture.

Current x86 processors don\'t \"maintain\" the x86 architecture. They are internally a RISC design and emulate the x86 instruction set via microcode.
Americans can always be counted on to do the sensible thing, after all
other options are exhausted.

Words like \"elegant\" and \"kludgy\" have no engineering value. The only thing that is important are the measurable parameters.
It tends to become more apparent when something doesn\'t work right and
you have to figure out why. And find that it\'s something with the fuel
pump, say. And find that on the early 2000s Malibus, a car you have,
they mount the fuel pump on top of the fuel tank and you have to remove
the whole fuel tank to get at it. Now, to remove the fuel tank you have
to remove the....

Unnnnnuggggghh
 
B

bitrex

Guest
On 7/29/2020 1:43 PM, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:
Am 29.07.20 um 17:58 schrieb Whoey Louie:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 4:01:48 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/28/2020 9:43 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:13:54 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/28/2020 7:52 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:08 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
trader4@optonline.net> wrote:


https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/



Intel\'s other problem is that x86 is ancient and buggy, and biggies
like Apple and Google can roll their own Arm-based chips and come out
ahead on price and performance.



They tried making an x86 low-power derivative to compete with the ARM
market segment at one point, it was called Atom and it kinda sucked

Intel\'s value has always been superb lithography cranking out bad
architectures, and now they don\'t have the lithography.




I think a solid argument could be made that x86 has been a kludgy dog
since about 1988. Or at least since the last major opportunity they had
to not double down on it, on the Pentium.

It did leave a lot of competing architectures in the dust
performance-wise but it\'s not inherently elegant like the Shinkansen
bullet-train or anything, it\'s like that Budd RDC they mounted jet
engines to, as an engineering analogy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saG-QQSiG4I

So it left a lot of competing architectures in the dust performance wise,
it maintained code compatibility with the huge X86 base, it was
enormously
successful, but it was a \"kludgy dog\" because it was not inherently
elegant.  Wow.  And IDK how you make something inherently elegant,
whatever that even
means, when you have to maintain the existing X86 architecture.

The 8086 was not even really ugly once you had grogged that the
segment registers were no registers but the MMU. It was a one-address
machine that was easy to maintain and was just twice the number of
transistors of the Z80 (16000 vs 8000). The 68K had 4 times the number
of transistors of the 8086, and they had a shitty yield. It was on the
border of impossible. At that time, Intel\'s slogan was \"Intel delivers\"
an that got them the IBM design win. IBM took what existed _really_.

Moto kept adding features in the style \"double memory indirect +
scale + bla\" that nobody needed and finally it was easy to write an
instruction that might never end, with segmentation violations,
page faults and other exceptions all in a single instruction and
maybe with multiple memory accesses. That was the time when they
knew they could no longer support this.

Intel never succumbed to this featurism. They removed the
real drawback, and that was the small memory space and
concentrated on computation power.

Oh-so-wonderful-and-so-much-better Intel roadkills:
68K
Fairchild Clipper
MicroVAX
DEC Alpha
NS 16032 / 32032
Western 32k (?)
z8000/ z80000 (made AMD leave & then crawl back)
HP Snakes
sparc
MIPS ( I liked that one, maybe still Zombie state)
TI99K
Transputer (I had quite a T800 cluster then)
Intel 432 (wonderful machine, just too slow to implement
          with the cache technology of the day)
Intel 860 (really HP\'s idea when the snakes ran out of steam)

It seems, Intel\'s X86 decisions were better than average.
It ran Windows

Today, X86 is just a multiple RISC with hundreds of renaming registers
and a 860 style instruction bundle decoder that smells like X86.
You won\'t find an EAX in it.
That it had too few general-purpose registers to make writing efficient
compilers more straightforward was pretty much fixed in x86 64, yeah, 30
years later.

And this legion of ARMs are mostly simplistic CPUs. The few
tries with speculative execution had their share of problems
too.

Gerhard
 
R

Ricketty C

Guest
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 1:43:08 PM UTC-4, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:
Intel never succumbed to this featurism. They removed the
real drawback, and that was the small memory space and
concentrated on computation power.

Oh-so-wonderful-and-so-much-better Intel roadkills:
68K
Fairchild Clipper
MicroVAX
DEC Alpha
NS 16032 / 32032
Western 32k (?)
z8000/ z80000 (made AMD leave & then crawl back)
HP Snakes
sparc
MIPS ( I liked that one, maybe still Zombie state)
TI99K
Transputer (I had quite a T800 cluster then)
Intel 432 (wonderful machine, just too slow to implement
with the cache technology of the day)
Intel 860 (really HP\'s idea when the snakes ran out of steam)

It seems, Intel\'s X86 decisions were better than average.
I don\'t see ARM on that list... I\'m just sayin\'...


Today, X86 is just a multiple RISC with hundreds of renaming registers
and a 860 style instruction bundle decoder that smells like X86.
You won\'t find an EAX in it.

And this legion of ARMs are mostly simplistic CPUs. The few
tries with speculative execution had their share of problems
too.
Yeah, they are \"simple\" in comparison to what the x86 has become, but they do the job required and in a much more power efficient way. The point is the desk/laptop arena is becoming a niche while the mobile market continues to grow.

It is highly concerning that Intel has lost the cutting edge in process technology. That\'s a huge indicator of a fundamental change in the market of CPUs and possibly digital IC design in general.

If companies like Intel can\'t maintain a fundamental advantage by building their own processing facilities how much longer will the contract manufacturers be able to continue to advance the art?

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
P

Pimpom

Guest
On 7/29/2020 11:49 PM, Ricketty C wrote:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 1:43:08 PM UTC-4, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:

Intel never succumbed to this featurism. They removed the
real drawback, and that was the small memory space and
concentrated on computation power.

Oh-so-wonderful-and-so-much-better Intel roadkills:
68K
Fairchild Clipper
MicroVAX
DEC Alpha
NS 16032 / 32032
Western 32k (?)
z8000/ z80000 (made AMD leave & then crawl back)
HP Snakes
sparc
MIPS ( I liked that one, maybe still Zombie state)
TI99K
Transputer (I had quite a T800 cluster then)
Intel 432 (wonderful machine, just too slow to implement
with the cache technology of the day)
Intel 860 (really HP\'s idea when the snakes ran out of steam)

It seems, Intel\'s X86 decisions were better than average.

I don\'t see ARM on that list... I\'m just sayin\'...
Or PowerPC.
 
G

Gerhard Hoffmann

Guest
Am 29.07.20 um 19:58 schrieb bitrex:
On 7/29/2020 1:43 PM, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:

Oh-so-wonderful-and-so-much-better (than) Intel roadkills:
68K
Fairchild Clipper
MicroVAX
DEC Alpha
NS 16032 / 32032
Western 32k (?)
z8000/ z80000 (made AMD leave & then crawl back)
HP Snakes
sparcPower PC , thanks, Pimpom!
MIPS ( I liked that one, maybe still Zombie state)
TI99K
Transputer (I had quite a T800 cluster then)
Intel 432 (wonderful machine, just too slow to implement
           with the cache technology of the day)
Intel 860 (really HP\'s idea when the snakes ran out of steam)

It seems, Intel\'s X86 decisions were better than average.

It ran Windows
It killed most of the above also in the Unix arena.
When you wanted fast Modelsim in large companies maybe
15 years ago, then it was a Pentiyummy running RedHead Linux
with virtual memory that actually worked. Even when there
was Windows on the desktops. They were the successors to
these (DEC, HP, SUN, MIPS, IBM) workstations at a much
better price/performance point.
 
P

Piotr Wyderski

Guest
edward.ming.lee@gmail.com wrote:

We are technically at war with Iran, who wants to destroy us and many others.

Really? There hasn\'t been a declaration of war. Iran may want to be free to try to convert the rest of the world to their brand of Islam, but they don\'t seem to be interested in destroying anybody for destruction\'s sake. It\'s more a matter of discouraging other people from trying to stop them doing their thing.

Like ISIS? They didn\'t declare war explicitly, but the actions speak of itself.
ISIS is Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, there is no Iran part in it.

Best regards, Piotr
 
G

Gerhard Hoffmann

Guest
Am 29.07.20 um 19:58 schrieb bitrex:

That it had too few general-purpose registers to make writing efficient
compilers more straightforward was pretty much fixed in x86 64, yeah, 30
years later.
It wasn\'t much worse than the PDP11 that also had only 8 registers,
including PC, Stack pointer, and one for the base pointer.

For a compiler, you need 0, 1 or infinite resources.
Anything else is just an allocation problem.

And that game with the renaming registers began with the 200 MHz
Pentium Pro that shocked the Alpha, PowerPC world and the others
who considered themselves leading.

The registers do not need a name, it\'s enough that they are there
and that the hardware keeps track of what is where.
 
W

Whoey Louie

Guest
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 12:56:56 PM UTC-4, Ricketty C wrote:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 11:58:31 AM UTC-4, Whoey Louie wrote:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 4:01:48 AM UTC-4, bitrex wrote:
On 7/28/2020 9:43 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:13:54 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 7/28/2020 7:52 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:08 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
trader4@optonline.net> wrote:


https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/


\"Intel Corp’s plan to outsource manufacturing is the end of an era in US tech
When most other US chip companies shut or sold domestic plants years ago, Intel held out, a strategy that is now in tatters, with the company’s factories struggling to keep up.\"

CEO Bob Swan made the stunning announcement on Friday, during an earnings
call. It sent Intel down 16%, AMD up 16%. Bottom line, Intel first screwed
10nm, they are only now recovering and catching up on that. Meanwhile
Swan announced that 7nm is all screwed up, yields are terrible, it has
slipped another 6 months on top of at least six months earlier. Intel
won\'t be in production until 2022/23. MEanwhile AMC is producing 7nm
via TSMC right now. By the time Intel is on 7nm, TSMC will be on 3 nm.
In short, Intel has gone from being a node ahead to a node behind.
And Swan says the answer is Intel is considering outsourcing production
to other companies!

I remember discussing this here a couple years ago, warning that this is
what happens when you let accountants take over high tech companies.
I remember the usual suspects here arguing it was no big deal, it\'s just
\"managing\". Well, the idiot bean counter from Ebay that somehow would
up running Intel sure has screwed this up really badly. It\'s unlikely
Intel will ever recover. And it validates AMD being apparently right
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Intel.
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.



Intel screwed up the transition to EUV somehow. I think the problem
was mostly technical.

That said, Intel\'s management seems to be very rigid.

Intel\'s other problem is that x86 is ancient and buggy, and biggies
like Apple and Google can roll their own Arm-based chips and come out
ahead on price and performance.

I think Samsung is going to drop $1e10 or something amazing on a new
EUV-based fab too.


They tried making an x86 low-power derivative to compete with the ARM
market segment at one point, it was called Atom and it kinda sucked

Intel\'s value has always been superb lithography cranking out bad
architectures, and now they don\'t have the lithography.




I think a solid argument could be made that x86 has been a kludgy dog
since about 1988. Or at least since the last major opportunity they had
to not double down on it, on the Pentium.

It did leave a lot of competing architectures in the dust
performance-wise but it\'s not inherently elegant like the Shinkansen
bullet-train or anything, it\'s like that Budd RDC they mounted jet
engines to, as an engineering analogy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saG-QQSiG4I

So it left a lot of competing architectures in the dust performance wise,
it maintained code compatibility with the huge X86 base, it was enormously
successful, but it was a \"kludgy dog\" because it was not inherently elegant. Wow. And IDK how you make something inherently elegant, whatever that even
means, when you have to maintain the existing X86 architecture.

Current x86 processors don\'t \"maintain\" the x86 architecture. They are internally a RISC design and emulate the x86 instruction set via microcode.
CISC processors have used microcode all along. And it would be incredibly
stupid to go backwards, to use microcode to execute instructions in
multiple steps, to emulate something, instead of executing them directly.

BTW, you\'re the genius that was arguing with me a couple years ago that
having an accountant from Ebay as Intel\'s CEO was a swell idea, because
it\'s just all about management. Doesn\'t look so smart today, does it?
 
L

Lasse Langwadt Christensen

Guest
onsdag den 29. juli 2020 kl. 20.20.02 UTC+2 skrev Ricketty C:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 1:43:08 PM UTC-4, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:

Intel never succumbed to this featurism. They removed the
real drawback, and that was the small memory space and
concentrated on computation power.

Oh-so-wonderful-and-so-much-better Intel roadkills:
68K
Fairchild Clipper
MicroVAX
DEC Alpha
NS 16032 / 32032
Western 32k (?)
z8000/ z80000 (made AMD leave & then crawl back)
HP Snakes
sparc
MIPS ( I liked that one, maybe still Zombie state)
TI99K
Transputer (I had quite a T800 cluster then)
Intel 432 (wonderful machine, just too slow to implement
with the cache technology of the day)
Intel 860 (really HP\'s idea when the snakes ran out of steam)

It seems, Intel\'s X86 decisions were better than average.

I don\'t see ARM on that list... I\'m just sayin\'...
they were targeting a different market

https://youtu.be/_6sh097Dk5k?t=1500

watch the whole thing, it is a quite interesting insight into the whole ARM thing
 
R

Ricketty C

Guest
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 7:16:38 PM UTC-4, Lasse Langwadt Christensen wrote:
onsdag den 29. juli 2020 kl. 20.20.02 UTC+2 skrev Ricketty C:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 1:43:08 PM UTC-4, Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:

Intel never succumbed to this featurism. They removed the
real drawback, and that was the small memory space and
concentrated on computation power.

Oh-so-wonderful-and-so-much-better Intel roadkills:
68K
Fairchild Clipper
MicroVAX
DEC Alpha
NS 16032 / 32032
Western 32k (?)
z8000/ z80000 (made AMD leave & then crawl back)
HP Snakes
sparc
MIPS ( I liked that one, maybe still Zombie state)
TI99K
Transputer (I had quite a T800 cluster then)
Intel 432 (wonderful machine, just too slow to implement
with the cache technology of the day)
Intel 860 (really HP\'s idea when the snakes ran out of steam)

It seems, Intel\'s X86 decisions were better than average.

I don\'t see ARM on that list... I\'m just sayin\'...


they were targeting a different market

https://youtu.be/_6sh097Dk5k?t=1500

watch the whole thing, it is a quite interesting insight into the whole ARM thing
You mean the market that is growing rather than shrinking and that Intel isn\'t doing so well competing in? It\'s not that Intel isn\'t in the same market, it\'s that they still have not yet found their footing in it.

I haven\'t watched the video yet, but do they talk about the server market? My understanding is that the ARM processors are gaining ground there. That is supposed to be the important market going forward.

BTW, when is DRAM going to move? They been shipping most machines with 16 GB for what, four, five years? When will the price drop so 32 GB becomes the norm? My previous machine only had 16 GB and periodically usage would reach a ceiling and the machine would either slow to a crawl or sometimes apps would crash.

With 32 GB I almost never have that problem. Right now it is running at 18 GB. Just enough to not work well in 16 GB.

While I can always add RAM to a machine, that costs a lot more than buying it in the machine already. Usually laptops have no empty slots and the existing memory has to be tossed.

--

Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
 
Toggle Sidebar

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Top