Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday August 07 2020, @06:29AM   Printer-friendly
from the intel-on-Intel dept.

What's wrong with Intel, and how to fix it: Former principal engineer unloads (archive)

In a blunt video posted late Thursday evening, outspoken former Intel principal engineer Francois Pidnoel offered his advice on how to "fix" Intel CPUs, criticized current leadership for not being engineers, said AVX512 was a misadventure, and declared that it's only luck AMD hasn't grabbed more market share.

"First, Intel is really out of focus," Piednoel said in the nearly hour-long video presentation. "The leaders of Intel today are not engineers, they are not people who understand what to design to the market."

[...] Pidnoel flat-out dismissed including AVX512 in consumer chips as a mistake. "You had Skylake and Skylake X for a reason," Piednoel said. "AVX512 is designed for a race of throughput that is lost to the GPU already. There's two ways to get throughput. One is to get the throughput is by having larger vectors to your core, and the other way is to have more cores."

[...] "Intel is very lucky AMD cannot get the volume, to be able to compete," Piednoel. "If they were getting volume, the price difference would definitely cost Intel market share a lot more than what they are losing right now."

Related: AVX-512: A "Hidden Gem"?
Intel CEO Blames "10nm" Delays on Aggressive Density Target, Promises "7nm" for 2021
Intel's Process Nodes Will Trail Behind Competitors Until at Least Late 2021
Linus Torvalds: Don't Hide Rust in Linux Kernel; Death to AVX-512
Intel Engineering Chief Out After 7nm Product Delays
Intel Faces Class-Action Lawsuit Over "7nm" Delays

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by shortscreen on Friday August 07 2020, @01:13PM

    by shortscreen (2252) on Friday August 07 2020, @01:13PM (#1032855) Journal

    So the "vulnerability" is that Intel CPUs let you change the voltage again? Two things about this are very strange...

    1) On a Pentium M privileged code could set the voltage to anything covering a very wide range. But on Core2 they locked it down and options became quite limited. Did they open it up again on later CPUs?

    2) Was this documented functionality that was there all along and someone just noticed it could be harmful? (Yeah, right) Or did a 'secret' method of changing the voltage come to light that wasn't supposed to be there?

    TFA is too busy being sensational and explaining voltage for laymen.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2