From Intel Earnings: Intel says accelerating 10nm product transition, 7nm product transition delayed

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,535
Even if Intel had been on track over the last 3 years, I don't think we would be seeing that massive of a difference in performance
We already have evidence that they'd be 20% to 30% ahead of Skylake, along with more cores at lower TDPs. We don't know if that would have been the case, of course ;).
no one is going to argue their market dominance, and you are right on that - that will take years to break down.
It's going to take years to start breaking down assuming that they don't get their act together; if they do turn things around, which is vastly more likely, their marketshare and install base may eclipse their previous high. Depending on what strategy they take, of course!
Also, the mobile device market and ARM processors now starting to threaten Intel's market share, plus the upcoming loss from Apple moving to their own in-house ARM processors
I don't see either of these as that big of a deal; Apple's always done their own thing. With Intel, they've been able to provide innovative products to their customers that wouldn't have otherwise been possible. With their custom ARM cores, they're probably going to be able to provide functionality earlier since they'll be able to tailor their whole stack to their customer base beyond their phones and tablets, but they're not going to be doing anything that's fundamentally unique.
and all of the security exploits Intel has dealt with over the last two years, are all starting to show the cracks in their proverbial foundation.
People keep forgetting that the security issues are a result of Intel dominating performance and then faltering on fabrication leadership; thus, the typical two-year (or so) cycle of releases got extended and one architecture wound up everywhere. That means that it was front and center of academic and other security research.

The reality of computing is that there are no 'secure systems', and that the much-maligned 'security by obscurity' paradigm is always in play.

Hard to be obscure when your products run the world!
Unless Intel gets back on track, their market dominance, and perhaps even the company itself, won't be a shadow of what it was by 2030.
They literally just need to get their fabs on track. That's it - which is why I find the 'doom and gloom' hysteria to be a weird perspective to take. IPC, clockspeeds, core counts, TDP, security, prices... all of this depends on their one traditional strength, which is actually building chips.

And all of this measured against AMD, who doesn't even build chips any more :D.
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
18,061
You seem to be under the impression that this is unlikely, when historically this is the norm. Further, it's not just an own-goal that could cause problems for AMD: a screwup at TSMC would have the same effect.

It's weird that you feel the need to make a statement like this...
exactly the reason I brought up Lisa Su...it's because of your statement about AMD's history...my point is the leadership is not the same at all so you can't predict future possibilities based on their old regime
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
18,061
I'm not disputing that. Although, that's not entirely accurate either. It also comes down to latency.
the latency issue will be addressed with Zen 3 (if the rumors are correct and everything I'm hearing says it will)
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
10,555
They literally just need to get their fabs on track. That's it - which is why I find the 'doom and gloom' hysteria to be a weird perspective to take. IPC, clockspeeds, core counts, TDP, security, prices... all of this depends on their one traditional strength, which is actually building chips.
Man, stop taking the fun out of this - doom and gloom and grandiose things happening are way more interesting than "they need to get their fabs on track".
Where is the emotion and excitement with that?!

Kind of reminds me of this, and you are definitely the rational son... ;)

 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,535
exactly the reason I brought up Lisa Su...it's because of your statement about AMD's history...my point is the leadership is not the same at all so you can't predict future possibilities based on their old regime
I expect Dr. Su to avoid the more obvious own-goals, but she's not going to be able to do anything if there's nowhere to make AMDs products. Further, AMD is still a significantly smaller, significantly less diverse company. Do you know why the best AMD boards ship with Intel networking hardware for wired and wireless?

There's an order of magnitude of difference between these companies.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,707
Wow....
So you openly admit that the projects he "touched" turned into a success (Apple A4, Zen1) and then say he had nothing to do with how it turned out and how future iterations turned out?

Just wow.....

Companies hire Jim Keller for top level positions for lots of money for a short time, that's not a bad job to have. Clearly not very many people have his expertise and experience.
Yes read what I said... he is a refinement guy. Intel or Apple or Tesla can afford to have people making multiple millions a year for their working lifetime if it makes sense.

Jim is a refiner. He is not an innovator.

He is very good at taking a design and seeing where it can be improved... he is very good at maxing out a node. What he is not good at (or at least has never proven himself good at) is being the first one to design a chip for a new node. Or include innovative ground breaking things into his designs. None of his chips do anything that was new. The A4 is a good chip... but it wasn't the industry leader like the later Apple chips where. Zen is a great design but its NOT all that innovative. Bulldozer on paper was far more revolutionary compared to what Intel was doing then Zen was.

Jim is the guy you call when you need a product that just works.... and fabs well. As far as I know I have never heard of any of his designs having major issues with fabrication. He is very good at understanding how far he can push a node without running into yield issues. That is important if your AMD and your almost bankrupt and need a chip that will work compete if not win any crowns, and more importantly have a nice high 90+% fab rate so you can price where you need to and make profit. Same was true for his work at Tesla and Apple... they where not looking to take big chances. Apple wasn't swinging for 40% better performance then the other guys with A4. They wanted a solid well built base... that is what he helped them get before he left. Tesla was in the same position they where not looking to turn the industry upside down they just wanted to build something in house that worked.

Jim has no history of being the guy they call in when there moving to a new node and are aiming to better the competition. That doesn't seem to be who he is... and the industry at this point seems to understand that pretty well. Where ever he ends up next... I'll call it now he is going to be the guy making a + version of whatever they have. Or helping a new player get a first product into production. That is who he seems to be... there is no evidence that he is the type of designer that would ever be designing anything with a list of First of its kind type features.
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,707
Not quite - Bulldozer and CMT were not "revolutionary", they were a cost-savings architecture employed by AMD at the time to bank on a cheap and effective way to utilize SMP-based multi-threaded software.
However, in 2011, multi-threaded consumer software was not nearly as mature or developed as it is now, and the single-threaded performance of AMD's Bulldozer processors were only 55% clock-for-clock as capable as Intel's Sandy Bridge processors were, so much of the market's consumer software was still single-threaded or lightly-threaded at the time, which gave AMD zero advantage on; in other words, they were too early to the party.

Not to mention, the CMT architecture with it's shared FPU was horribly inefficient, even with heavily multi-threaded workloads, that at most would only reach about 80% of the CPU's full capabilities, and many OS kernel's had to have additional drivers and core written to properly utilize the CMT architecture, which took some time to get going.
I have used quite a few of their FX processors from 2011-2016 across a vast amount of workloads, and Intel (pre-exploit era) crushed them in every single workload, be it gaming, professional, audio rendering, video rendering, VMs, single-threaded, or otherwise.

From what I have seen, Zen 2's chiplet design, while it may not be "revolutionary", was a massively innovative design that has helped to propel AMD forward.
It seems like the only bottleneck at this point is the CCX interconnect design, depending on the workloads.
To me being early on something = revolutionary. Software development simply didn't progress fast enough. Looking back those old AMD chips held up a lot better as software has progressed. (and those 2011-2012 Intel chips have all had massive performance handicapping security flaws fixed as well)

By your own admission if the software world caught up the way the initial bulldozer designers expected.... we would be having a different conversation about the tech. It enabled them to crank out higher core counts then the competition with fairly reasonable fab costs. Or course in hindsight ya no doubt they bet wrong. Which is why I say Zen was a correction more then a revolutionary design. Zen is a much more traditional design. It is exactly what AMD needed at the time don't get me wrong. Consider where they where... they needed a chip that they could fab cheaply that performed in line with Intels current lineup. It seems when a company is looking to achieve something like that... a solid tested design they can make bank on. Jim seems to be a good option. He is a fixer more then a creator as I see it. If your looking to do something new and set the pace... he isn't the guy.
 

juanrga

Pro-Intel / Anti-AMD Just FYI
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
2,642
Intel's 10nm is about the same feature density as TSMC's 7nm. Intel's 7nm is going to be about the same feature size as TSMC's 5nm.
Intel 10nm has a density higher than 100 MTr/mm² and the 7HPC node used by AMD was about 80 MTR/mm² or something like that.

AMD partnered with TSMC...nothing to do with luck...you seem like a die hard Intel fan who doesn't seem to want to give AMD any credit...Intel was on top forever but now there's a new king (yes Intel theoretically leads on paper with gaming benchmarks but in practical use it means nothing and Zen 3 should erase that)
AMD partnered with Glofo, which partnered with IBM. Then the Glofo/IBM collaboration failed, all the 7nm development was cancelled and AMD moved to TSMC.

Giving AMD "any credit" for TSMC successful process nodes is ridiculous.
 

juanrga

Pro-Intel / Anti-AMD Just FYI
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
2,642
Isn't Jim Keller the mastermind behind Ryzen? Isn't he at Intel right now?
The Zen team chief was Suzanne Plummer and Zen chief architect was Mike Clark.

Intel announced recently that Keller is leaving.

My guess is Jim knew he was out the min Lisa was named CEO. Just took him a few months to get his Tesla gig lined up. Which is why I joked earlier.... Intel needs someone in charge that can figure out who the dead weight is and make their life unconformable until they land that dream gig at Tesla. lmao Jim has been there at least once before... his value is overrated.
He left when Lisa Su cancelled the two projects that Keller was involved in: Skybridge and K12.
 

Gideon

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
2,689
The Zen team chief was Suzanne Plummer and Zen chief architect was Mike Clark.

Intel announced recently that Keller is leaving.



He left when Lisa Su cancelled the two projects that Keller was involved in: Skybridge and K12.
I see your still posting FUD that Keller had nothing to do with Zen.
 

juanrga

Pro-Intel / Anti-AMD Just FYI
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
2,642
I see your still posting FUD that Keller had nothing to do with Zen.
I am simply giving credit to the people of the Zen team, because guys as you like to ignore them and their work.

Anonymous:

Who had the biggest role in the creation of Ryzen? Was it you? Jim Keller? Someone else?
Lisa Su:

In terms of the creation of Ryzen, I am really really really PROUD of our team. To build something like Ryzen takes really smart people coming together around a big, audacious goal and the Ryen team did it. The lead architect on Ryzen was a guy named Mike Clark and together with the entire global team, made Ryzen a reality.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5x4hxu/we_are_amd_creators_of_athlon_radeon_and_other/def58ir/

I see you answer for him these days. Simple fact he has said that before and got made fun of then he deleted his post. He constantly acts like Keller is not important in the development of Zen, despite AMD saying otherwise.

https://www.kitguru.net/components/...croprocessor-developer-jim-keller-leaves-amd/
The article is wrong. No. Keller didn't left AMD "after completing his work on K8", neither he did any of those Apple designs mentioned in the article. K8 was designed by a team leaded by Fred Weber in collaboration with Kevin McGrath and Dave Christie who developed the 64 bit extensions.

At Apple, Keller worked in the A4 and A5, both which used 32 bit Cortex cores designed by ARM engineers. The custom cores in Apple A7--A13X were designed by Gerard Williams III. Gerard lead Cyclone, Typhoon, Twister, Hurricane, Monsoon, Vortex, and Lightning.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Messages
2,625
Pretty disappointing, by the time when Intel does finally move to 7nm, if ever, it would be old technology by then and AMD most likely would have moved on to a new node giving them the extra advantage there.
 

Ready4Dis

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
1,761
It's not quite the same, but I do see what you are saying.
When AMD's Bulldozer CPUs debuted in 2011, it had around 55% core-for-core and clock-for-clock IPC and general performance as Intel's Sandy Bridge CPUs.

Even if Intel had been on track over the last 3 years, I don't think we would be seeing that massive of a difference in performance, though Intel most likely would have remained on top performance-wise; no one is going to argue their market dominance, and you are right on that - that will take years to break down.
However, this time around, unlike when AMD was leading in the early to mid 2000s with Athlon 64 against Netburst, Intel can't resort to anti-consumer and anti-competitive practices.

Also, the mobile device market and ARM processors now starting to threaten Intel's market share, plus the upcoming loss from Apple moving to their own in-house ARM processors, and all of the security exploits Intel has dealt with over the last two years, are all starting to show the cracks in their proverbial foundation.
Intel is not too big to fail, but they are too big to fail quickly, much thanks to their current market dominance, vendor lock-in, and vast x86/x86-64 software library.

However, AMD, Apple, ARM, the mobile market, and their recent fumbles are all starting to add up, and even a mighty elephant can die by a thousand cuts.
Unless Intel gets back on track, their market dominance, and perhaps even the company itself, won't be a shadow of what it was by 2030.

If ARM continues to proceed to where we are thinking it is going, AMD won't be many years behind...



From this post of yours, I agree with everything else except this. :p
If this were 2017 or 2018, I would agree with you, but even powerful fast-clocked quad-cores are starting to show their age, at least in anything at or above an office environment.

6-core CPUs and above are definitely the sweet spot right now, and don't seem to have as many bottlenecks on even basic productivity software that current quad-core CPUs have.


I do agree with you on the single-thread performance being important, though - this is one area most individuals here think is a dead technology, but I assure everyone that it is not, and faster cores will always remain important.

OS updates (Windows and *NIX), certain file decompressions, network TCP/IP data transfers, etc. are all single-threaded, and no amount of additional cores are going to help these tasks or functions perform any better.
These are improvements that Intel, AMD, and ARM manufacturers need to always continuously improve upon.
Why would anyone make network data transfer single threaded? This hasn't been the case for like 10+ years. Especially with today's high bandwidth networks, you'd never hit 100gbps using a single core. Man, wish I had that link handy for what kind of core count it takes to actually utilize high bandwidth networks.... But it scales well over 32 cores. Anyways, I do understand the point your trying to make, some things do depend on other things (serial vs parallel processes) and are difficult to make use of more cores. Single thread performance is still a must have, especially for businesses who pay a per core license!! They don't want 2,048 slow cores... They rather 32 super fast cores.that can do the same work. From a license perspective and space constraints.
 

Balkroth

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
264
Ya know thinking about this, this really makes me think of the DEC effect on things, hypertransport on the amd side which kinda turned into infinity fabric, intel, basically stealing tech and bled them dry for the pentium pro items that became Core after the p4 crappyness. Now, Dec killed themselves, but they have had a huge amount of influence in our computing today.

And son of an old Dec Engr, there is still a lot of talk between them, so seeing a lot of fun things.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: N4CR
like this

N4CR

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Messages
4,688
How did this devolve into a discussion about Jim Keller? He has literally nothing to do with Intel's process failures.
Funny that happens when certain people come out of the woodwork in certain types of threads, after certain types of announcements.
End of the day, INTC share price must be defended... that is what you are seeing here mostly.

INTC stock.jpg


Guess what the two drops were this year? Both the same thing - 7nm delays in March and this week. Guess when a certain someone returned after nearly four months off [H]? Oh.. March 16th... how strange, that's when they last announced 7nm delays ;) Go check their post history it's all there. Just a coincidence, I'm sure!
 

Chimpee

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 6, 2015
Messages
1,548
Funny that happens when certain people come out of the woodwork in certain types of threads, after certain types of announcements.
End of the day, INTC share price must be defended... that is what you are seeing here mostly.

View attachment 264650

Guess what the two drops were this year? Both the same thing - 7nm delays in March and this week. Guess when a certain someone returned after nearly four months off [H]? Oh.. March 16th... how strange, that's when they last announced 7nm delays ;) Go check their post history it's all there. Just a coincidence, I'm sure!
Didn't the first drop coincide with the market crash from February to March like most other stocks that crash around that time.
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
10,555
Why would anyone make network data transfer single threaded? This hasn't been the case for like 10+ years. Especially with today's high bandwidth networks, you'd never hit 100gbps using a single core. Man, wish I had that link handy for what kind of core count it takes to actually utilize high bandwidth networks.... But it scales well over 32 cores. Anyways, I do understand the point your trying to make, some things do depend on other things (serial vs parallel processes) and are difficult to make use of more cores. Single thread performance is still a must have, especially for businesses who pay a per core license!! They don't want 2,048 slow cores... They rather 32 super fast cores.that can do the same work. From a license perspective and space constraints.
If you can find that link, or any info pertaining to this, I would appreciate it.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 11, 2017
Messages
671
Yes read what I said... he is a refinement guy. Intel or Apple or Tesla can afford to have people making multiple millions a year for their working lifetime if it makes sense.

Jim is a refiner. He is not an innovator.

He is very good at taking a design and seeing where it can be improved... he is very good at maxing out a node. What he is not good at (or at least has never proven himself good at) is being the first one to design a chip for a new node. Or include innovative ground breaking things into his designs. None of his chips do anything that was new. The A4 is a good chip... but it wasn't the industry leader like the later Apple chips where. Zen is a great design but its NOT all that innovative. Bulldozer on paper was far more revolutionary compared to what Intel was doing then Zen was.

Jim is the guy you call when you need a product that just works.... and fabs well. As far as I know I have never heard of any of his designs having major issues with fabrication. He is very good at understanding how far he can push a node without running into yield issues. That is important if your AMD and your almost bankrupt and need a chip that will work compete if not win any crowns, and more importantly have a nice high 90+% fab rate so you can price where you need to and make profit. Same was true for his work at Tesla and Apple... they where not looking to take big chances. Apple wasn't swinging for 40% better performance then the other guys with A4. They wanted a solid well built base... that is what he helped them get before he left. Tesla was in the same position they where not looking to turn the industry upside down they just wanted to build something in house that worked.

Jim has no history of being the guy they call in when there moving to a new node and are aiming to better the competition. That doesn't seem to be who he is... and the industry at this point seems to understand that pretty well. Where ever he ends up next... I'll call it now he is going to be the guy making a + version of whatever they have. Or helping a new player get a first product into production. That is who he seems to be... there is no evidence that he is the type of designer that would ever be designing anything with a list of First of its kind type features.
Lol this guy saying Bulldozer was more revolutionary than Ryzen on paper...
Were the heck do you get your info? All the major tech news outlets that actually HAVE sources don't agree with you on Keller.
CCX was the first step to getting chipets (Infinity fabric) right, they were basically chiplets already (but on the same chip).

I also see juanrga came in to state that Jim Keller didn't do anything that he actually did either (Athlon/64, Ryzen....)
Take everything he says with a truckload of salt, I mean he even says he is "pro Intel and anti AMD"...

Also Lisa Su won't be talking about employees that have been gone for 2+ years when talking about the Zen team. You only talk about who is currently there. Zen was being designed way before Keller left, they take years to create. Keller most likely built the Zen team that Lisa Su mentions.
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
10,555
I also see juanrga came in to state that Jim Keller didn't do anything that he actually did either (Athlon/64, Ryzen....)
Take everything he says with a truckload of salt, I mean he even says he is "pro Intel and anti AMD"...
Could you please lay off of juanrga?
The guy knows his shit when it comes to ARM and CPU technology in general, and he has provided sources again and again about Jim Keller, which I am starting to agree more and more with.

Not trying to throw shade at Jim Killer, but credit needs to go where credit is due, and unless he comes out and states that he was a part of Zen's development, I do think his involvement was minimal to nil.
If Jim Keller does, then my hat is off to him, but if not, then it is all conjecture and opinion with many sources showing, and proving, the complete opposite.

Take everything he says with a truckload of salt
Would you mind posting some links showing that he was proven to work on Zen?
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2017
Messages
671
Could you please lay off of juanrga?
The guy knows his shit when it comes to ARM and CPU technology in general, and he has provided sources again and again about Jim Keller, which I am starting to agree more and more with.

Not trying to throw shade at Jim Killer, but credit needs to go where credit is due, and unless he comes out and states that he was a part of Zen's development, I do think his involvement was minimal to nil.
If Jim Keller does, then my hat is off to him, but if not, then it is all conjecture and opinion with many sources showing, and proving, the complete opposite.


Would you mind posting some links showing that he was proven to work on Zen?
Just Google the name Jim Keller. You get pages and pages of how he was a part of Zen. That and K7, K8, x86_64, etc... The dude is so freaking popular in the tech world for a reason. He must be doing something right.

I agree about him needing some kind of autobiography...
 

polonyc2

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
18,061
AMD is slowly chipping away at Intel with every new Ryzen release...how long can Intel hang on with 14nm+ before the floodgates give way and AMD just delivers a beatdown?...could Zen 3 be that watershed moment?...Rocket Lake is a semi new architecture but doesn't sound like it can compete with Zen 3
 

ChadD

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,707
Just Google the name Jim Keller. You get pages and pages of how he was a part of Zen. That and K7, K8, x86_64, etc... The dude is so freaking popular in the tech world for a reason. He must be doing something right.

I agree about him needing some kind of autobiography...
I don't really want to continue the JK back and forth... but I guess I am. sorry. At least I can I think tie some of the JK talk into the cluster fuck going on over at Intel.

This is from when he started at Intel a couple years ago....
https://www.anandtech.com/show/13048/an-anandtech-exclusive-the-jim-keller-interview
Its a good short read... and its clear he had ideas on how he could help Intel streamline and get to producing product. Although he seems to have either been cryptic about what he was there for specifically or really honestly didn't know.
In the mans own words;
"... I'm not really a visionary, I'm more of a go build stuff kind of person. "

Jim sees himself as a fixer. Always has I have read other things he has said over the years and he makes no bones about who he is. He is a good manager and by all accounts he is easy to work for. He is smart enough to know what people can handle and what needs to be done on complicated projects. What he mostly gets praise for is getting engineers excited to be working on boring shit. lol It makes him a rock star because most people capable of understanding what every engineer is doing on a multi billion transistor CPU design.. while still being human enough to not piss people off is rare. Its what make people like him and Lisa sue rock stars. There are lots of genius level engineers in the field... but few of them are well rounded enough to lead 100s of very very smart people for 2-3 years at a time to design a chip.

He was brought into Intel clearly to be a fixer... and as I see it there are 4 possible reasons he left. First he or someone close to him is actually sick. (which of course we all hope isn't the case). Secondly he fixed what he came to fix and feels his job is done and hes on to the next thing (which seems unlikely to me as Intel still seems to be fubar as there preparing investors for missed targets) Thirdly he has got to a point where he realizes he can't fix anything at Intel due to their entrenched culture or whatever other issues he ran into. (a very strong possibility... Intel isn't known to have a agile open to change culture). and of course it is also possible his bosses at Intel lost confidence in his ability to sprinkle his Mr. Fix it magic and get them a workman style money maker out the door, as he has for AMD, Apple and Tesla.
 

juanrga

Pro-Intel / Anti-AMD Just FYI
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
2,642
Funny that happens when certain people come out of the woodwork in certain types of threads, after certain types of announcements.
End of the day, INTC share price must be defended... that is what you are seeing here mostly.

View attachment 264650

Guess what the two drops were this year? Both the same thing - 7nm delays in March and this week. Guess when a certain someone returned after nearly four months off [H]? Oh.. March 16th... how strange, that's when they last announced 7nm delays ;) Go check their post history it's all there. Just a coincidence, I'm sure!
Hollywood lost a great screenwriter
 

juanrga

Pro-Intel / Anti-AMD Just FYI
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
2,642
Lol this guy saying Bulldozer was more revolutionary than Ryzen on paper...
He is right.

I also see juanrga came in to state that Jim Keller didn't do anything that he actually did either (Athlon/64, Ryzen....)
Take everything he says with a truckload of salt, I mean he even says he is "pro Intel and anti AMD"...
I gave you the names of the guys behind Athlon/64. I could also quote David Kanter: "Keller was never the guy behind the K8." It doesn't have anything to do with being pro this or pro that. It has to do with getting facts right and stop repeating cliches and hype about Keller.
 

Ready4Dis

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
1,761
If you can find that link, or any info pertaining to this, I would appreciate it.
I just spent over 30 minutes trying to find it to no avail. I recall it was network + raid, and the biggest issue was the CPU processing the obscene # of interrupts coming in and the ended up going from a 24 core to 32 core to alleviate the majority of the bottlenecks. It was one of the review places that did a write-up on their upgrade they didn't go as smooth as they had hoped.
 

idiomatic

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 12, 2018
Messages
142
Intel has gone full Boeing. There's a number of blue chip companies we need to let die. Engineering companies need engineering management.
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2017
Messages
671
I don't really want to continue the JK back and forth... but I guess I am. sorry. At least I can I think tie some of the JK talk into the cluster fuck going on over at Intel.

This is from when he started at Intel a couple years ago....
https://www.anandtech.com/show/13048/an-anandtech-exclusive-the-jim-keller-interview
Its a good short read... and its clear he had ideas on how he could help Intel streamline and get to producing product. Although he seems to have either been cryptic about what he was there for specifically or really honestly didn't know.
In the mans own words;
"... I'm not really a visionary, I'm more of a go build stuff kind of person. "

Jim sees himself as a fixer. Always has I have read other things he has said over the years and he makes no bones about who he is. He is a good manager and by all accounts he is easy to work for. He is smart enough to know what people can handle and what needs to be done on complicated projects. What he mostly gets praise for is getting engineers excited to be working on boring shit. lol It makes him a rock star because most people capable of understanding what every engineer is doing on a multi billion transistor CPU design.. while still being human enough to not piss people off is rare. Its what make people like him and Lisa sue rock stars. There are lots of genius level engineers in the field... but few of them are well rounded enough to lead 100s of very very smart people for 2-3 years at a time to design a chip.

He was brought into Intel clearly to be a fixer... and as I see it there are 4 possible reasons he left. First he or someone close to him is actually sick. (which of course we all hope isn't the case). Secondly he fixed what he came to fix and feels his job is done and hes on to the next thing (which seems unlikely to me as Intel still seems to be fubar as there preparing investors for missed targets) Thirdly he has got to a point where he realizes he can't fix anything at Intel due to their entrenched culture or whatever other issues he ran into. (a very strong possibility... Intel isn't known to have a agile open to change culture). and of course it is also possible his bosses at Intel lost confidence in his ability to sprinkle his Mr. Fix it magic and get them a workman style money maker out the door, as he has for AMD, Apple and Tesla.
Well, considering that he left Intel for personal reasons, that makes #1 and #3 the most likely.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this

juanrga

Pro-Intel / Anti-AMD Just FYI
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
2,642
Just Google the name Jim Keller. You get pages and pages of how he was a part of Zen. That and K7, K8, x86_64, etc... The dude is so freaking popular in the tech world for a reason. He must be doing something right.
Pages written by people with no clue, as that Kitguru article that someone else did bring to us. That article not only repeats the old myths about K8, but now pretends that Keller is behind Apple's Swift, Cyclone, and Typhoon. Sure, in a parallel universe where Gerard Williams III does not exist :D

"Chief Architect for all Apple CPU and SOC development. For CPU, lead the Cyclone, Typhoon, Twister, Hurricane, Monsoon, Vortex and Lightning architecture work. And everyday, I still work on very very cool stuff."

https://www.linkedin.com/public-profile/in/gerard-williams-iii-27895aa/
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2017
Messages
671
Pages written by people with no clue, as that Kitguru article that someone else did bring to us. That article not only repeats the old myths about K8, but now pretends that Keller is behind Apple's Swift, Cyclone, and Typhoon. Sure, in a parallel universe where Gerard Williams III does not exist :D

"Chief Architect for all Apple CPU and SOC development. For CPU, lead the Cyclone, Typhoon, Twister, Hurricane, Monsoon, Vortex and Lightning architecture work. And everyday, I still work on very very cool stuff."

https://www.linkedin.com/public-profile/in/gerard-williams-iii-27895aa/
Does Jim Keller have a LinkedIn?
 

Red Falcon

[H]F Junkie
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
10,555
I just spent over 30 minutes trying to find it to no avail. I recall it was network + raid, and the biggest issue was the CPU processing the obscene # of interrupts coming in and the ended up going from a 24 core to 32 core to alleviate the majority of the bottlenecks. It was one of the review places that did a write-up on their upgrade they didn't go as smooth as they had hoped.
Thanks for trying, I do appreciate it. :)
I will look into it, as most of the large single-file network transfers I have ever seen have been all single-threaded, so if this is the case, it's great news!
 

IdiotInCharge

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 13, 2003
Messages
14,535
Thanks for trying, I do appreciate it. :)
I will look into it, as most of the large single-file network transfers I have ever seen have been all single-threaded, so if this is the case, it's great news!
I wonder if it wasn't Linus Sebastian with the file server they set up...
 

Ready4Dis

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
1,761
I wonder if it wasn't Linus Sebastian with the file server they set up...
Sounds like it could be, I even searched Linus when I was looking.thinking maybe it was Linus tech tips or something. I tried another search but Google just wants to fix Linus to Linux for me.
 

Ready4Dis

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
1,761
Thanks for trying, I do appreciate it. :)
I will look into it, as most of the large single-file network transfers I have ever seen have been all single-threaded, so if this is the case, it's great news!
I mean, it really does depend obviously, 24 cores for a HDD and 10mb/s ethernet probably won't net you much ;).
 
Top