cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
22,153
Gadi Singer is the vice president and general manager of the Artificial Intelligence Products Group at Intel. In an interview with Ed Sperling of Semiconductor Engineering, he discusses how Intel is evolving to meet the ever changing requirements for deep learning. He believes that Xeon processors are well suited for deep learning but there are other solutions needed that range from sub-1 watt to 400 watts. Intel's ability to leverage the data center, edge and system integration will be key to their future in creating a solid portfolio of products for the deep learning field.

There are three elements. One is that we need a portfolio, because our customers are asking for it. You need solutions that go from the end device, whether that's a security camera or a drone or a car, to a gateway, which is the aggregation point, and up to the cloud or on-premise servers. You need a set of solutions that are very efficient at each of those points. One element of our hardware strategy is to provide a portfolio with complementary architectures and solutions. Another element is to further make Xeon a strong foundation for AI.
 
They are trying to construct a new leader for the company using the AI they are developing just to try and avoid more mis-steps. Yeah Intel,...you aint foolin no one!
 
Xeon processors are well suited for landfills until they fix/remove speculative execution and come up with a new architecture.
 
"AI is hot, so buy our Xeon processors for it. They weren't designed for AI, but they make us a lot of money, so of course they are the perfect solution for your AI needs."

Once upon a time, Intel had great engineers leading its product development.
That died, replaced by optics-driven* product development, when Intel decided to go with the Pentium 4 "NetBurst" architecture.
It's been downhill ever since.

*optics-driven: "how buzz-worthy the product looks,"
as opposed to marketing-driven: "how well it satisfies the customer's needs"
 
Let's use our spare cycles to crystalize our roadmap, and leverage that deep learning! Ping me, and we'll set up some meetings to plan a time to discuss the primary action items, and solidify the synergy between deep learning and our silicon semiconductor engineering.
 
Once upon a time, Intel had great engineers leading its product development.
That died, replaced by optics-driven* product development, when Intel decided to go with the Pentium 4 "NetBurst" architecture.
It's been downhill ever since.


Conroe? Intel trounced AMD there.


Just trying to be clear. I'm not trying to be in Intel's corner. I want them put to the thumb screws and torches as much as the next guy. Well, unless the next guy is blindly dedicated to Intel for some reason.
 
Well Intel welcome to AMD shoes where your foundries are holding your engineers back. All while a wealthy competitor blows right past you.
 
Back
Top