Intel Archive
Broadcom has been closely examining Intel’s chip-design and marketing business, according to people familiar with the matter. It has informally discussed with its advisers making a bid but would likely only do so if it finds a partner for Intel’s manufacturing business, the people said. Nothing has been submitted to Intel, the people cautioned, and Broadcom could decide not to seek a deal. Separately, TSMC has studied controlling some or all of Intel’s chip plants, potentially as part of an investor consortium or other structure, according to people familiar with the discussions. ↫ Asa Fitch, Lauren Thomas, and Yang Jie at The WSJ The vultures continue to circle, but considering Intel isn’t actually dead yet, it does all feel a little bit premature. The company needs time to right the ship, but with its current non-technical, finance-oriented leadership it might already be too late for such time to be given to the company. For all we know, they’re already working on a big payday through divestment or wholesale selling of the company, and they’re just waiting on the right offer. I don’t think it’s a good idea to let Intel be stripped for parts and looted by the ultra-wealthy, but with the United States hurdling towards a massive constitutional crisis and experiencing utter destruction of government institutions, I don’t think anyone’s left to stop it or think things through properly.
Remember x86S, Intel’s initiative to create a 64bit-only x86 instruction set, with the goal of removing some of the bloat that the venerable architecture accumulated over the decades? Well, this initiative is now dead, and more or less replaced with the x86 Ecosystem Advisory Group, a collection of companies with a stake in keeping x86 going. Most notably, this includes Intel and AMD, but also other tech giants like Google. In the first sign of changes to come after the formation of a new industry group, Intel has confirmed to Tom’s Hardware that it is no longer working on the x86S specification. The decision comes after Intel announced the formation of the x86 Ecosystem Advisory Group, which brings together Intel, AMD, Google, and numerous other industry stalwarts to define the future of the x86 instruction set. Intel originally announced its intentions to de-bloat the x86 instruction set by developing a simplified 64-bit mode-only x86S version, publishing a draft specification in May 2023, and then updating it to a 1.2 revision in June of this year. Now, the company says it has officially ended that initiative. ↫ Paul Alcorn This seems like an acknowledgement of the reality that Intel is no longer in the position it once was when it comes to steering the direction of x86. It’s AMD that’s doing most of the heavy-lifting for the architecture at the moment, and it’s been doing that for a while now, with little sign that’s going to change. I doubt Intel had enough clout left to push something as relatively drastic as x86S, and now has to rely on building consensus with other companies invested in x86. It may seem like a small thing, and I doubt many larger tech outlets will care, but this story is definitely the biggest sign yet that Intel is in a lot more trouble than people already seem to think based on Intel’s products and market performance. What we have here is a full admission by Intel that they no longer control the direction of x86, and have to rely on the rest of the industry to help them. That’s absolutely wild.
This is a bit of an odd few days for Intel. Mere days after the board ousted its CEO Pat Gelsinger, once heralded as the chip giant’s messiah, they’re today launching two brand new desktop graphics cards. They’re aimed at the more budget-oriented consumer, and might very well be the last discrete graphics cards Intel makes, since this is one of the product lines on the chopping block. Intel’s next — and possibly last — desktop graphics cards will begin arriving in just 10 days. Right on cue, the company has announced the budget $249 Arc B580 and $219 Arc B570, shipping December 13th and January 16th, respectively, as the “best-in-class performance per dollar” options in the GPU market. They’re based on the same Xe2 “Battlemage” GPU architecture you’ll find in Intel’s Lunar Lake laptop chips but with more than double the graphics cores, up to 12GB of dedicated video memory, and up to 190W of power compared to their limited laptop forms — enough power to see the B580 slightly beat Nvidia’s $299 RTX 4060 and AMD’s $269 RX 7600, according to Intel’s benchmarks, but sometimes still trading blows. ↫ Sean Hollister at The Verge As for Gelsinger’s dismissal, it seems the board forced him out after being frustrated with the slow progress the company was making in its turnaround. The fact that a finance person and a marketing person will together be interim CEOs seems to indicate the board is more interested in quick profit than a long-term turnaround, and with companies like Qualcomm being interested in acquiring Intel, the board’s short-term mentality might be winning out, and ousting Gelsinger is just paving the way for selling off parts of Intel until there’s nothing left. Who knows, I might be reading way too much into all of this, but it feels like expecting an organisation as complex as a high-end processor makers to turn itself around in just a few years is incredibly shortsighted, and you’d think board members at Intel would understand that. If the goal is to maintain Intel as a separate, profitable entity making some of the world’s fastest processors, you’re going to need to give a CEO and leadership team more than just a few years to turn the ship around. Within a few years we’ll know the board’s true intentions, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see Intel being sold for parts over the coming years.
On Friday afternoon, The Wall Street Journal reported Intel had been approached by fellow chip giant Qualcomm about a possible takeover. While any deal is described as “far from certain,” according to the paper’s unnamed sources, it would represent a tremendous fall for a company that had been the most valuable chip company in the world, based largely on its x86 processor technology that for years had triumphed over Qualcomm’s Arm chips outside of the phone space. ↫ Richard Lawler and Sean Hollister at The Verge Either Qualcomm is only interested in buying certain parts of Intel’s business, or we’re dealing with someone trying to mess with stock prices for personal gain. The idea of Qualcomm acquiring Intel seems entirely outlandish to me, and that’s not even taking into account that regulators will probably have a thing or two to say about this. The one thing such a crazy deal would have going for it is that it would create a pretty strong and powerful all-American chip giant, which is a PR avenue the companies might explore if this is really serious. One of the most valuable assets Intel has is the x86 architecture and the associated patents and licensing deals, and the immense market power that comes with those. Perhaps Qualcomm is interested in designing x86 chips, or, more likely, perhaps they’re interested in all that sweet, sweet licensing money they could extract by allowing more companies to design and sell x86 processors. The x86 market currently consists almost exclusively of Intel and AMD, a situation which may be leaving a lot of licensing money on the table. Pondering aside, I highly doubt this is anything other than an overblown, misinterpreted story.
Intel’s woes are far from over. Pat Gelsinger, the company’s CEO, has announced that Intel’s chipmaking business will be spun off and turned into a separate company. A subsidiary structure will unlock important benefits. It provides our external foundry customers and suppliers with clearer separation and independence from the rest of Intel. Importantly, it also gives us future flexibility to evaluate independent sources of funding and optimize the capital structure of each business to maximize growth and shareholder value creation. There is no change to our Intel Foundry leadership team, which continues to report to me. We will also establish an operating board that includes independent directors to govern the subsidiary. This supports our continued focus on driving greater transparency, optimization and accountability across the business. ↫ Pat Gelsinger This is a big move, and illustrated the difficulties Intel is facing. Its foundry business lost $7 billion last year, and it’s cutting 15% of its workforce – 15000 people – indicating it needs to do something to turn the ship around. Intel is also pausing construction on two additional plants in Europe, but will continue its expansion efforts in the United States. Bitter note is that Intel received a massive cash injection from the US Biden administration, yet then proceeds to fire 15000 people. Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor.
In what started last year as a handful of reports about instability with Intel’s Raptor Lake desktop chips has, over the last several months, grown into a much larger saga. Facing their biggest client chip instability impediment in decades, Intel has been under increasing pressure to figure out the root cause of the issue and fix it, as claims of damaged chips have stacked up and rumors have swirled amidst the silence from Intel. But, at long last, it looks like Intel’s latest saga is about to reach its end, as today the company has announced that they’ve found the cause of the issue, and will be rolling out a microcode fix next month to resolve it. ↫ Ryan Smith at AnandTech It turns out the root cause of the problem is “elevated operating voltages”, caused by a buggy algorithm in Intel’s own microcode. As such, it’s at least fixable through a microcode update, which Intel says it will ship sometime mid-August. AnandTech, my one true source for proper reporting on things like this, is not entirely satisfied, though, as they state microcode is often used to just cover up the real root cause that’s located much deeper inside the processor, and as such, Intel’s explanation doesn’t actually tell us very much at all. Quite coincidentally, Intel also experienced a manufacturing flaw with a small batch of very early Raptor Lake processors. An “oxidation manufacturing flaw” found its way into a small number of early Raptor Lake processors, but the company claims it was caught early and shouldn’t be an issue any more. Of course, for anyone experiencing issues with their expensive Intel processors, this will linger in the back of their minds, too. Not exactly a flawless launch for Intel, but it seems its main only competitor, AMD, is also experiencing issues, as the company has delayed the launch of its new Ryzen 9000 chips due to quality issues. I’m not at all qualified to make any relevant statements about this, but with the recent launch of the Snapdragon Elite X and Pro chips, these issues couldn’t come at a worse time for Intel and AMD.
Hot on the heels of AMD, here’s Intel’s next-generation processor, this time for the laptop market. Overall, Lunar Lake represents their second generation of disaggregated SoC architecture for the mobile market, replacing the Meteor Lake architecture in the lower-end space. At this time, Intel has disclosed that it uses a 4P+4E (8 core) design, with hyper-threading/SMT disabled, so the total thread count supported by the processor is simply the number of CPU cores, e.g., 4P+4E/8T. ↫ Gavin Bonshor at AnandTech The most significant change in Lunar Lake, however, has nothing to do with IPC improvements, core counts, or power usage. No, the massive sea change here is that Lunar Lake will do away with separate memory sticks, instead opting for on-die memory at a maximum of 32GB LPDDR5X. This is very similar to how Apple packages its memory on the M dies, and yes, this also means that as far as thin Intel laptops go, you’ll no longer be able to upgrade your memory after purchase. You choose your desired amount of memory at purchase, and that’s what you’ll be stuck with. Buyer beware, I suppose. We can only hope Intel isn’t going to default to 8GB.
Last week I wrote about Intel aiming to remove Xeon Phi support in GCC 15 with the products being end-of-life and deprecated in GCC 14. While some openly wondered whether the open-source community would allow it given the Xeon Phi accelerators were available to buy just a few years ago and at some very low prices going back years so some potentially finding use still out of them especially during this AI boom (and still readily available to buy used for around ~$50 USD), today the Intel Xeon Phi support was indeed removed. ↫ Michael Larabel Xeon Phi PCIe cards are incredibly cheap on eBay, and every now and then my mouse hovers over the buy button – but I always realise just in time that the cards have become quite difficult to use, since support for them, already sparse to begin with, is only getting worse by the day. Support for them was already removed in Linux 5.10, and now GCC is pulling he plug too, so the only option is to keep using old kernels, or pass the card on to a VM running an older Linux kernel version, which is a lot of headache for what is essentially a weird toy for nerds at this point. GCC 15 will also, sadly, remove support for Itanium, which, as I’ve said before, is a huge disgrace and a grave mistake. Itanium is the future, and will stomp all over crappy architectures like x86 and ARM. With this deprecation, GCC relegates itself to the dustbin of history.
Intel and AMD both tried to ship iGPUs fast enough to compete with low end discrete cards over the past 10 years with mixed results. Recently though, powerful iGPUs have been thrown back into the spotlight. Handhelds like Valve’s Steam Deck and ASUS’s ROG Ally demonstrated that consumers are willing to accept compromises to play games on the go. AMD has dominated that market so far. Valve’s Steam Deck uses AMD’s Van Gogh APU, and the ROG Ally uses the newer Phoenix APU. Unlike Van Gogh, Phoenix is a general purpose mobile chip with both a powerful CPU and GPU. Phoenix doesn’t stop at targeting the handheld segment, and threatens Intel’s laptop market share too. In response, Meteor Lake brings a powerful iGPU to the party. It has the equivalent of 128 EUs and clocks up to 2.25 GHz, making it modestly wider and much faster than Raptor Lake’s 96 EU, 1.5 GHz iGPU. Raptor Lake’s Xe-LP graphics architecture gets replaced by Xe-LPG, a close relative of the Xe-HPG architecture used in Intel’s A770 discrete GPU. At the system level, Meteor Lake moves to a GPU integration scheme that better suits a chiplet configuration where the iGPU gets significant transistor and area budget. I’ll be testing Meteor Lake’s iGPU with the Core Ultra 7 155H, as implemented in the ASUS Zenbook 14. I purchased the device myself in late February. ↫ Chips and Cheese I’m absolutely here for the resurgence in capable integrated GPUs, both for PC gaming on the go and for better graphics performance even in thinner, smaller laptops. I would love to have just a bit more graphics power on my thin and small laptop so I can do some basic gaming with it.
Since the mid-90’s with the P6 micro-architecture for the Pentium Pro as the sixth-generation x86 microarchitecture, Intel has relied on the “Family 6” CPU ID. From there Intel has just revved the Model number within Family 6 for each new microarchitecture/core. For example, Meteor Lake is Family 6 Model 170 and Emerald Rapids is Family 6 Model 207. This CPU ID identification is used within the Linux kernel and other operating systems for identifying CPU generations for correct handling, etc. But Intel Linux engineers today disclosed that Family 6 is coming to an end “soon-ish”. ↫ Michael Larabel They should revive the ix86 family name, and call the next generation i786. It sounds so much cooler, even if these names have become rather irrelevant.
Nearly one year ago Intel published the X86S specification (formerly stylized as “X86-S”) for simplifying the Intel architecture by removing support for 16-bit and 32-bit operating systems. X86S is a big step forward with dropping legacy mode, 5-level paging improvements, and other modernization improvements for x86_64. With the Linux 6.9 kernel more x86S bits are in place for this ongoing effort. ↫ Michael Larabel I doubt we’ll see much fallout from these changes.
US chip company Intel will make high-end semiconductors for Microsoft, the companies announced, as it seeks to compete with TSMC and Samsung to supply the next generation of silicon used in artificial intelligence for customers around the world. Chief executive Pat Gelsinger said at a company event on Wednesday that Intel is set to “rebuild Western manufacturing at scale,” buoyed by geopolitical concerns in Washington about the need to bring leading-edge manufacturing back to the US. ↫ Michael Acton Having our entire advanced chip industry built atop one Dutch company and one company on an island China would love to invade is not exactly the recipe for a stable supply chain. I think it’s a great idea to build capacity in the US and Europe, and if Intel’s the one to do it – with lavish government funding, I might add – then so be it. We’d all love for it to be more diverse than that, but the sad reality is that building advanced chip factories is really hard and really expensive, and very few companies have both the knowledge and money to do so.
Around 1977, Intel released a floppy disc controller (FDC) chip called the 8271. This controller isn’t particularly well known. It was mainly used in business computers and storage solutions, but its one breakthrough into the consumer space was with the BBC Micro, a UK-centric computer released in 1981. There are very few easily discovered details about this chip online, aside from the useful datasheet. This, combined with increasing observations of strange behavior, make the chip a bit of an enigma. My interest in the chip was piqued when I accidentally triggered a wild test mode that managed to corrupt one of my floppy discs even though the write protect tab was present! You can read about that here. Can we reverse engineer a detailed understanding of how it works? What wonders will we find? ↫ Chris Evans This thing is wild.
After three years of delays, Merced shipped as Itanium on the 29th of May in 2001. The first OEM systems from HP, IBM, and Dell were shipped in June. Itanium, whose architecture was now referred to as IA-64, was a 6-wide VLIW chip running at either 733 to 800 MHz with a 266 MT/s front side bus. It had 16K of L1 cache, 96K of L2 cache, 2 or 4 MB of L3 cache, and it was a single core chip on socket PAC418 built on a 180nm process. That this chip under performed is an understatement. Given the long development time, multi-billion-dollar development cost, significant hype, and claims that it would out-compete everything on the market… Itanium was a massive failure. The 32 bit x86 chips of the time were able to best it in most workloads. Embarrassingly, the Pentium 4 (whose own performance wasn’t that good) beat Itanium on integer performance and memory bandwidth. Those areas where the chip was strong were in transaction processing and scientific applications. John Crawford, Merced project leader at Intel, reflects: “Everything was crazy. We were taking risks everywhere. Everything was new. When you do that, you’re going to stumble.” The five hundred person team working on the chip was also relatively inexperienced, and disagreements between HP and Intel led to many compromises in design. ↫ Bradford Morgan White Itanium is the future. This entire article is anti-Itanium propaganda and misinformation. Do your own research.
Intel’s Optane memory modules launched with a lot of fanfare in 2015, and were recently discontinued, in 2022, with similar fanfare. It was a sad day for me, a lover of abstraction-breaking technologies, but it was forseeable and understandable. At the time of Optane’s launch, a lot of us were excited about the idea of having a new storage tier, sitting between DRAM and flash. It was announced as having DRAM endurance and speed with the persistence and size of flash. It was a futuristic memory technology, but the technology of the future met the full force of Wright’s Law. ↫ Nima Badizadegan I definitely remember Optane being presented as a huge deal, but it seems it fell between the cracks of other technologies developing around it and their prices dropping fast.
Chip companies like Qualcomm, Nvidia, and AMD are all either planning or said to be planning another attempt at making Arm chips for the consumer PC market. Qualcomm is leading the charge in mid-2024 with its Snapdragon X Elite and a new CPU architecture called Oryon. And Reuters reported earlier this week that Nvidia and AMD are targeting a 2025 release window for their own Arm chips for Windows PCs. If these companies successfully get their chips into PCs, it would mostly come at Intel’s expense. But Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger doesn’t seem worried about it yet, as he said on the company’s most recent earnings call. The biggest issue for Windows on ARM will be, as always, application compatibility. ARM applications haven’t exactly been pouring in for Windows, and translation layers in Windows haven’t been earth-shattering either. As long as this problem remains, Intel indeed has little to worry about. I’m just excited there’s finally some movement in ARM laptops, because Linux is exceptionally well positioned for the transition to ARM. Every major distribution has a fully functional ARM version, with pretty much full package repository support. There really is very little difference in running desktop Linux on ARM (or even POWER9, for that matter). The power of open source.
The Intel 14th Gen Core series is somewhat of a somber swansong to the traditional and famed Core i series naming scheme, rounding off what feels like the end of an era. With the shift to their upcoming Meteor Lake SoC, the impending launch of the new naming scheme (Core and Core Ultra) branding, and what Intel hopes to be a groundbreaking mobile chiplet-based architecture. The crux of the analysis is if you’re upgrading from an older and outdated desktop platform, the Intel 14th Gen series is a solid performer, but there’s still value in current 13th Gen pricing. Those must be considered in the current global financial situation; some users may find a better deal. If you already have 12th or 13th Gen Core parts, then there’s absolutely no reason to upgrade or consider 14th Gen as a platform, as none of the features (mainly software) justify a sidegrade on which is ultimately the same platform and the same core architecture. AnandTech always delivers. Unlike Intel.
A circuit called the flip-flop is a fundamental building block for sequential logic. A flip-flop can hold one bit of state, a “0” or a “1”, changing its value when the clock changes. Flip-flops are a key part of processors, with multiple roles. Several flip-flops can be combined to form a register, holding a value. Flip-flops are also used to build “state machines”, circuits that move from step to step in a controlled sequence. A flip-flops can also delay a signal, holding it from from one clock cycle to the next. Intel introduced the groundbreaking 8086 microprocessor in 1978, starting the x86 architecture that is widely used today. In this blog post, I take a close look at the flip-flops in the 8086: what they do and how they are implemented. In particular, I will focus on the dynamic flip-flop, which holds its value using capacitance, much like DRAM. Many of these flip-flops use a somewhat unusual “enable” input, which allows the flip-flop to hold its value for multiple clock cycles. More in-depth chip content. This type of content has been coming up a lot lately.
Intel is a newcomer to the world of discrete graphics cards, and the company’s Xe architecture is driving its effort to establish itself alongside AMD and Nvidia. We’ve seen Xe variants serve in integrated GPUs and midrange discrete cards, but Intel’s not stopping there. Their GPU ambitions extend to the datacenter and supercomputing markets. That’s where Ponte Vecchio (PVC) comes in. Like other compute-oriented GPUs, PVC goes wide and slow. High memory bandwidth and FP64 throughput differentiate it from client architectures, which emphasize FP32 throughput and use caching to reduce memory bandwidth demands. Compared to Nvidia’s H100 and AMD’s MI210, PVC stands out because it lacks fixed function graphics hardware. H100 and MI210 still have some form of texture units, but PVC doesn’t have any at all. Combine that with its lack of display outputs, and calling PVC a GPU is pretty funny. It’s really a giant, parallel processor that happens to be programmed in the same way you’d program a GPU for compute. Another great feature from Chips and Cheese. Speaking of Intel – the company also unveiled that Meteor Lake CPUs are coming to the desktop in 2024.
The European Commission has fined Intel $400 million (€376 million) for hindering competitors’ access to the market through naked restrictions between 2002 and 2007. The fine comes after a long-running antitrust court battle dating back to 2009 when the Commission initially fined Intel a record $1.13 billion for abuse of dominance. While some of Intel’s actions, like hidden rebates, were dropped on appeal due to lack of evidence of harm, the Commission upheld that Intel paid PC manufacturers to delay or limit products using AMD processors. Specifically, the Commission cited examples where Intel paid HP not to sell AMD-powered business PCs to small and medium businesses through direct channels from 2002-2005. It also paid Acer to delay the launch of an AMD-based notebook from late 2003 to early 2004. Intel also paid Lenovo to push back the launch of AMD notebooks by six months. While it’s great that fines are being levied for these crimes, the problem is that the damage is already done and a fine won’t actually undo said damage. Of course, there’s no way to know exactly what the industry would’ve looked like had Intel not committed these crimes, but I feel like quite often these fines are more seen as a cost of doing business than as an actual detrimental punishment. It reminds me a lot of speeding tickets – they can be devastating to somebody of lower means, but to the upper classes they’re just the cost of driving a car and barely even register. I’d be much more in favour for not just fining companies that violate antitrust, but also going after the people within those companies that enabled and advocated for such behaviour through massive personal fines and jail time. None of the people involved will feel even the slightest bit of sting from their actions, and will do it all over again next time they get the chance.
