Wednesday, October 6th 2021

Intel's Pat Gelsinger Exclaims "Intel is Back" AMD is "Over"

Intel's recently appointed CEO wasn't mincing words in a recent interview with CRN, where he claimed that Intel not only "have the best product" but also that "this period of time when people could say, "Hey, [AMD] is leading," that's over." We'd say them are fighting words, regardless of what various leaks have suggested, since Intel still has a lot to prove with its upcoming Alder Lake CPUs.

Gelsinger continues with "We have 80 percent market share. We have the best software assets that are available in the industry. We do the best job supporting our partners and our OEMs with it. We have an incredible brand that our channel partners, customers want and trust. Wow, that's a lot of assets in that. If the channel partner doesn't see value in that, I want to talk to him." It's pretty clear from this that Intel believes that they're doing a bang up job and if their customers don't see it, then they need a talking to.
For those that were hoping for an engineer to be at the reins of Intel again, the interview with CRN reads like a marketing spinner is at the head of the company. "We are back with a very defined view of what it requires to be leadership in every dimension: leadership product, leadership [chip] packaging, leadership process, leadership software, unquestioned leadership on critical new workloads like AI, graphics, media, power-performance, enabling again the ecosystem. This is what we will be doing with aggressive actions and programs over the next couple of years." How Intel is planning to take the lead in the graphics market is going to be interesting to see if nothing else.

Most of the interview is about how Intel is planning on growing its channel and partner ecosystem, but the article also touches on things like Apple, although once again, Gelsinger dismisses Apple's move away from Intel hardware by saying " We ultimately see the real competition to enable the ecosystem to compete with Apple". This suggests that he doesn't seem to understand why Apple decided to make its own processors in the first place. He also doesn't seem to be a fan of what he calls "Apples closed garden" while calling Windows an "open ecosystem".

When asked how Intel is going to be able to compete with AMD and the various Arm based server parts from companies like Amazon and Ampere, he simply answers "do better products". It's hard to take that kind of an answer seriously and although Intel is hardly in a situation where they're likely to end up on the brink of ruin any time soon, the company has been losing ground in both the server, desktop and notebook markets over the past couple of years.

Gelsinger isn't expecting any further slips in terms of market share, mostly due to the fact that neither Intel or AMD can increase their production at the moment and the situation is likely the same for the Arm based server chip makers. Furthermore, he's expecting pricing to remain stable, although this seems to be referring to server parts, as consumer CPUs aren't discussed in the article. He doesn't see a thread from Arm based server CPUs either, claiming that they have a "very minimal" market share today and will continue to do so.

One interesting quote about the consumer PC side is that he believes that with Alder Lake, Intel will have the "energy efficiency leadership", something no-one else is expecting. That said, it seems like he does have some respect for AMD, saying "AMD has done a solid job over the last couple of years. We won't dismiss them of the good work that they've done". It'll be interesting to see how this unfolds over the next couple of generations of CPUs from both companies, as Intel still has a lot to prove with its new CPU designs.
Source: CRN
Add your own comment

171 Comments on Intel's Pat Gelsinger Exclaims "Intel is Back" AMD is "Over"

#1
lynx29
Let's wait for reviews. TDP, temps, and fps in games! Competition is good for the consumer, I hope they pull it off, that way Lisa Su moves her timeline ahead of schedule
Posted on Reply
#2
TheLostSwede
lynx29Let's wait for reviews. TDP, temps, and fps in games! Competition is good for the consumer, I hope they pull it off, that way Lisa Su moves her timeline ahead of schedule
Indeed. At the same time, AMD has to prove that they can keep up with Intel.
Posted on Reply
#3
Hyderz
yes but the 12900k costs 850 euro....
Posted on Reply
#4
TheLostSwede
Hyderzyes but the 12900k costs 850 euro....
I doubt that's official pricing, considering nothing has launched as yet.
Posted on Reply
#5
spnidel
"intel ceo admits AMD has had them beat for years"
thanks, Pat!
Posted on Reply
#6
las
It was just a matter of time - AMD did well condering all.

HOWEVER without Intel being stuck at 14nm _and_ AMD using TSMC 7nm - AMD would never have been able to do what they did. Ryzen 1000 and 2000 on GloFo was nothing special at all however it delivered an alternative to Intel which even the most hardcore AMD fanboys had joined, because FX CPUs were pretty much garbage.

With 3000 series Ryzen became decent, with 5000 series they become good. This is mostly because of going from GloFo 12nm (which is far worse than Intel 14nm in every aspect) to TSMC 7nm.

AMD have beaten Intel and even Nvidia before but Intel and Nvidia always came back and took the crown. Which resulted in AMD lowering prices and went back to the drawing board. Just look how AMD priced 5000 series compared to 1000/2000 and somewhat 3000 series. AMD started milking just like Intel did for ~10 years. AMD left NON-X models and generally priced all the chips way higher than before.

I own 2 Ryzen machines (htpc + nas/server) and 1 Intel (gaming rig) so you can stop the fanboy BS. I even own two consoles, so I actually have 4 AMD chips in my home... However I also have 3 intel laptops :p So I guess it's 50/50
Posted on Reply
#7
Ferrum Master
The article is way too sarcastic and bites Intel too much... get ready for the troll army.

Surely he was put into a spotlight where he really doesn't understand what' really going on.
Posted on Reply
#8
Verpal
Hope Intel can back their claim with action, high availability and competitive pricing would bring Intel back in the game.

I do, sincerely, hope neither AMD nor Intel win outright, whenever someone win they exploit their monopolizing position with little delay.
Posted on Reply
#9
las
Hyderzyes but the 12900k costs 850 euro....
Because you can always trust pre-launch prices.
VerpalHope Intel can back their claim with action, high availability and competitive pricing would bring Intel back in the game.

I do, sincerely, hope neither AMD nor Intel win outright, whenever someone win they exploit their monopolizing position with little delay.
Intel had high availablity on chips throughout whole COVID 19 situation, thats the perk of having their own fabs (which is both good and bad).

I order hardware for several businesses and pretty much every Intel laptop had day to day delivery, however most Ryzen machines, took 3-4 weeks minimum but for some models even 3-6 months. Yep, MONTHS...

I probably ordered 5000+ laptops in the last 2 years. Intel was in 99% of these, because availablity was great at all times. This is actually AMDs biggest problem, especially on mobile segment. It is just a mess. Especially their transistioning from 4000 to 5000 series on mobile. All models went out of stock for weeks, some months.

However the delivery have improved by now but AMD lost millions of sales in this window. People working from home = alot of new hardware needed and Intel stood ready to deliver, AMD did not.

I'm looking forward to seeing Alder Lake reviews, I won't be buying tho. Meteor Lake at the earliest for me and then I will still see what AMD has to offer at the time, obviously on AM5 + DDR5. DDR5 gets some time to mature too, because timings are stinky right now.
Posted on Reply
#10
wolf
Performance Enthusiast
Fun times ahead, hopefully this really ushers in the end of Intel standing still. You gave AMD plenty of time to catch up, and catch up they did, so the race is back on in earnest now.
Posted on Reply
#11
watzupken
If Intel can't hit back at AMD after a year, I don't know what to say about them to be honest. At least based on rumours and leaks so far, they've all been pointing to a good improvement from a single core perspective. But the limited number of performance cores will still cost them some performance deficit in my opinion, at least until we can confirm if this is really the case with official reviews. I believe some of the advantage of Intel Alder Lake is contributed by the DDR5 that comes along with it if the benchmark/ app is bandwidth sensitive.

I feel Pat is missing out the pricing factor that will help to win back market share/ stop their bleeding. There are a few leaks on pricing, but some of them look quite sketchy. So best to wait for Intel's MSRP to determine if they will be able to win back more users. There is no bad product, but bad pricing, and the high cost of entry for Alder Lake CPUs may actually deter people other than hard core enthusiasts to adopt it early.
Posted on Reply
#12
TheUn4seen
While I wholeheartedly dislike the corporate spin-talk clearly aimed at appeasing concerned investors, one has to admit Intel is a juggernaut with very deep pockets. We'll see how they handle Alder Lake and, even more importantly, how will AMD counter it. I'm reaching a point of being in the market for a platform upgrade so it might be interesting for me personally, but I'm in no hurry at all.
Posted on Reply
#13
TheLostSwede
Ferrum MasterThe article is way too sarcastic and bites Intel too much... get ready for the troll army.

Surely he was put into a spotlight where he really doesn't understand what' really going on.
Feel free to read the CRN article, it's linked to as the source.
Yes, maybe I took the piss a bit, but it's hard not to with the kind of answers that were given.
The man is the CEO of Intel after all, he should know better.
Posted on Reply
#14
las
watzupkenIf Intel can't hit back at AMD after a year, I don't know what to say about them to be honest. At least based on rumours and leaks so far, they've all been pointing to a good improvement from a single core perspective. But the limited number of performance cores will still cost them some performance deficit in my opinion, at least until we can confirm if this is really the case with official reviews. I believe some of the advantage of Intel Alder Lake is contributed by the DDR5 that comes along with it if the benchmark/ app is bandwidth sensitive.

I feel Pat is missing out the pricing factor that will help to win back market share/ stop their bleeding. There are a few leaks on pricing, but some of them look quite sketchy. So best to wait for Intel's MSRP to determine if they will be able to win back more users. There is no bad product, but bad pricing, and the high cost of entry for Alder Lake CPUs may actually deter people other than hard core enthusiasts to adopt it early.
Intel has not really been bleeding. They have very deep pockets and their financials have been fine over the years. Part of the reason for this is Intel has actually been able to deliver chips, in comparison to AMD which rely solely on TSMC to deliver and TSMC is under huge pressure to fulfill orders from tons of companies. This is also the reason why Radeon 6000 series is being downplayed so much. Barely any marketshare, Nvidia soon hits 85% dGPU marketshare with Intel coming for the low to mid end segment in a few months, which is AMDs primary GPU focus.

However even AMDs lower end cards like x600 series have been pretty mediocre with 6600XT and the 128 bit bus which is terrible, the card is "aimed for 1080p" as a result. 6700XT was somewhat decent but priced way too high. AMD GPUs generally lost their perf/value with 6000 series and this was/is the primary factor for people choosing an AMD GPU (outside of fanboys, that is). Nvidia 3060 non-Ti was mediocre too tho.

The reality is, if 3060 Ti and 6700XT is priced the same, 9 out of 10 would choose the 3060 Ti and with 3060 Ti being CHEAPER the choice will be even easier for most people. And this is why many people with Ryzen CPUs _still_ go with a Nvidia card. The overall performance is just more solid on a Nvidia card, especially when you are playing lesser known titles or early access games, these tend to favor Nvidia bigtime (because dev's optimize for the majority and mostly uses Nvidia themselves)

AMDs most succesful GPUs in the last 5 years in terms of sales are all sub 200 dollar cards like RX580, 570, 480 and 470. AMD sells very few "high-end" cards compared to Nvidia.
Posted on Reply
#15
nguyen
Can we tech enthusiast finally have some IPC and efficiency improvement now almighty Intel :roll:.
Posted on Reply
#16
Fourstaff
Good to have bullish CEO. However, AMD has an upgrade in the pipeline in the form of TSMC's 5nm, I am not sure if Intel will be able to respond fast enough against that free win.
Posted on Reply
#17
lynx29
FourstaffGood to have bullish CEO. However, AMD has an upgrade in the pipeline in the form of TSMC's 5nm, I am not sure if Intel will be able to respond fast enough against that free win.
until the gpu situation gets fixed, which it won't until end of 2023 most likely. none of these new chips really matter anyway
Posted on Reply
#18
las
FourstaffGood to have bullish CEO. However, AMD has an upgrade in the pipeline in the form of TSMC's 5nm, I am not sure if Intel will be able to respond fast enough against that free win.
If AMD actually uses 5nm which I don't think they will be.

I think we will see a refreshed 5000 series using 3D cache and the 6nm TSMC node which is an optimized 7nm proces.

Zen on 5nm TSMC will probably face Meteor Lake, which is on Intel 4, not Intel 7 like Alder Lake. So the node difference won't be big.

5000 series Threadripper has already got delayed by AMD (again). AMD's biggest bottleneck is TSMC however they rely on TSMC 100% to deliver what they do, so they can't really do much right now.

AMD will never get priority at TSMC. They can't afford to use the best nodes.

TSMC will always prioritize Apple, which pretty much "owns" the best nodes at all times. Without Apple, TSMC would not be in the position they are today. Apple still sits hard on the 5nm TSMC node and will for the next year. AMD don't have the money to push away the big boys. Even Intel secured TSMC 3nm before AMD. I think this will be for GPUs tho.

Upcoming Intel dGPUs will be made using TSMC 6nm.
Posted on Reply
#19
Vya Domus
They're still clueless or maybe they just pretend to not understand that the industry in which they operate does not ultimately care if they have 80% of market share. If there is a better option they will switch, it might take years but it's going to happen eventually if you don't have the technological edge. Intel's lacking offerings have been buffered by their immense financial resources but those will run out eventually as well, that's why they've been able to appear unaffected by competitors that have completely outclassed them and that doesn't include just AMD but also Nvidia, ARM, Apple and who knows how many other.

Failure for a huge company like Intel is always a delayed process, where the effects may appear years after the causes took place, I unironically hope they realize that.
Posted on Reply
#20
las
Vya DomusThey're still clueless or maybe they just pretend to not understand that the industry in which they operate does not ultimately care if they have 80% of market share. If there is a better option they will eventually switch, it might take years but it's going to happen eventually if you don't have the technological edge. Intel's lacking offerings have also been buffered by their immense resources but those will run out eventually as well. Failure for a huge company like Intel is always a delayed process, where the effects may appear years after the causes took place, I unironically hope they realize that.
Yes but Intel have not really been behind in terms of sales which is the most important thing.

Ryzen 1000 and 2000 series were not really a threat to Intel. They just offered an alternative but performance was nothing great, especially not for gaming and single threaded apps. First with 3000 series but especially 5000 series, Ryzen became good and this is mostly because of TSMC 7nm. If AMD had stayed on Global Foundries, you would have seen little to no progress from Ryzen 1000/2000.

AMD were left behind for 10+ years on the CPU market, I think Intel can survive 1 year, considering Intel have way deeper pockets. Pat Gelsinger already did more for Intel in the last 1 year than Bob Swan did for 5+ years. Bob Swan is probably the reason why Intel was stuck on 14nm for so long, no wonder he got booted and Intel went back to the roots.
Posted on Reply
#21
Xex360
lasIntel has not really been bleeding. They have very deep pockets and their financials have been fine over the years. Part of the reason for this is Intel has actually been able to deliver chips, in comparison to AMD which rely solely on TSMC to deliver and TSMC is under huge pressure to fulfill orders from tons of companies. This is also the reason why Radeon 6000 series is being downplayed so much. Barely any marketshare, Nvidia soon hits 85% dGPU marketshare with Intel coming for the low to mid end segment in a few months, which is AMDs primary GPU focus.

However even AMDs lower end cards like x600 series have been pretty mediocre with 6600XT and the 128 bit bus which is terrible, the card is "aimed for 1080p" as a result. 6700XT was somewhat decent but priced way too high. AMD GPUs generally lost their perf/value with 6000 series and this was/is the primary factor for people choosing an AMD GPU (outside of fanboys, that is). Nvidia 3060 non-Ti was mediocre too tho.

The reality is, if 3060 Ti and 6700XT is priced the same, 9 out of 10 would choose the 3060 Ti and with 3060 Ti being CHEAPER the choice will be even easier for most people. And this is why many people with Ryzen CPUs _still_ go with a Nvidia card. The overall performance is just more solid on a Nvidia card, especially when you are playing lesser known titles or early access games, these tend to favor Nvidia bigtime (because dev's optimize for the majority and mostly uses Nvidia themselves)

AMDs most succesful GPUs in the last 5 years in terms of sales are all sub 200 dollar cards like RX580, 570, 480 and 470. AMD sells very few "high-end" cards compared to Nvidia.
Where are smoking, the only reason AMD 6000 series doesn't have any market share is due to availability, the cards are as fast or faster than nVidia, the 6900XT is the fastest GPU, only in 4K it's beaten by the 3090 granted both are stupid cards.
The 6700XT is faster than the 3070 let alone the 3060ti. AMD offering is more balanced, the 3080 lacks memory, the 3080ti is overpriced.
RayTracing is useless as neither architecture is powerful enough, DLSS and FSR are useless as they need per game implementation.
Where nVidia was good is in mining, then they f***** their line up with the useless LHR cards.
Posted on Reply
#22
las
Xex360Where are smoking, the only reason AMD 6000 series doesn't have any market share is due to availability, the cards are as fast or faster than nVidia, the 6900XT is the fastest GPU, only in 4K it's beaten by the 3090 granted both are stupid cards.
The 6700XT is faster than the 3070 let alone the 3060ti. AMD offering is more balanced, the 3080 lacks memory, the 3080ti is overpriced.
RayTracing is useless as neither architecture is powerful enough, DLSS and FSR are useless as they need per game implementation.
Where nVidia was good is in mining, then they f***** their line up with the useless LHR cards.
I never said 6000 series were bad, only the lower end is bad and priced too high. Availablity is bad because AMD does not focus on GPUs. All their current chips uses TSMC 7nm and they can't focus on all chips at once. They earn the least on GPUs, so they focus on CPUs and APUs. It's THAT simple.

And no, 6700XT is not faster than 3070 and 3080 Ti beats 6900XT too overall, especially at 4K. This is not even counting in DLSS performance either, but plain rasterization perf.

As you can see here; www.techpowerup.com/review/gainward-geforce-rtx-3080-ti-phantom-gs/28.html

DLSS and FSR useless? Haha, sounds more like you're clueless..
Posted on Reply
#23
TheLostSwede
lasIf AMD actually uses 5nm which I don't think they will be.

I think we will see a refreshed 5000 series using 3D cache and the 6nm TSMC node which is an optimized 7nm proces.

Zen on 5nm TSMC will probably face Meteor Lake, which is on Intel 4, not Intel 7 like Alder Lake. So the node difference won't be big.

5000 series Threadripper has already got delayed by AMD (again). AMD's biggest bottleneck is TSMC however they rely on TSMC 100% to deliver what they do, so they can't really do much right now.

AMD will never get priority at TSMC. They can't afford to use the best nodes.

TSMC will always prioritize Apple, which pretty much "owns" the best nodes at all times. Without Apple, TSMC would not be in the position they are today. Apple still sits hard on the 5nm TSMC node and will for the next year. AMD don't have the money to push away the big boys. Even Intel secured TSMC 3nm before AMD. I think this will be for GPUs tho.

Upcoming Intel dGPUs will be made using TSMC 6nm.
Actually, Apple is on an unofficial node and have been for quite some time. They're pretty much TSMC's test partner in way for the upcoming nodes and as such are always a generation ahead of everyone else.
lasYes but Intel have not really been behind in terms of sales which is the most important thing.

Ryzen 1000 and 2000 series were not really a threat to Intel. They just offered an alternative but performance was nothing great, especially not for gaming and single threaded apps. First with 3000 series but especially 5000 series, Ryzen became good and this is mostly because of TSMC 7nm. If AMD had stayed on Global Foundries, you would have seen little to no progress from Ryzen 1000/2000.

AMD were left behind for 10+ years on the CPU market, I think Intel can survive 1 year, considering Intel have way deeper pockets. Pat Gelsinger already did more for Intel in the last 1 year than Bob Swan did for 5+ years. Bob Swan is probably the reason why Intel was stuck on 14nm for so long, no wonder he got booted and Intel went back to the roots.
It's not even 10 months yet...
Posted on Reply
#24
las
TheLostSwedeActually, Apple is on an unofficial node and have been for quite some time. They're pretty much TSMC's test partner in way for the upcoming nodes and as such are always a generation ahead of everyone else.
Yes, but they also occupy last 1-2 nodes.

iPhone 13 = 5nm. (N5P)
iPhone 12 = 5nm. (N5)
iPhone 11 = 7nm. (N7P)
iPhone XS = 7nm. (N7)
iPhone 10 = 10nm.

And obviously iPads, Apple TV + M1 SoC too but iPhone is still their primary focus and probably always will be with 75-80% of the earnings.

I expect AMD will be able to use N5 in late 2022 or early 2023.

Thats probably also the reason why Threadripper is delayed, again and they will do a 6nm refresh of 5000 series with added 3D Cache instead of a true new series on 5nm. They are simply not able to yet, too expensive for AMD. This might even be 5000 XT models, just like 3000 series had XT models.

Still stupid AMD skipped 4000 series for desktop, and called it 5000 series (because mobile 4000 series = 3000 desktop).

Ryzen 5000 should have been 5nm on AM5 with DDR5. All 5's = Logic.

AMD did not focus on mobile much, hence the naming scheme difference here.
Ryzen 3000 mobile = Zen+ aka Ryzen 2000 on desktop. Very stupid decision really.
Just like their APU's are a huge mess too, with mixed architechtures etc. (even in the same series)
Not sure how they can fck something like this up. They tried to misslead mobile/laptop buyers really.
That's the only explanation or they would have matched models and archs across desktop and mobile from the start.
Posted on Reply
#25
Bomby569
lets hope not, we all know how great it was to be a consumer when "AMD was over".
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment