|
|
|
|
|
|
by caslon
936 days ago
|
|
|
Intel actually did a lot in the last decade. Skylake alone was a massive improvement over the previous generation. AVX-512, countless open source projects—not to mention Optane, which was one of the most radical innovations in hardware in years. They did some really cool stuff with Altera IP, but the market didn't really care for it as much as it probably should have. Much of the value of Mobileye happened under Intel's ownership, too. You mention their iGPUs, but their iGPUs actually got radically better in the timespan you mention; Iris, if properly cooled and not memory-choked, was actually pretty decent for a lot of purposes. It does and historically has had a pretty terrible board, and its management hasn't been the greatest, but people who complain about them doing nothing for most of a decade generally are making a reactionary take about the lack of post-Skylake microarchitectures, while ignoring that pretty much everyone's performance gains got swallowed by vulnerability mitigations for years because they care about video games more than safety. |
|
|
That's the expected case when you have tons of cash and market dominance.
> are making a reactionary take about the lack of post-Skylake microarchitectures
Or about the general inability of large monopolies to effectively compete and continue to deliver according to market expectations.
> or years because they care about video games more than safety.
And yet, they still had a "server chips" division for much of that time.