“In March 2025, Intel appointed Lip-Bu Tan as its new CEO,” Cotton wrote in the letter. “Mr. Tan reportedly controls dozens of Chinese companies and has a stake in hundreds of Chinese advanced-manufacturing and chip firms. At least eight of these companies reportedly have ties to the Chinese People’s Liberation Army.”
I don’t know about his investments, but one fact is clear: he was CEO of Cadence Design Systems, which has just pleaded guilty to federal charges for exporting technology to China. That alone should make him ineligible to lead a company with major government contracts.
If he resigns (and he will), the board should go with him.
Huh? What'd we supposed to learn? If we're doing billion foot maxims i prefer iacocca: you need people, product, profit. Without people you can't get the other two.
I view Intel as a company that has a huge number of missed opportunities:
1. They have excellent engineering resources - why didn't they just take their ARC cards and add more RAM to them? People are dropping $2K+ on the 5090 with 32GB and would surely pay $1200+ for an ARC with 32GB or even much more for one with 64GB or higher. Absolute performance wouldn't be the benchmark; being able to load larger models would make for excellent price/performance, for many lower-end uses.
2. We've been stuck at typical network speeds of 1GBit Ethernet for literally 20 years at this point. A first generation Opteron server like the Sun V20z (made by Newisys or Celestica, really) had dual-Gigabit interfaces; Intel should be pushing for 10Gb or higher as the bare minimum - and they make the 10Gb chips! More bandwidth capacity, even on the low end, will grow the computing market. And Intel has a big chunk of the market.
3. Intel did the same with their only offering dual-memory channel and thus much lower bandwidth of CPU <-> RAM ; unless you are buying an expensive server, you only get 2 channels to RAM; Apple increased their RAM bandwidth significantly and as it turns out, customers liked that, and bought more Apple CPUs.
Intel has to become "hungry" once more and stop their sedate, sclerotic ways. Maybe caring about their customers would help, too.
I have the feeling nobody knows what to do in terms of selling Ethernet for home use right now.
The moonshot efforts are around better Wi-Fi, which is, of course, at best a "good enough" solution that keeps people from running proper wires. But even as someone eager for hard-line networks, I wouldn't have good advice for a typical consumer.
If you run copper in your walls, you're really only good up to 10Gb and perhaps not even that. But if you want an optical-centric solution, that's an entirely new ecosystem that's a lot more complex. It's not just "buy a box of cable at the Home Depot and a crimp tool" anymore-- your devices might need 10GbE cards and SFP modules, you'll probably need some switches that still expose copper ports.
I wonder if there's a market for optical versions of the early "LAN in a box" kits that came with a couple of cheap ISA bus cards and a spool of cable-- just selling to people something that's all-inclusive and eliminates high-frustration mismatched parts.
> They have excellent engineering resources - why didn't they just take their ARC cards and add more RAM to them? People are dropping $2K+ on the 5090 with 32GB and would surely pay $1200+ for an ARC with 32GB or even much more for one with 64GB or higher. Absolute performance wouldn't be the benchmark; being able to load larger models would make for excellent price/performance, for many lower-end uses.
This one also drives me bonkers, but my guess is that it doesn't capture that margin they want.
Intel seems to be kinda bad at starting from an 'underdog' standpoint in a market.
> Intel did the same with their only offering dual-memory channel and thus much lower bandwidth of CPU <-> RAM ; unless you are buying an expensive server, you only get 2 channels to RAM; Apple increased their RAM bandwidth significantly and as it turns out, customers liked that, and bought more Apple CPUs.
Apple has much tighter integration; i.e. they don't have sockets for the CPU or memory. What you buy is what you get unless you're brave enough to solder.
AMD provides a sort of in-between with Threadripper and it's pro variant, however it seems that they have a bit of a limitation on bandwidth based on CCDs for the low core count Pro models [0].
> Intel has to become "hungry" once more and stop their sedate, sclerotic ways. Maybe caring about their customers would help, too.
TBH I think whatever body (JEDEC I'd guess) needs to either make DDR6 128bit, or at the very least (and if even possible) work with memory controller folks to figure out a way to have a 'one stick, two channels' standard that simplifies board routing and keeps OEM usage simple.
It's really curious to me that over the last decade I've only dealt with one machine that only supported single channel, and the ones that 'were' single channel absolutely could have been dual channel but the OE could save a few bucks by going single channel due to the cost of two DIMMS vs one.
> TBH I think whatever body (JEDEC I'd guess) needs to either make DDR6 128bit
That would require twice the number of pins and traces on each DIMM with corresponding extra pins on the CPU package as well and associated interconnects which would add heat as well. You end up with similar problems when you increase the number of channels per DIMM. CPU packages are strained as it is; I don't think the tradeoffs are worth it to increase system memory bandwidth on consumer systems.
The key question is this: how did the board of directors hire him knowing he had been subpoenaed to testify regarding Cadence Design Systems, and that the company has now agreed to plead guilty.
It's honestly wild that a sitting US president is calling out specific company CEOs. The fact that it was done in a tweet-esque post is even more concerning. I'd expect that something like this would have been accompanied by a proper investigation and writeup stating the administration's perspective on why, but instead it's just "he's highly CONFLICTED".
I don't debate his history at Cadence Design is concerning from a national security point of view, but the approach the administration took really shows how we're in a different era of politics.
The king, I mean unitary executive, has opinions and power to do all things without regard to law, without critical thinking or consideration if they are beneficial or harmful to humanity, and without boundaries.
This is why Tim Apple presented Dear Leader with a 24K gold award and so was rewarded by a tariff exclusion.
This administration (and the previous one) have been paying billions of dollars to chip companies to make fabs in the United States.
Trump in particular is essentially trying to make sure Intel lives despite market forces. It is effectively a quasi-nationalized entity akin to major military-industrial complex entities.
Given that, we are not talking about a random private entity. A US President making such statement about Intel is entirely justified.
"Strategic" companies like Boeing and Intel get socialism for corporations and rich people, but then decry "socialism" and "communism" for everything and everyone who isn't rich.
Eh. Without getting anywhere near the merits of this particular fracas, the federal government has gotten deeply involved in critiquing the management of companies like Lockheed and Boeing, both for national security reasons and because of the importance of those companies to the economy. Easy to see Intel fitting into that mold in 2025.
It's not done by competent presidents. Trump is incompetent. Feds mind their own business except for doj, fbi, sec, fina who have evidence of wrong doing.
Meh, Trump wants someone as loyal and willing to spy on us as he thinks this guy was for China. I love how the right detests regulation but is okay with arbitrarily monkeying directly in the management of a company like this with no rules around it. No company is safe under this guy.
Intel was (and arguably still is) too large relative to its current technical capabilities. Yet even in this current “bad chips” era, Intel is only, at worst, about 10% behind in gaming performance (largely due to cache disparity) and is on par or better in most other workloads. From the K10 era until Zen 3, AMD processors were objectively worse (sometimes comically so) and AMD still managed to survive.
Intel’s mobile CPUs remain extremely competitive. Their integrated GPUs are the fastest in the x86 space. And their SoC+platform features: video decode/encode, NPUs, power management, wifi, and so on are the best in class for x86 CPUs; they are usually a solid second place or better regardless of architecture.
Subjectively, the most interesting “mainstream” laptops on the market are still, and historically have been, Intel-based. I understand that in an era where the M4 Max, Snapdragon 8 Elite, and Strix Halo each serve as best-in-class in different segments, “mainstream appeal” no longer equates to market dominance. And that is bad news for an Intel that historically just make a few CPUs (the rest being market segmented down versions of those chips), but still, to suggest they will disappear overnight seems... odd.
> Yet even in this current “bad chips” era, Intel is only, at worst, about 10% behind in gaming performance (largely due to cache disparity)
Gaming is irrelevant.
For AMD, gaming (both console and PC combined) is less revenue than embedded-- things like those routers you can get off of aliexpress and Synology NASes.
Enterprise, cloud, and AI are the only things that matter, and even enterprise is falling off.
Back in 2020 with the second wave of AMD EPYC Rome, after I had gotten a couple of R7525s in hand and put them through their paces I started saying that you are professionally negligent if you, as a technology professional, recommend an Intel solution unless you have some very specific use cases (AVX512/Optane-optimized options). In 2022 everyone started agreeing with me.
Now you are professionally negligent if you recommend Intel at all.
Enterprise cares about speed, cloud cares about clients per socket, and AI cares about bandwidth. Intel is not competitive in any of those.
Even in the consumer space, for running bullshit workloads like Copilot on a laptop the difference is negligible. Intel is ahead, by about 10%-- at ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY WATTS (if the OEM even allows it) while you trade that 10% for 75W on AMD.
No human being on earth cares that the scan to identify if there's a cute dog in the photo they just saved to disk takes .255 or .277 seconds. They do care about battery life.
And gaming isn't just irrelevant due to revenue, once you look at margins you start realizing that AMD could never again spend a single cent on marketing X3D chips to gamers and instead redirect that money to target other sectors and they would probably be better off for it.
Look at Nvidia. Gaming went from their cash crop to burdensome baggage in just a couple of years. Gaming went to less than 9% of revenue from like, 80%. They don't care about people buying an RTX card and having to deal with OEMs and distributors and retailers and marketing and RMAs and driver patches at whatever piss-poor margin it is due to everyone taking their cut when enterprise clients are putting in POs directly to them for tens of thousands of Data Center cards at a time at high margins-- and they didn't have to spend barely anything on marketing.
The very last thing, after figuring out absolutely everything else, that Intel should care about is what their chips are benchmarking at in the latest video game.
Price-performance scatter plots [2] say although Intel isn't battling AMD for the >$1000 threadripper territory, they have some competitive products in the sub-$500 price band.
And while Intel missed out on the smartphone market, I've heard people comparing their N100 CPUs favourable to the latest Raspberry Pi hardware.
Sure, Intel has had major troubles with their next process node. And one of the best performing laptops is ARM-based. But Intel are nowhere near defeated.
> Intel was (and arguably still is) too large relative to its current technical capabilities. Yet even in this current “bad chips” era, Intel is only, at worst, about 10% behind in gaming performance (largely due to cache disparity) and is on par or better in most other workloads. From the K10 era until Zen 3, AMD processors were objectively worse (sometimes comically so) and AMD still managed to survive.
The current “bad chips that are only 10% behind” are fabbed by TSMC, not Intel.
In the past AMD needed to survive for antitrust reasons. Now x86 is losing in relevance now as alternatives are established. Nobody needs to keep intel alive.
Intel has only about half of the server market at this point, and that's with their products priced so low they're nearly selling them at cost.
The margins on their desktop products are also way down, their current desktop product isn't popular due to performance regressions in a number of areas relative to the previous generation (and not being competitive with AMD in general), and their previous generation products continue to suffer reliability problems.
And all this, while they're lighting billions of dollars on fire investing in building a foundry that has yet to attract a single significant customer.
Thank god Apple has been putting their eggs in their home-woven ARM basket. Now I just wish that they had a CEO who was above golden-trophy ass-kissing.
Does it being "designed in California" but "made in Taiwan" really make a difference? If Taiwan was to be invaded and TSMC follows through with their threat of destroying all of the fabs, Apple's home-woven basket wouldn't be worth much at all
I hate everything that Cook is doing to kiss up to Trump and he did something similar during the first administration by letting Trump brag about final assembly of low selling Mac Pros was happening in the US.
But this is the country that the US wants (said as a born and bred US citizen) these are the results of it. Every CEO is kissing Trumps ass because that’s the only way you get ahead in the US now.
The media, the other two branches, colleges, tech companies etc have all bent a knee and bribed the President in one way or the other.
It doesn't need to get officially nationalized. Trump is already using tariffs to essentially direct large businesses. It's already been reported that Trump is requiring TSMC to take a 49% stake in Intel for tariff relief.
Why would TSMC do this? Companies want the best chips and they can only get them from TSMC. If there isn't an alternative and building the necessary infrastructure in the US takes too long the Tarif is useless.
Readit News
FTA:
“In March 2025, Intel appointed Lip-Bu Tan as its new CEO,” Cotton wrote in the letter. “Mr. Tan reportedly controls dozens of Chinese companies and has a stake in hundreds of Chinese advanced-manufacturing and chip firms. At least eight of these companies reportedly have ties to the Chinese People’s Liberation Army.”
"Has a stake in hundreds" is true of anyone who owns a global index fund.
I don’t know about his investments, but one fact is clear: he was CEO of Cadence Design Systems, which has just pleaded guilty to federal charges for exporting technology to China. That alone should make him ineligible to lead a company with major government contracts.
If he resigns (and he will), the board should go with him.
In Soviet Russia you follow their rules and do everything/anything to win.
In US you follow the rules there and do everything/anything to win.
In China/India/country you follow the rules there and do everything/anything to win.
Through law, politics, advertising.
The ultimate goal is to win globally right?
A true capitalist leader can operate with complete lack of attachment for the sake of the corporation.
Dead Comment
1. They have excellent engineering resources - why didn't they just take their ARC cards and add more RAM to them? People are dropping $2K+ on the 5090 with 32GB and would surely pay $1200+ for an ARC with 32GB or even much more for one with 64GB or higher. Absolute performance wouldn't be the benchmark; being able to load larger models would make for excellent price/performance, for many lower-end uses.
2. We've been stuck at typical network speeds of 1GBit Ethernet for literally 20 years at this point. A first generation Opteron server like the Sun V20z (made by Newisys or Celestica, really) had dual-Gigabit interfaces; Intel should be pushing for 10Gb or higher as the bare minimum - and they make the 10Gb chips! More bandwidth capacity, even on the low end, will grow the computing market. And Intel has a big chunk of the market.
3. Intel did the same with their only offering dual-memory channel and thus much lower bandwidth of CPU <-> RAM ; unless you are buying an expensive server, you only get 2 channels to RAM; Apple increased their RAM bandwidth significantly and as it turns out, customers liked that, and bought more Apple CPUs.
Intel has to become "hungry" once more and stop their sedate, sclerotic ways. Maybe caring about their customers would help, too.
The moonshot efforts are around better Wi-Fi, which is, of course, at best a "good enough" solution that keeps people from running proper wires. But even as someone eager for hard-line networks, I wouldn't have good advice for a typical consumer.
If you run copper in your walls, you're really only good up to 10Gb and perhaps not even that. But if you want an optical-centric solution, that's an entirely new ecosystem that's a lot more complex. It's not just "buy a box of cable at the Home Depot and a crimp tool" anymore-- your devices might need 10GbE cards and SFP modules, you'll probably need some switches that still expose copper ports.
I wonder if there's a market for optical versions of the early "LAN in a box" kits that came with a couple of cheap ISA bus cards and a spool of cable-- just selling to people something that's all-inclusive and eliminates high-frustration mismatched parts.
This one also drives me bonkers, but my guess is that it doesn't capture that margin they want.
Intel seems to be kinda bad at starting from an 'underdog' standpoint in a market.
> Intel did the same with their only offering dual-memory channel and thus much lower bandwidth of CPU <-> RAM ; unless you are buying an expensive server, you only get 2 channels to RAM; Apple increased their RAM bandwidth significantly and as it turns out, customers liked that, and bought more Apple CPUs.
Apple has much tighter integration; i.e. they don't have sockets for the CPU or memory. What you buy is what you get unless you're brave enough to solder.
AMD provides a sort of in-between with Threadripper and it's pro variant, however it seems that they have a bit of a limitation on bandwidth based on CCDs for the low core count Pro models [0].
> Intel has to become "hungry" once more and stop their sedate, sclerotic ways. Maybe caring about their customers would help, too.
TBH I think whatever body (JEDEC I'd guess) needs to either make DDR6 128bit, or at the very least (and if even possible) work with memory controller folks to figure out a way to have a 'one stick, two channels' standard that simplifies board routing and keeps OEM usage simple.
It's really curious to me that over the last decade I've only dealt with one machine that only supported single channel, and the ones that 'were' single channel absolutely could have been dual channel but the OE could save a few bucks by going single channel due to the cost of two DIMMS vs one.
[0] - https://old.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1mcrx23/psa_the...
That would require twice the number of pins and traces on each DIMM with corresponding extra pins on the CPU package as well and associated interconnects which would add heat as well. You end up with similar problems when you increase the number of channels per DIMM. CPU packages are strained as it is; I don't think the tradeoffs are worth it to increase system memory bandwidth on consumer systems.
24GB and 48GB cards are supposed to be coming.
I don't debate his history at Cadence Design is concerning from a national security point of view, but the approach the administration took really shows how we're in a different era of politics.
This is why Tim Apple presented Dear Leader with a 24K gold award and so was rewarded by a tariff exclusion.
https://apnews.com/article/business-china-asia-beijing-race-...
Deleted Comment
Trump in particular is essentially trying to make sure Intel lives despite market forces. It is effectively a quasi-nationalized entity akin to major military-industrial complex entities.
Given that, we are not talking about a random private entity. A US President making such statement about Intel is entirely justified.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2007/10/qwest-ceo-nsa-punished...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6033113
Not a sitting president and the NSA doesn't need a warrant for foreign targets.
Please let’s not sanewash what is happening right now.
If it doesn't affect them directly, or they can't perceive how it will affect them directly, they simply do not care.
This truly never happened before. Oh wait:
https://www.politico.com/story/2009/03/gm-ceo-resigns-at-oba...
Intel was (and arguably still is) too large relative to its current technical capabilities. Yet even in this current “bad chips” era, Intel is only, at worst, about 10% behind in gaming performance (largely due to cache disparity) and is on par or better in most other workloads. From the K10 era until Zen 3, AMD processors were objectively worse (sometimes comically so) and AMD still managed to survive.
Intel’s mobile CPUs remain extremely competitive. Their integrated GPUs are the fastest in the x86 space. And their SoC+platform features: video decode/encode, NPUs, power management, wifi, and so on are the best in class for x86 CPUs; they are usually a solid second place or better regardless of architecture.
Subjectively, the most interesting “mainstream” laptops on the market are still, and historically have been, Intel-based. I understand that in an era where the M4 Max, Snapdragon 8 Elite, and Strix Halo each serve as best-in-class in different segments, “mainstream appeal” no longer equates to market dominance. And that is bad news for an Intel that historically just make a few CPUs (the rest being market segmented down versions of those chips), but still, to suggest they will disappear overnight seems... odd.
Gaming is irrelevant.
For AMD, gaming (both console and PC combined) is less revenue than embedded-- things like those routers you can get off of aliexpress and Synology NASes.
Enterprise, cloud, and AI are the only things that matter, and even enterprise is falling off.
Back in 2020 with the second wave of AMD EPYC Rome, after I had gotten a couple of R7525s in hand and put them through their paces I started saying that you are professionally negligent if you, as a technology professional, recommend an Intel solution unless you have some very specific use cases (AVX512/Optane-optimized options). In 2022 everyone started agreeing with me.
Now you are professionally negligent if you recommend Intel at all.
Enterprise cares about speed, cloud cares about clients per socket, and AI cares about bandwidth. Intel is not competitive in any of those.
Even in the consumer space, for running bullshit workloads like Copilot on a laptop the difference is negligible. Intel is ahead, by about 10%-- at ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY WATTS (if the OEM even allows it) while you trade that 10% for 75W on AMD.
No human being on earth cares that the scan to identify if there's a cute dog in the photo they just saved to disk takes .255 or .277 seconds. They do care about battery life.
And gaming isn't just irrelevant due to revenue, once you look at margins you start realizing that AMD could never again spend a single cent on marketing X3D chips to gamers and instead redirect that money to target other sectors and they would probably be better off for it.
Look at Nvidia. Gaming went from their cash crop to burdensome baggage in just a couple of years. Gaming went to less than 9% of revenue from like, 80%. They don't care about people buying an RTX card and having to deal with OEMs and distributors and retailers and marketing and RMAs and driver patches at whatever piss-poor margin it is due to everyone taking their cut when enterprise clients are putting in POs directly to them for tens of thousands of Data Center cards at a time at high margins-- and they didn't have to spend barely anything on marketing.
The very last thing, after figuring out absolutely everything else, that Intel should care about is what their chips are benchmarking at in the latest video game.
Steam [1] tells me gamers use Intel by 59:41
Price-performance scatter plots [2] say although Intel isn't battling AMD for the >$1000 threadripper territory, they have some competitive products in the sub-$500 price band.
And while Intel missed out on the smartphone market, I've heard people comparing their N100 CPUs favourable to the latest Raspberry Pi hardware.
Sure, Intel has had major troubles with their next process node. And one of the best performing laptops is ARM-based. But Intel are nowhere near defeated.
[1] https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/ [2] https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_value_available.html#xy_sca...
The current “bad chips that are only 10% behind” are fabbed by TSMC, not Intel.
The margins on their desktop products are also way down, their current desktop product isn't popular due to performance regressions in a number of areas relative to the previous generation (and not being competitive with AMD in general), and their previous generation products continue to suffer reliability problems.
And all this, while they're lighting billions of dollars on fire investing in building a foundry that has yet to attract a single significant customer.
Intel's not in a good spot right now.
But this is the country that the US wants (said as a born and bred US citizen) these are the results of it. Every CEO is kissing Trumps ass because that’s the only way you get ahead in the US now.
The media, the other two branches, colleges, tech companies etc have all bent a knee and bribed the President in one way or the other.
A sort of corporate communications-whitewashed version of the My Cousin Vinny "Everything that guy just said is bullshit. Thank you."