Is there context to this claim? If so, can you share it?

The performance of Intel during the five years that he ran it is plenty of context, no? 2013 is a pretty clear inflection point for Intel and that was the year that he became CEO.

I arrived at Google search in 2013 and soon they were complaining about how much Intel was "Slacking" and how badly they needed an alternate supplier for data center chips.

I followed Chromebook and laptop iGPU 3D performance very carefully from 2013-2019. Did you know Intel made ZERO iGPU performance improvements in this time period? The 2013 IRIS Pro 5200 and Haswell (4000 series) were a major highpoint for FIVE years. The 5000 Through 8000 Intel core cpus were highly stagnant and forgettable! Mostly they were slacking off with new designs like the Ynnn "thermal throttlemaker" Such chips ran fast for 3 secs then quit - completely! From 2013-2019 their marketing pinheads sure had a field day making up new names for the same old shit iGPUs year after year after year!

What's interesting is if you put all of that next to the stock price. The disconnect is so weird.

Short term gains traded for long term losses is a pretty standard CEO playbook move. Make yours then bail with a golden parachute as the plane crashes.

I think he was kicked out.

With no severance?

That's a rhetorical question?

I recall that he was entitled to double digit millions compensation if he resigned (which makes no sense to me so maybe I'm remembering this wrong). I'm sure there is an article somewhere on the web with all of the details and whether he actually got any of it or not but I would assume that he did. If only to make it easier for Intel to find its next CEO.

Gelsinger's only been there 2 years. You don't expect a major turn-around for roughly 5 (at the least) since it takes a pretty long time to go from research node to production.

> from 2013-2019. Did you know Intel made ZERO iGPU performance improvements in this time period?

This is absolutely not true at all. Haswell was a major perf-per-watt improvement compared to previous Ivy Bridge. Broadwell and then Skylake both had significant improvements over their successors, not only in performance but also in power consumption and by adding necessary GPU tech to them. Then both Ice Lake and Tiger Lake had near 2x improvements in some industry standard benchmarks (e.g., Manhattan).

The difference between Intel's 2019 and 2013 integrated GPUs is much bigger than the difference between their 2019 and 2013 processors.

Not sure what he's referring to, but during his tenure he decided to "shake things up" and laid people off almost-Elon-Musk-style. He basically had a target in terms of Dollars, and he asked HR to come up with metrics to hit the target. They laid off everyone who had had a bad review the prior year. But that wasn't enough to hit the target, so they laid off everyone who had an average performance review, but low bonuses. But that didn't hit the target, so they offered voluntary severance packages to those who had not had a promotion more than N years. That, along with encouraging early retirement let them hit the target.

The layoffs happened all at once - not in phases. You had cases where a manager was suddenly told to inform his report that he is being laid off, only to then be told that the manager himself is being laid off.

As you can imagine, any time someone does a blunt top down approach like this, you lose a lot of critical people with no one in the team knowledgeable to take over.

No one saw it coming. Managers were not told in advance. In some cases, you had the manager informing his employee

You also lose a lot of fucks from people who know things but it isn't their job title either.

After big cuts everyone is covering their asses.

As toxic as Brian Krazinich was, you can’t really blame one person for the problem at Intel. Yes, he and Murthy initiated the layoffs. But then the orders were executed by mid/senior management. They are the ones who have used reviews/promos/bonuses as political weapons for as long as I ever worked there (over a decade). It was natural that the 2016 layoffs at Intel eviscerated the technical contributors while keeping the politicians, ass-kissers and powerpointers in place.

As far as I can tell Pat Gelsinger has not changed anything. The same hacks who ruined Intel are all still there, moving up the managerial ranks. Makes sense because Pat came from that culture… he practically defined it.