Create? Perhaps lack of IP/talent. The exynos chips have been lagging a bit behind last I checked. However, they are adding capacity to their fabs for AI chips, so it’s possible they may be planning one in the future.

https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20231121VL206/samsung-electr...

GPU architecture is just a simple core repeated a gazillion times plus some memory bus.

If GPUs are so easy, then why has Intel taken like three swings at making a GPU in the last ten years and haven't come close to NVDA perf even once?

they haven't hired that guy you're replying to!

"just" is doing an astounding amount of heavy lifting here. Modern GPUs are extraordinarily complex systems.

This is not a good comparison. Nvidia doesn't have a fab, but they are the lead player in the AI chip space. Intel had both and look where it got them. TSMC has a good model, and you can basically take any of your designs for the same node and manufacture it in any of their plants. Same strategy can be applied to Samsung, and they already help a lot on the memory segment. The new HBM3E memory chips for H200s might be even coming from Samsung.

NVIDIA Ampere consumer line was manufactured in Samsung fabs:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_30_series

That's why it was a power hungry hog.

Intel was infected with marketing people who diseased the entire C-Suite and drained the company for 8 years without doing anything other than make up new marketing names for the 5000-11000 series of chips and their stagnant iGPUs. That level of thievery would kill any leading company. ..

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.

you forgot to mention they did a great job building a hyper optimized 14nm process, spent at least 5 years on it...

> Intel actually did a lot in the last decade.

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.

They are with tenstorrent. https://www.reuters.com/technology/samsung-manufacture-chips...

CEO: Jim Keller.

Don't they already create the majority of the world's AI chips? Their GPUs?

They fabbed a lot of AI chips. Nvidia's Ampere chips up to 3090 were made by Samsung in 8 nm.

Interestingly the chips bigger than those found in the 3090 (so GA100s for A100s) were made by TSMC on a 7 nm node.

Maybe Samsung's yield was not high enough to produce those large chips (AD100 is 826 mmsq and would probably be even bigger on Samsung's node).