Intel's mobile chief resigns

3/21/2011 5:23 PM EDT

Two guesses: 1) He got fired for the Nokia partnership going south or 2) He is about to be named AMD's new CEO...or 3) He saw Intel was not going to make it into handsets anytime soon (as others tell me) and got out before the collapse of his group. Thoughts?

3/21/2011 7:03 PM EDT

The challenges of the successor will be tremendous. He/ She needs not only to understand the mobile market but also to effectively leverage the engineering power. Who would be the right person to succeed Anand?

3/21/2011 7:41 PM EDT

I contend Intel, AMD and Microsoft are in similar ruts. All have too much legacy to covet. Google seems to be where it's at at the moment. What's needed is more revolutionary thinking in the extending the ubiquity of all that's mobile, in the broadest sense.

Anand should step back and try to understand the dynamics of the evolution of where this technology is going and target where things should be three to five years from now. Not easy but it's too easy to be me-too these days and fail.

3/21/2011 9:57 PM EDT

"He started at Intel in 1995"
Bio says "He has been with Intel since 1988."

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/bios/achand.htm

3/21/2011 10:14 PM EDT

Too bad. At least Intel is losing at something.

3/21/2011 10:16 PM EDT

Let Intel go and acquire MediaTek

3/21/2011 11:25 PM EDT

I bet something got really wrong for this to happens else Anand is not a somebody to let off behind the doors. I think his departure is sure to hit them badly.

He is one of the foremost pioneers of low power cmos and will be much sought after in the chip industry. I guess he is already taken up or might even be going for a startup.

3/22/2011 2:05 AM EDT

Thanks eewiz. sorry. I missed that. Do you have anything else to add?

3/22/2011 10:44 AM EDT

Intel acquired baseband processor capability with Infineon's Wireless group, now IMC.
This is one of the wisest acquisition that Intel has ever made and it is critical for its success in mobile (Atom-based)application processors.
Hopefully Intel is fully aware just how important is that acquisition for its success in mobile space and will continue to support/invest for its success in LTE connectivity.
A departure of Anand might be a signal that Intel is becoming aware of its possible execution problems - for example in pricing of Atom ($75 for Intel Atom Z670 processor) versus Tegra (priced at about $15)

3/22/2011 10:46 AM EDT

Anand didn't leave in my opinion - he was asked to go

3/22/2011 11:27 AM EDT

Some times it is better to change the top line professionals so that there comes a new younger hi tech personalities steer the show in a better way. Similarly vice versa. End result every one gains!

3/22/2011 11:29 AM EDT

PS: For two definitive articles on mobile processors by the Petrov Group see last week DigiTimes

3/22/2011 12:16 PM EDT

Those of us with longer memories may recall that Intel at one point owned the StrongARM architecture, which was at that point the best of breed out of the ARM variants. They essentially gave it away because they were sure that they could do better. It looks like it might be fair to second-guess that decision.

Larry M.

3/22/2011 12:35 PM EDT

So has Intel's Atom been a bomb or not?

3/22/2011 1:18 PM EDT

It seems to me that Intel's Atom and iX product lines are not sufficiently differentiated. People here may remember that Microsoft gave Internet Explorer away so they could destroy Netscape. Microsoft charged 0$ for IE and there was no way Netscape could generate revenue. Intel appears to be taking the opposite approach. They offer a product that is not competitive and charge 5 times more for it. I haven't heard anything that persuades me that Intel will be successful unless Microsoft uses its monopoly power on the desktop and somehow takes over the mobile market. If that happens then its x86 everywhere and Intel's advantage would allow it to dominate.

3/22/2011 1:27 PM EDT

In my experience, leaving "to pursue other interests," pretty much always equals "was asked to leave."

From the outside looking in, it seems that Intel has done a lot of good with the Atom in terms of creating a viable competitor to the new generation of higher-end ARM processors. But there could be a lot of issues that can't be seen from the outside.

The cost structure may be too far off to allow a good business model. The whole concept may look sound and the overall business model may work, but in implementation, the profit model may look anemic compared to that of the big processors. Perhaps the profit model works, but only when built on Intel's frontline fab lines, but the high-end processors have that capacity all sewn up.

It may also simply be a marketing issue. Right now, ARM is a steamroller in the market. It's heard to break in under such conditions, even if you are Intel. Perhaps they're approaching the marketing as they do with big chips but that strategy doesn't work in the mobile arena.

3/22/2011 1:36 PM EDT

The infamous Pogo title "We Have Met the Enemy and He is Us" seems appropriate.

Major internal reorganization is underway...,

3/22/2011 1:48 PM EDT

Intel will need to get creative to break the ARM stranglehold in smart phones. You would think if Atom could match the low power performance of ARM it would have happened already.

3/22/2011 3:59 PM EDT

This is a tough business for intel to crack. Do not blame anyone. If confident, why don't Dadi put his neck on the line to show if he can do anything.

It is easy to do server, laptop, not cell phone, not digital home... train left long ago...

3/22/2011 4:19 PM EDT

Yes. wait till ARM based servers kick in. Times are marked....Why 10 W server is introduced?.

Soon Performance/Watts limits will be seen and compared on the data centers. the benefits of RISC will be aparaent to the world.

3/22/2011 6:08 PM EDT

Remember Intel mentioned that internet is important and it is all about software and ECO systems. No other device cannot browse in a secure manner. cannot download web pages, etc...

More devices are browsed with non-intel architecture....

Agree their fabs are Awesome (thanks to Bohr and company).

With closing remarks. Goos luck Intel and see if you can turn around...
by 2012.

3/23/2011 6:10 AM EDT

Intel is a leader in high end controllers and processors. I guess its better to be leader somewhere rather than trying something thats flashy. Phone business although very lucrative but is very very competitive. I guess they have burnt their hands.

3/23/2011 8:49 AM EDT

There is some not so minor chance this might be connected to the higher power dissipation in the earlier / present Chipset/ controller companion ot the Atom CPU, that rendered power dissipation of the early products uncompetitive despite advances in the Atom. This is being fixed in the latest Atom products, but too late.

If I remember correctly the initial Atom chipset controller IC was a retread from a non mobile design, and might have in Atom use only had minor tweaks to get the Atom properly outfitted. Intel was slow to remedy this, it would be ironic if this remained on a lagging process ( the Atom's controller IC ) due to China ( ie the lagging Intel China Fab @? 65nm ).

By now if an Atom derivative were entirely competitive in power consumption ( including Chipset controller IC ) with ARM solutions, the potential momentum for x86 in smartphone mobile is a faint glimmer fading on the horizon dominated by ARM - the ARM ecosystem is too diverse, and far lower margin than a typical successful Intel solution.

If Intel were to have a chance to recoup losses in market share not gained in Mobile, they have to produce a super ARM like NOW (without regrets)- licensing from ARM yet again and migrating to 35nm or smaller within 6 months, with a COMPLETE solution on the CPU and controller, and then the RF baseband integrated to scoop the competition.

3/23/2011 8:50 AM EDT

There is some not so minor chance this might be connected to the higher power dissipation in the earlier / present Chipset/ controller companion ot the Atom CPU, that rendered power dissipation of the early products uncompetitive despite advances in the Atom. This is being fixed in the latest Atom products, but too late.

If I remember correctly the initial Atom chipset controller IC was a retread from a non mobile design, and might have in Atom use only had minor tweaks to get the Atom properly outfitted. Intel was slow to remedy this, it would be ironic if this remained on a lagging process ( the Atom's controller IC ) due to China ( ie the lagging Intel China Fab @? 65nm ).

By now if an Atom derivative were entirely competitive in power consumption ( including Chipset controller IC ) with ARM solutions, the potential momentum for x86 in smartphone mobile is a faint glimmer fading on the horizon dominated by ARM - the ARM ecosystem is too diverse, and far lower margin than a typical successful Intel solution.

If Intel were to have a chance to recoup losses in market share not gained in Mobile, they have to produce a super ARM like NOW (without regrets)- licensing from ARM yet again and migrating to 35nm or smaller within 6 months, with a COMPLETE solution on the CPU and controller, and then the RF baseband integrated to scoop the competition.

3/23/2011 8:52 AM EDT

The firm has to drop x86 agenda in Mobile for now possibly for ever, and play to win, not play to force x86 into an ARM world as yet.

With unbeatable Intel process technology always as yet leading in process, they could make a killer ARM platform if they comprehended that reality forces their hand to do so expediently ( ie use 35nm and smaller in their best fabs to be the best ARM out there, and once gaining customers only then reassess strategy )

Since ARM product deployment / implmentation would be the quickest design to fab Intel might ever see ( keep the design mods simple ) the facts are this is a no brainer, but hard to swallow culturally for the best and biggest CPU firm in the world.

Yet they have to do the obvious - priority fastrack a complete leading ARM solution, in both design and support.

Imagine a power sipping ARM at 32nm and smaller, say 5? ghz dynamically clocked and then handset manufacturers might be flocking to the product.

Intel might have a chance to mop up in the product space instead of moping about oportunity lost.

Intel process tech is unbeatable. And design is leading when market focused, instead of x86 obsessed.

Bite the bullet and do it Intel.

3/23/2011 5:50 PM EDT

any idea where he is going? just curious

3/23/2011 8:43 PM EDT

I am not sure he is going anywhere, but away from Intel. It does look like he was excused, I wonder how much the current market place trends for ARM and mobile devices hurt him?

3/24/2011 3:29 PM EDT

Greetings,
I completely disagree with Bloomberg statement that Chandrasekher resignation is an indication of amid Intel's faltering attempts to get into the cell-phone market; if this was really the primary reason, I am sure Bloomberg would have provided more detail factual information. I do agree that there may be some type of management disagreement. I found this interesting that Bloomberg made such a strong statement concerning this.

3/24/2011 6:33 PM EDT

@motti2 - Dead on right - Intel failed at ATOM power management - esp. in chip set. They may be now looking to fix, but overloaded with engineers who are trained the INTEL way...and stuck with Microsoft & Intel centric software tools and engineers...
no cracking that Babushka for another decade...

3/25/2011 2:49 AM EDT

Did the ARM-Microsoft deal have anything to do with this?

3/26/2011 12:26 AM EDT

The ARM MS deal was joined at the hip bone to no viable Intel platform in high end mobile till too late. And the lack of viability in power consumption metric made any prior Intel smartphone platform stillborne.

The initial ATOM CPU/chipset targetted netbooks that did not have competition from power sipping ARM solutions, so in netbooks the power hungry ATOM controller chip ( relative to ARM solns) it squeaked by.

But in the high end smartphone arena, Intel in the early days of Android was largely MIA, and only the latest ATOM controller chip has mitigated the power issue, but too late, as much of the smartphone ecosystem is liking ARM and avoiding Intel and its typical high margins.

The diversity of the ARM ecosystem negates the x86 market domination Intel has enjoyed for many years, and many customers of ARM implicitly like the freedom with ARM solutions quickly ramping up in computational power whilst retaining superb power efficiency.

Yet if Intel brooked no regrets and did a crash program in 32nm and smaller ARM offerings - total solns including chipsets if needed, then there still might be some potential due to exlnt process tech. But they'd have to do this well and quick both in execution and quenching the internal bickering that is likely.

3/26/2011 3:24 AM EDT

I thought something was up when I saw his demeanor at MWC last month; especially when he attacked the ARM CEO at 1:20 in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iv45xll5iBw

I don't think that one phone alone will make a difference; especially if potentially funded by Intel like I believe was done for many of the MID products that came and went in the past.

The big challenge is not just SoC integration and power, but software. It is a HUGE software investment for an OEM on these complex applications platforms, and betting on one vendor's device with no option to move is very risky. With the proven ARM silicon partner offerings there is a wide variety of offerings with the ability to leverage software investment.

I don't believe that if Intel can close the silicon gap that they will automatically be in the game - there are many other issues like software and choice that have to be considered, and the bar is higher every year.

The position from Intel that the Internet is based on x86 and people want to migrate their applications directly to the mobile world was not the right approach. We are in a disruptive time of computing where this is not the key issue. ARM technology and partners are taking the reins in this new computing era where things are changing.

Maybe this reality is starting to sink in and this is one of the first signs. It will be interesting if they have to go to ARM at some point to change direction.

3/26/2011 11:17 AM EDT

I'm sure no one would stand for this, but why doesn't Intel buy ARM?

3/26/2011 12:23 PM EDT

Agree. But then, you pay off governments to get the deal done.

3/26/2011 4:04 PM EDT

I think intel should move away from x86 to the ARM to develop a competitive SoC solutions for smart phones. What Intel lacks is a right combination of processor and low power dissipated chipset.

3/26/2011 8:10 PM EDT

The fight with ARM is too tough unless Intel cam bring in some innovative design.