zlacker

>>fancy_+(OP)
You can tell from the tone of this letter and the bizarre reference to agenetic AI he is completely clueless. Compare this to someone like Jensen, a nerd's nerd who gets up on stage with the latest GPU, can talk about new CUDA API's and goes deep on specs like memory bandwidth. He knows exactly who his customer is, and what kinds of workloads they run for AI.

It's just such a massive difference. You can tell Lip-Bu spends his weekends playing golf while Jensen is checking out the latest model from Huggingface.

You can't buy passion or genuine interest in what you're doing.

>>iamlep+4f

  You can tell from the tone of this letter and the bizarre reference to agenetic AI he is completely clueless.

Why? He's basically saying Intel needs to focus on inference (agentic AI) and not training because they can't catch Nvidia.

>>aurare+HN
Agree and I really appreciate your comment, as it wasn't immediately clear to me from reading the letter.

It's not a "bizarre reference to agentic AI" - it's saying (as you point out) that Intel can't compete in the training (i.e. "compile time") race, but they can in the inference (i.e. "run time") race, which is likely where more spending is going to be anyway in the near/medium future as the scaling hype looks like a dead end.