Ex-CEO: Fire Intel board and bring back Pat Gelsinger

Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger, who was dismissed at the end of 2024, has the backing of one of his predecessors. Craig Barrett –, Intel CEO – from 1998 to 2005, does not blame Gelsinger, but the company's board of directors, for Intel's bad situation. Barrett would fire the board and bring Gelsinger back as CEO so that he can complete Intel's internal reorganization.

Barrett is critical of a break-up into two companies – one that continues to design processors and a separate chip contract manufacturer –. Various such business models have been circulating through the rumor mill for months. These include speculation that the world's largest chip contract manufacturer TSMC could enter the Intel Foundry manufacturing division or take over its semiconductor plants.

In an opinion piece on Fortune, Barrett writes:

“Please stop talking about breaking up a company and the complications and distractions that come with it. The company has gone through several CEOs and boards that have done the wrong things.

[...]

Currently, the company is run by a chief financial officer and a product manager. The challenge for Intel is to find someone who understands the business of chipmaking, not someone who spends their time splitting the company in two. Along the way, you should also think about Intel's board of directors. It bears ultimate responsibility for what has happened to Intel over the last decade.

[...]

The moment you announce Intel's split, you lose the momentum and resources you need to succeed. In my opinion, it would be far better to fire the Intel board and rehire Pat Gelsinger to finish the job he has done brilliantly over the last few years.”

Intel's 18A on par with TSMC

Barrett sees Intel's next-generation 18A process on a par with TSMC's upcoming 2-nanometer technology. Intel is behind from a technical perspective, he says. “If Intel has an equivalent or better technology than TSMC, the game changes.” Intel Foundry could then win important customers. Rumor has it that Nvidia and Broadcom are currently testing Intel's 18A process.

“Intel failed in its previous efforts in the foundry business for the simple reason it did not have a competitive technology. The best technology wins, as you are at a disadvantage if you use an older version. Of course, Intel has to provide good customer service, fair pricing, guaranteed capacity, and a clear separation of chip designers from their foundry customers, but there is no disputing that the best technology wins. Intel used to lead in technology and chip design. They still struggle in chip design with the move to AI applications, but they are certainly back in manufacturing technology.

So, let’s stop talking about breaking up Intel as the only solution. Instead, let’s talk about Intel eating into TSMC’s current high-end foundry business based on Intel’s technology resurgence.”

Ex-engineers criticize Intel's corporate culture

Intel's former chief architect Raja Koduri and ex-chief engineer Jim Keller had previously commented on the company's difficulties. Keller wrote about a possible sale: “this is not unlocking shareholder value, it's a fire sale. That makes me sad.”

Koduri wrote an entire article in which he criticized Intel's internal bureaucracy and poor decision-making. Intel's engineers could no longer innovate in this way.

(mma)