Skip to main content

AMD, Intel, Nvidia Slow Hirings as Economy Falters

Fabs
(Image credit: Shutterstock)

Prominent tech players AMD, Intel and Nvidia have been slowing the pace of new hires as a cost-cutting measure that'll allow them to better weather the ongoing economic downturn. According to Planet3DNow!, who scoured open hiring positions available on all three players' websites, there's been a reduction in available positions at all three companies. This signals that they are trying not to increase their operating expenses in such a cloudy economic environment.

See more

AMD's hiring reduction is easily the least significant, likely reflecting the company's stellar Q2 results, which led to a 70% increase in revenue and locked approximately $447 million in profits. This is a company whose execution (since being helmed by Lisa Su) has placed it on a clearly upwards trajectory. And with such strong results, it's not surprising that the company is focusing on capturing additional talent that will help it deliver in the coming years. 

The company's 4% reduction in open hire positions in the last week could simply mean that AMD filled some of the previously available ones. But, at the same time, AMD is now in the top spot for open positions, beating both Intel and Nvidia with its 2,701 work offers.

Out of all three, Nvidia's slowdown is the most significant: the company's available positions have been reduced by 68% since May 7th, with 18% of that contraction happening in the last week alone. This led the company's open positions to fall from a high of 3,555 just four months ago down to just 1,114 at the time of writing - less than two-thirds of its high.

The company already confirmed a slowdown in hiring back in May. However, being a multibillion-dollar company, Nvidia didn't want to place itself in what could be seen as a vulnerable position by investors. The company claimed it was simply allowing more time to "better onboard thousands of recent hires."

Those hires may take a bit longer to acclimate than expected.

As for Intel, the company's hiring slowdown is even more conspicuous. In addition, the company recently delivered an eye-opening $500 million loss for Q2, almost mirroring AMD's earnings. This prompted CEO Pat Gelsinger to admit to the company's execution flaws with the promise of future improvements.

Likely related, Intel's open positions decline too is significant; the company went from having almost double AMD's job offers in May (6,092 vs 3,439) to having 168 fewer (2,533 vs 2,701) at the time of writing. But there's a slight caveat to Intel's slowdown in hiring: it seems the company is more focused on acquisitions as of late, and that's where it might actually be redirecting its capital. 

And let's not forget the billions of dollars the company has committed to a series of new manufacturing facilities across the U.S. and Europe. It remains to be seen how - and if - Intel's open positions reduction will impact its factory expansions. However, one thing is sure: semiconductor manufacturers have been fighting for qualified workers for a while now.

It's almost certain that all three companies are shifting their hiring strategy towards retaining the talent they already have rather than onboarding new employees. The Russian invasion of Ukraine is primarily responsible for today's economic downturn, but tensions are high - and climbing higher - elsewhere. Taiwan, home to the world's leading semiconductor foundries thanks to TSMC, is in a seemingly precarious position with China. A Chinese missile and scores of military airplanes (numbering 22) violating Taiwanese airspace after U.S. House of Representatives speaker Nancy Pelosi's visit do little to assuage worldwide fears of conflict. Uncertainty breeds turmoil in the economy, and companies have to ensure they have sufficient capital to weather further economic spiraling. 

Francisco Pires
Francisco Pires

Francisco Pires is a freelance news writer for Tom's Hardware with a soft side for quantum computing.

  • jkflipflop98
    The real problem is that we just went through a huge hiring wave across the industry not too long ago. There's more newbies than old vets to train them.
    Reply
  • kiniku
    While far too many people in the U.S. are having to decide which to pay for: gasoline, food, and even their rent, that didn't stop the Pelosi's from cashing in with Nvidia stock right after the recent "Chip" legislation. Well done!
    Reply
  • BILL1957
    Honestly I look at this as being a savvy business and reading the upcoming likely market conditions and adjusting your companies position in advance not after the fact.
    Which would hurt the stock prices more, a headline stating a company is slowing down hiring more workers or a headline stating 6 months from now that a major tech company is laying off several thousand workers at such and such facilities because of declining or lackluster sales?
    Reply
  • spongiemaster
    kiniku said:
    While far too many people in the U.S. are having to decide which to pay for: gasoline, food, and even their rent, that didn't stop the Pelosi's from cashing in with Nvidia stock right after the recent "Chip" legislation. Well done!
    You didn't read the story properly if you think Nancy's husbanded "cashed in" his Nvidia stock. He sold it at a loss of $341,365. In light of that, your post doesn't make any sense.
    Reply
  • BILL1957
    kiniku said:
    While far too many people in the U.S. are having to decide which to pay for: gasoline, food, and even their rent, that didn't stop the Pelosi's from cashing in with Nvidia stock right after the recent "Chip" legislation. Well done!
    Actually Nvidia is not a chip manufacturer and will not be one of the companies that really benefits from that bill but instead buys the chips they use from other foundries that actually make chips and the chip legislation is aimed at those manufacturers such as Intel to actually build chip fabrication plants here on U.S. soil.

    If the ARMS purchase deal by Nvidia had of been approved then Nvidia may have been in position to benefit from this legislation that that deal was shot down and not approved some time ago.
    I expect many bought Nvidia stock speculating the deal would go through and Nvidia would also start manufacturing their own chips but are bailing now trying to cut their losses before stock prices continue to fall from a down sales forecast or outlook over the next year or two.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    BILL1957 said:
    Actually Nvidia is not a chip manufacturer and will not be one of the companies that really benefits from that bill but instead buys the chips they use from other foundries that actually make chips and the chip legislation is aimed at those manufacturers such as Intel to actually build chip fabrication plants here on U.S. soil.
    Right. Any benefit to Nvidia is indirect and just in the realm of helping them diversify their production chain and insulating it a little bit from geopolitical affairs.

    BILL1957 said:
    I expect many bought Nvidia stock speculating the deal would go through and Nvidia would also start manufacturing their own chips
    Anyone who thought Nvidia actually wanted to get into the chip making business probably deserved to lose money. It would make no sense for them, CHIPS act or not.
    Reply
  • BILL1957
    bit_user said:
    Anyone who thought Nvidia actually wanted to get into the chip making business probably deserved to lose money. It would make no sense for them, CHIPS act or not.
    Nvidia actually did make a full bore attempt to buy I believe it was a British based arms chip manufacturer a year or so ago but I believe it was the British government would not allow that purchase to proceed.
    Nvidia did have aspirations to begin manufacturing their own chips but could not pull the deal off through no fault of their own making.
    Reply
  • spongiemaster
    BILL1957 said:
    Nvidia actually did make a full bore attempt to buy I believe it was a British based arms chip manufacturer a year or so ago but I believe it was the British government would not allow that purchase to proceed.
    Nvidia did have aspirations to begin manufacturing their own chips but could not pull the deal off through no fault of their own making.
    ARM only designs chips, they don't fab them themselves. Nvidia still would have gotten nothing from the CHIPS act even if they had completed the purchase of ARM.
    Reply
  • BILL1957
    spongiemaster said:
    ARM only designs chips, they don't fab them themselves. Nvidia still would have gotten nothing from the CHIPS act even if they had completed the purchase of ARM.
    But the first step to being able to manufacture a chip is to have a complete working design to build.
    If Nvidia had of been able to complete said purchase and agreed to build a plant to manufacture them here in the U.S.A. then they would have been eligible to receive some of that Chip act money!
    Reply
  • bit_user
    BILL1957 said:
    But the first step to being able to manufacture a chip is to have a complete working design to build.
    No, ARM has always been an IP-only business. They don't even design entire chips. They design cores, interconnects, GPUs, etc. and give their customers options for which parts and parameters they want to use in their own SoCs.

    There has never been any hint that ARM was looking to stray from a pure IP-only business model, nor did Nvidia do anything to suggest such an intent. As a publicly-traded company, Nvidia needs to have a certain degree of transparency and chip building is incredibly capital-intensive. There's no way they can or would hide any such plans or aspirations from their investors.

    You're just way off track, here.
    Reply