Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger retires, effective immediately — two co-CEOs step in

Intel CEO Pat Gelsinger
(Image credit: Intel)

Intel announced that CEO Pat Gelsinger will retire and step down from the board of directors, effective immediately. Intel has appointed two interim leaders, CFO David Zinsner and Michelle Johnston Holthaus, as interim co-CEOs while the board begins a search for a new CEO. Speculation is rife that Gelsinger was forced out, especially in light of the company's poor performance in the stock market — Intel's stock price is down 61% since Gelsinger took over.

Gelsinger spent more than 40 years at Intel, returning in 2021 to lead the company after serving as the CEO of VMware. Intel's press release doesn't indicate Gelsinger's future plans. There have been many reports that Intel's board of directors is exploring a plan to split the company and spin off the foundry business. The press release says the board wishes to put the product group at the center of 'all we do,' which might indicate more restructuring. However, the company also said, "Returning to process leadership is central to product leadership, and we will remain focused on that mission."

Gelsinger presided over a tumultuous four years at Intel as the company struggled to regain its lost glory, both with its process node technology and finished products business. The company has recently undergone a series of extreme cost-cutting measures as it struggles to return to profitability, culminating in a restructuring and mass layoff of more than 15% of its workforce that will be concluded by the end of the year. Intel is still in the midst of laying off roughly 15,000 employees or more (potentially up to 17,475 based on recent Intel headcount numbers of 116,500). This ranks as the most severe layoff in Intel's 56-year history.

Intel's product division continued to have multiple setbacks under Gelsinger's tenure, with numerous product delays that continued to hamper the company's competitiveness as AMD began to take more market share and Arm chips began to chew into Intel's high-margin data center CPU business. Meanwhile, Intel has missed the AI wave almost entirely. It recently disclosed that its Gaudi 3 accelerators aren't selling well, instead pinning hopes on the next-gen products as its entry into the AI market. 

Paul Alcorn
Editor-in-Chief

Paul Alcorn is the Editor-in-Chief for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • Marlin1975
    Seems more like a fall guy.
    He came in and intel was a hot mess. They seem to be trying but it takes a long time to turn around not only design issues but the decades long manufacture issues he was handed.

    Not saying he is faultless for intels current status. But 4 years is not a long time for the hand he was dealt.
    Reply
  • bill001g
    He should have just pretended he laid himself off for news headline purposes. At least this guy had a very technical background rather than being the clueless suits who run many companies.
    Reply
  • AndrewJacksonZA
    They didn't give him enough time. I agree with @Marlin1975 , I think he is being made the fall guy. The damage was done by the bean counter CEO.
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    Marlin1975 said:
    Seems more like a fall guy.
    He came in and intel was a hot mess. They seem to be trying but it takes a long time to turn around not only design issues but the decades long manufacture issues he was handed.

    Not saying he is faultless for intels current status. But 4 years is not a long time for the hand he was dealt.
    Yeah, this is pretty alarming. Intel has been struggling with execution in a variety of ways since 2014. The architectures released in the past three years of Gelsinger being at the helm were mostly done and designed before he even got started. I'm not at all confident in Intel's ability to correct things with some other CEO instead of Pat, at least in the near term. It could be a decade or more to recover, if ever.

    Pat has the right idea with Intel Foundry and chasing US gov't investments. The former should have happened a decade ago at least. That's how TSMC got ahead... that and consistent execution. But it's ironic that just as Intel floundered (refinements of 14nm for years), TSMC managed to do better.
    Reply
  • Notton
    — a strategy that the stock market often dislikes.
    If they were in charge, they would sell off every asset Intel has for maximum profits, and you'd have nothing left but a hollowed out carcass in a few years. - Asset stripping.
    Reply
  • doomtomb
    I am saddened to hear his departure likely due to what we're seeing is Intel's too big to rapidly pivot. It's not even super clear what they are pivoting to: is it foundry, is it AI, which of these will save them and regain their former glory.

    It's a passing of the torch. They have more in common with IBM than their actual competitors on the other fronts. Their best days were about Pentium I to Core i7 Nehalem/Sandy Bridge era. Were they supposed to jump on mobile? It's a shame Atom didn't work out.
    Reply
  • magbarn
    Don’t worry. They won’t hire anyone like Lisa Su. Instead they’ll get another Wharton/Jack Welch useless acolyte that’s only good for temporarily pumping up stock prices at the expense of the future.
    Reply
  • ezst036
    JarredWaltonGPU said:
    Pat has the right idea with Intel Foundry and chasing US gov't investments.
    :rolleyes:

    Good grief.
    Reply
  • YSCCC
    Although intel in recent years are struggling to retain their prior glory, and most products arn't technically competitive, yet it seems to me he's the one who took the lead in a hot mess trying to steer it in a right direction, while that direction need to burn through some time and a lot of cash, they kicked him off the boat before those investments have the time to materialize... in this wall street style management it seems it will be unlikely the chips act will work for them, only to feed the greedy board of directors
    Reply
  • EzzyB
    I honestly thought he was going to pull it off. I get that it is painful but what he had to do there was a huge task.

    What is wrong with business today, literally all of them, is that stock price is more important than having a good business. We see it everywhere, chasing stock price instead of building a good, solid, profitable company is absolutely detrimental to consumers. Amazon was awesome, now it sucks, same for Netflix, Google, etc, etc. This unending chase to constantly grow and increase the stock price turns, good, respected companies into predators with their customers as the prey.

    I think Gelsinger deserved a couple more years to see it through.
    Reply