Intel to cut its workforce by five percent by end of 2014

Chipmaker Intel has announced plans to reduce its current workforce by about five percent by the end of 2014 as the company tries to change some of its business practices in the face of falling PC shipments.

Reuters quotes Intel company spokesperson Chris Kraeuter as saying the decisions were "part of aligning our human resources to meet business needs." Intel currently has about 108,000 employees which means that by the end of 2014 over 5,000 people won't be working there anymore. Some of those staff members will depart due to early retirement and attrition, according to Kraeuter.

The news comes one day after Intel released its latest quarterly financial numbers, when it revealed that it had $13.8 billion in revenue for the fourth quarter of 2013, and net income of $2.6 billion for the quarter, which was slightly below analyst expectations. PC chip revenue for the fourth quarter was flat compared to a year ago.

Earlier this week, Intel announced that it would not open a new processor factory in Arizona as previously planned in favor of upgrading the three other factories on the same site. The vacant building will be used at some point to make future technology products.

Source: Reuters | Intel image via Shutterstock

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

BlackBerry: No plans to bring BBM app to Windows Phone

Next Story

NTT DoCoMo cancels plan to carry Samsung's Tizen smartphone

16 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I am still running a Q9650 3ghz clocked up to 4.2ghz... + 8gb of DDR3... and it will run all modern games flawlessly. So no need to upgrade yet.

Intel almost let their low power CPUs die out when they should have been listening to partners. In 2006/2007 Microsoft was urging Intel to expand multi-core and 64bit Atom class low power CPUs, and Intel basically told Microsoft they were crazy. (Microsoft envisioned the growing cloud server data centers that could benefit from server class, low power, 64bit CPUs. - Saving space, heat, etc.)

Intel took a lot of hits in the mobile market, when they could of had a handheld Atom processor usable in Phones several years ago, instead of just catching up with the latest version. (Usable, as in equal to ARM in power consumption with a faster CISC design.)


My rambling thoughts...
It is strange that they are reducing their workforce at the same time they have caught up and can offer competitive Tablet and Phone CPUs.

The other crazy thing is the internal anti-Microsoft mindset of Intel. They remain passive aggressive and continue to get upset with Microsoft every few years when they don't get exclusive support. This goes back to Windows support of AMD/VIA in the 90s, NT's Alpha/MIPS/PowerPC support in 4.0, AMD64 support in the early 00s, and more recently Microsoft offering Windows on ARM. (Even MS compiler technology keeps angering Intel by offering faster and more secure code.)

So Intel has been pushing Chromebooks and Android x86 and making first launch deals with Apple; when in reality it is Microsoft Windows that sells more of their product than anyone else by a huge factor.

Intel is even missing an opportunity, as Microsoft's push with Windows 8 to make the OS more hardware agnostic with both low level NT support of various architectures and the new WinRT API set that is conducive to offering seamless hardware support. Intel could use this to push forward some of their non x86/x64 architecture designs that are faster and easily get Microsoft to have Windows running on the new CPU design.


I like Intel's speeds, their per core speeds are far ahead of AMD, but they keep doing silly things by trying to push Microsoft aside.

Mobius Enigma said,
Even MS compiler technology keeps angering Intel by offering faster and more secure code.
What's the story behind this?

Older CPUs (not merely older i-series, but even older LGA775 CPUs) are "good enough" for most users and most uses - where is the upgrade pressure? (Take me for example: I'm running a Q6600 CPU, which has been dead how long? I run three operating systems (in rotation) on my hardware (two desktop and one server) - all are current; in fact, all three released merely within the past year. Other than bleeding-edge software/use, why would I upgrade under normal circumstances?) CPU demand is still soft - it has NOT rebounded from the Great Recession (in terms of either desktops OR servers). As far as pushing more into server or mobile CPUs (hyper-efficiency) mobile CPUs are a niche - so are specialized server CPUs (such as XEON PHI - which is an Intel product). If Intel pushes more in either area than what they are, they are taking a chance on pushback (in terms of PR) - hasn't no less than Microsoft taken plenty of heat for their own Windows Phone and server products push (And that is besides Intel being in more in terms of products than even Microsoft - and that was before Intel's acquisition spree.) CPUs still "stir the coffee" at Intel - if anything, the latest spur in terms of cost-cutting is Intel putting FAB 42 (targeting post-Broadwell CPUs) on hold, primarily due to still-soft demand for Haswell.

JHBrown said,
Windows 8 is reaking havoc in all sectors! /s

P.S.
Sorry, couldn't resist. Just having some fun.


More like a continually bad economy that isn't improving and inflation that allows for much less disposable income...

ah ok, so they are not losing money, they just want to make the investor happy and increase the stock price, because paper has been always better than hummans

sales are up 2-5% depending on what department... love all the news sites saying sales are crashing this past quarter when they have an increase in sales...

Lord Method Man said,
Intel needs to get out of the hardware business and just work on making drivers for AMD.

Wasn't sure if you were being funny or not.

The single core performance difference between Intel and AMD is currently huge. This is why a low end modern Pentium or i3 can easily outperform even the higher end 6/8 core AMD CPUs outside of highly threaded software. (AMD is competitive in the Server market, but have reduced their server product push.)

Can I humbly suggest using the vacant building to keep all that obscene mountain of money. And seeing as you'd also need someone to carry the piles of green all the way from Oregon to AZ, give that job to people about to be booted and see them leap straight into the Grand Canyon.

Given the circumstances it just seems like the right thing to do.