Groq Reviews

For a startup, the management structure is hierarchical and rigid. There is a lack of experience among higher-level management in chip development. College dropouts running companies are fine for internet and software areas, but not for competing against hardware giants such as Nvidia and Intel. There is too much vaporware and puffery. Middle management is bureaucratic and prone to micromanagement. As a result of these factors, there is high turnover.

The company lacks a clear focus and has pivoted too many times. They lost a lot of their institutional knowledge when lead Architects left. They grew too fast (after they said that they knew the secret that no one else knew) and ended up laying off 20% of their force. The CEO micromanages and gives advice to people in roles that he has no experience with. Chimes in on Project reviews to discuss how he use to do things with the failed compilers. Seems needy for attention and validation. There are hardly any women or under represented minorities. The 20% in force affected women and black employees more than any other demographic. They have a different development environment than the Customer Environment. This means that CI tests do not capture any of the errors that customers would experience resulting in very long QA timelines. QA takes a lot of flack for taking so long to identify/report/verify bugs/bugfixes. No matching for 401k, and the stocks are worthless unless someone buys them and pays more than what investors have promised to be paid.