I dont see why Intel's new desktop CPUs being slightly slower in video games would be of major concern to investors, who are more anxious about the $billions spent in the fab-first transition, watching how that's going, and eagerly seeing if Intel can pull it off.What I dont understand is how the stock was up 7% yesterday. I know the financials were better than they looked because all the write offs dragged it down, but he problem is ARL is a disaster. I try to support Intel because they get so much hate, but seriously, I can see no reason to buy ARL at all, and I have no confidence in 18A either. Maybe investors are counting on mobile and server being more competitive, or maybe things are just obviously so horrible that investors are anticipating a merger or take over.
There's a report coming from Semafor, that the US government would encourage a private sector merger.Not only Qualcomm, but also Samsung, Apple enter the chat. Although these acquisition rumor are not all likely happen, it can provide better expectation for stock
One option is a merger, led by the private sector but possibly encouraged by the government, of Intel’s chip-design business with a rival like AMD or Marvell, the people said. There’s little appetite for a 2008-style bailout, in which the government took direct stakes in automakers and banks, because policymakers are worried about losing money given Intel’s continued sales declines
What I dont understand is how the stock was up 7% yesterday. I know the financials were better than they looked because all the write offs dragged it down, but he problem is ARL is a disaster. I try to support Intel because they get so much hate, but seriously, I can see no reason to buy ARL at all, and I have no confidence in 18A either. Maybe investors are counting on mobile and server being more competitive, or maybe things are just obviously so horrible that investors are anticipating a merger or take over.
They are slower in video games, probably will be a significant amount behind 9800x3D (10-20 percent on average??) They are no faster for the flagship sku in productivity either, although it remains to be seen how productivity will pan out for the i7 and i5 skus, since they have extra E cores, but now lack HT. So really, as I said, I see no reason to buy desktop intel at all at their current prices, unless you are in some niche that you dont care about gaming, but want an i5 or i7 for productivity.I dont see why Intel's new desktop CPUs being slightly slower in video games would be of major concern to investors, who are more anxious about the $billions spent in the fab-first transition, watching how that's going, and eagerly seeing if Intel can pull it off.
The reported client figures were fine. Datacenter is slightly improving, results were better than expected, and guidance increased. All reasons why a stock price should slightly correct itself upwards.
I dont see why Intel's new desktop CPUs being slightly slower in video games would be of major concern to investors, who are more anxious about the $billions spent in the fab-first transition, watching how that's going, and eagerly seeing if Intel can pull it off.
The reported client figures were fine. Datacenter is slightly improving, results were better than expected, and guidance increased. All reasons why a stock price should slightly correct itself upwards.
Realistically if Intel were to get acquired/merged, which companies would be eligible?
Regulators will not approve a foreign company such as Samsung, or the creation of a monopoly (which would happen if they merged with AMD).
Except if they open x86 to competitors ?Regulators will not approve a foreign company such as Samsung, or the creation of a monopoly (which would happen if they merged with AMD).
Some of the numbers are just a little below the surface.
For example, Intel lost $450 million in desktop revenue (Q2 -> Q3), which was generated by internal fabs - "Intel 7"
At the same, gained $400 million notebook revenue (Q2 -> Q3), which may be the Lunar Lake shipments. What's interesting from profitability POV?
- Lunar Lake is using much more expensive external process node
- Lunar Lake revenue includes revenue from DRAM that Intel is reselling at cost, so part of that revenue is effectively not real
With 16 billion slush fund of "one time" write-offs, Intel can manufacture any Operating margin of the Client business, and in case of Q3, Intel manufactured improved Operating margin.
I don't think it is real, Intel may have fooled the Wall Street.
The $16 billion slush fund can keep up the mirage of improving Operating margins for a few more quarters... IIRC, only about 3 billions out of the 16 billions were accounted for in Q3 (but I may be wrong on this).
A little early to assume LNL was the cause of that notebook revenue increase. Could just as well be RPL-U and MTL-U business laptops getting a cyclical bump because its ~4 years since the COVID notebook bump and thats a common hardware refresh timeline.
Desktop retraction likely also could be related to anticipation of a new launch as well as partially impacted by overall market trends of desktop shrinking relative to notebook markets.
Point being that gaming desktop CPUs performance in games are far down on the list of investor concerns, well below fabs/18A progress, notebook, Xeon, Gaudi, etc.
"New Intel gaming CPUs for desktop are on average 5% slower in games ans 5% faster in productivity vs RPL-R, roughly match Zen 5 vanilla are going to lose to X3D" is hardly a pressing concern to Wallstreet.
I think in DC yields, volume and market price dictate the sales price as cost is way below the market price.Price and cost to make is -as always - a very important metric.
Now list prices are often not an indication of cost to manufacture, but isn't Sierra Forest two massive 570mm² 3NM dies Vs AMD's CCD approach? While no vendor wants a price war, those massive dies cannot be cheap to make.
DC was in dramatic free fall for Intel. A slightly less dramatic free fall with little hope of a drastic slowing of that erosion isn't good at all. I can see AMD gaining another 10-20% market in DC before a possible intervention by CWF by maybe 2026.I dont see why Intel's new desktop CPUs being slightly slower in video games would be of major concern to investors, who are more anxious about the $billions spent in the fab-first transition, watching how that's going, and eagerly seeing if Intel can pull it off.
The reported client figures were fine. Datacenter is slightly improving, results were better than expected, and guidance increased. All reasons why a stock price should slightly correct itself upwards.
I agree completely. Consumers (and the USA as a country). Need a competitive Intel.I think a lot of that hate or just lack of preferring them is warranted. They tried to kill the competition buy handing ODM's billions, then there was contra revenue, and after that when AMD was near bankruptcy they released boring 4 cores for years on end without much progress. But wait, theres more! You'll need a new motherboard because we change sockets so much! and if you wanted more than 4 cores, be ready to sell a kidney!
That's not to say Intel doesn't make good products. They have. If AMD were in the same position, they may very well have done the same. Some say they already are by staying with 16 cores since Zen 2. But because of Intel's past shenanigans, I tend to prefer AMD unless Intel offers a better solution.
I'd like Intel to bounce back at some point. I don't want a (near) monopoly like Nvidia has. Competition is good for all of us.
Sorry for the OT rant. On topic, there seems to be faith in Intel as its stock has gone up a bit since the report. I think Intel's stock has been a bit undervalued. If they hit a home run with 18A, I'll wish I had invested.
What I dont understand is how the stock was up 7% yesterday. I know the financials were better than they looked because all the write offs dragged it down, but he problem is ARL is a disaster. I try to support Intel because they get so much hate, but seriously, I can see no reason to buy ARL at all, and I have no confidence in 18A either. Maybe investors are counting on mobile and server being more competitive, or maybe things are just obviously so horrible that investors are anticipating a merger or take over.
It would appear that all recent Intel chips including ARL are unstable in at least this one game or more(I have not kept track of how many games are affected in this Intel crashing thread)You think ARL is a "disaster" because it doesn't get any performance increases in games. That's a minority of the market. For most non-gaming benchmarks it does get a nice gain over the previous Intel CPUs, especially when taking power into account. Whether you have confidence in 18A has no bearing on the stock market. If respected analysts they listen to start sounding alarm bells then it'll impact the stock. But it may turn out fine, despite your lack of confidence.
Gaming may be a "minority" of the market, but it is highly visible and influences the perception of the rest of the line, IMO. You of course will probably disagree, and more power to you. AMD has already slashed prices on non-x3D versions of Zen 5 due to lack of performance improvement. ARL is even more disappointing than Zen 5, and I think they will have to cut prices drastically to move the product. And they dont have an equivalent to the x3D chips to hold up prices on at least part of the line.You think ARL is a "disaster" because it doesn't get any performance increases in games. That's a minority of the market. For most non-gaming benchmarks it does get a nice gain over the previous Intel CPUs, especially when taking power into account. Whether you have confidence in 18A has no bearing on the stock market. If respected analysts they listen to start sounding alarm bells then it'll impact the stock. But it may turn out fine, despite your lack of confidence.
You think ARL is a "disaster" because it doesn't get any performance increases in games. That's a minority of the market. For most non-gaming benchmarks it does get a nice gain over the previous Intel CPUs, especially when taking power into account. Whether you have confidence in 18A has no bearing on the stock market. If respected analysts they listen to start sounding alarm bells then it'll impact the stock. But it may turn out fine, despite your lack of confidence.
Gaming may be a "minority" of the market, but it is highly visible and influences the perception of the rest of the line, IMO. You of course will probably disagree, and more power to you. AMD has already slashed prices on non-x3D versions of Zen 5 due to lack of performance improvement. ARL is even more disappointing than Zen 5, and I think they will have to cut prices drastically to move the product. And they dont have an equivalent to the x3D chips to hold up prices on at least part of the line.
OK then, I will rephrase the question: why would anyone buy ARL for any reason (except price)? Its the proverbial "dead man walking". I think Intel will have to cut prices to the bone, or give some sort of rebate or incentive to move the product, which is not exactly what you want to be doing for a company that is, to put it mildly, strapped for revenue. Hell, even last gen RL is probably a better deal for business/consumer use where stability should not be an issue on the lower skus.You really think that gaming issues are going to convince corporate buyers to reject ARL? Or will convince typical consumers, who in their minds are just buying a "Dell" or whatever, and often don't even know or care whether it has an Intel or AMD CPU inside let alone which one?
As a corporate slave to Dell, I don't even get a choice for my processor even though I know what CPU is inside.You really think that gaming issues are going to convince corporate buyers to reject ARL? Or will convince typical consumers, who in their minds are just buying a "Dell" or whatever, and often don't even know or care whether it has an Intel or AMD CPU inside let alone which one?
You really think that gaming issues are going to convince corporate buyers to reject ARL?
No but the reports of Raptor Lake's instability might be.
Nah, at most Dell will get an even deeper discount than usual to "alleviate customer confidence concerns" yadda yadda. They stuck with Intel through Pentium 4 and Prescott, they won't ditch them now.No but the reports of Raptor Lake's instability might be.
Intel is not in a good position for a price war and discounting from their current position will reduce free cash flow even more from its current negative position.Nah, at most Dell will get an even deeper discount than usual to "alleviate customer confidence concerns" yadda yadda. They stuck with Intel through Pentium 4 and Prescott, they won't ditch them now.