AMD Q2 2013 Market Share up 2.2% Q to Q (Mercury Research)

[Blandge]

The problem is they are too big, too set in their ways

Except that the reason people are so pissed off about Haswell is because it was designed completely for mobile (which would indicate that they are not too set in their ways), and the new CEO recently said that Intel may prioritize Atom over Core (According to Anandtech's podcast). You keep making assertions that are largely inaccurate as though they are fact. You are good at arguing, but not good at making a sound argument for the assertions you are make while arguing.

You seem like a very intelligent person, but please include supporting evidence for the claims you make. Even if this supporting evidence is not very good, at least show that you've considered whether or not your beliefs are justified.

 

[bullzz]

"Silvermont won't fix 2 out of 3 of those"
intel is already shipping LTE to samsung. so they wud have fixed 2 of 3 with silvermont

"Intel's "bleeding edge" fabs are likely to be no more bleeding-edge than the rest in 3-5 years"
where did you dig that from. intel's bleeding-edge will stay for atleast 6-7 yrs before any one can catchup
http://www.dvice.com/archives/2012/09/intel_5nm_proce.php

 

[SiliconWars]

Except that the reason people are so pissed off about Haswell is because it was designed completely for mobile (which would indicate that they are not too set in their ways), and the new CEO recently said that Intel may prioritize Atom over Core (According to Anandtech's podcast). You keep making assertions that are largely inaccurate as though they are fact. You are good at arguing, but not good at making a sound argument for the assertions you are make while arguing.

The facts seem pretty clear to me. Intel is struggling under it's own weight - you simply have to compare them to Qualcomm to see that this is the case. Metrics like revenue per employee, profit to revenue ratios etc show this.

Yes Qualcomm gets a lot of money from licenses, but their licensees are building chips on older processes, and presumably making money out of it otherwise they wouldn't be.

What I don't understand is why Intel, who have everything they need to be clear #1 in the industry on every metric, is falling behind Qualcomm on the important one, ie profit. Something is wrong with their business - it worked vs non-competition in their x86 monopoly (big surprise) but it is not working in today's markets.

You seem like a very intelligent person, but please include supporting evidence for the claims you make. Even if this supporting evidence is not very good, at least show that you've considered whether or not your beliefs are justified.

What evidence do you want? Most of everything I've written is available simply by looking at both companies last financial statement.

 

[SiliconWars]

"Silvermont won't fix 2 out of 3 of those"
intel is already shipping LTE to samsung. so they wud have fixed 2 of 3 with silvermont

Yup, forgot about that one.

"Intel's "bleeding edge" fabs are likely to be no more bleeding-edge than the rest in 3-5 years"
where did you dig that from. intel's bleeding-edge will stay for atleast 6-7 yrs before any one can catchup
http://www.dvice.com/archives/2012/09/intel_5nm_proce.php

That was written last year. Intel has since cut capex twice, by $1 billion each time. You can't just go chopping $2 billion off your spending and expect nothing to change.

 

[Blandge]

Silvermont won't fix 2 out of 3 of those.

This is a strawman. I never said it would.

They had no competition. The rest combined didn't even have 1/10th of the money so the comparison is BS, frankly.

False.

From Wikipedia:

At various times, companies such as IBM, NEC,[14] AMD, TI, STM, Fujitsu, OKI, Siemens, Cyrix, Intersil, C&T, NexGen, UMC, and DM&P

Intel's "bleeding edge" fabs are likely to be no more bleeding-edge than the rest in 3-5 years, because they can no longer afford to maintain their position. They were too late, they missed the mobile boat while others got very rich.

You are making an assertion without any evidence again. Show me the evidence that Intel cannot afford bleeding edge fabs. How much does a bleeding edge 10nm or 7nm fab cost? How much can Intel afford to spend on CAPEX in 2015 through 2017? For what reasons do you suspect that Intel will not make enough to spend that much on CAPEX?

After all that you still haven't address the fact that you were making a red herring fallacy that Intel's manufacturing advantage hasn't yet helped them in mobile. You use a very infantile argument technique of ignoring all counter points and just making more assertions without evidence. I assure you that none of us take anything you say seriously when it's not backed up with sound reasoning.

 

[Blandge]

The facts seem pretty clear to me. Intel is struggling under it's own weight - you simply have to compare them to Qualcomm to see that this is the case. Metrics like revenue per employee, profit to revenue ratios etc show this.

Yes Intel is a big company that moves slowly compared to companies like Qualcomm, but they are making a significant effort to compete in the mobile space by changing the way they do business. Intel doesn't look like the same company that was was 5 years ago, but the stock performance is basically the same, revenue is up by 20 billion dollars a year and they are moving into new markets.

Yes Qualcomm gets a lot of money from licenses, but their licensees are building chips on older processes, and presumably making money out of it otherwise they wouldn't be.

I didn't say anything about Qualcomm. But in any case, I don't think process technology matters very much for a baseband chip. It's pervasiveness of the underlying protocols (CDMA for instance) that makes Qualcomm's business successful.

What I don't understand is why Intel, who have everything they need to be clear #1 in the industry on every metric, is falling behind Qualcomm on the important one, ie profit. Something is wrong with their business - it worked vs non-competition in their x86 monopoly (big surprise) but it is not working in today's markets.

The thing wrong with Intel's business that that their main industry is rapidly declining, so they are entering a new industry that is growing fast. This just happens to be Qualcomm's home turf. The advantages Intel had in the PC industry do not all directly transfer, and things like manufacturing advantage have not have time to materialize by this point.

Meanwhile Intel's data center business is doing very well.

What evidence do you want? Most of everything I've written is available simply by looking at both companies last financial statement.

Any evidence or justification is better than none. When you make a claim that you want other people to believe, you should attempt to convince them by presenting compelling evidence. Otherwise you are just attempting to convince yourself, which adds nothing to the discussion and is pretty juvenile as far as I'm concerned.

 

[krumme]

What choice do they have? Ruiz's Asset Lite? Keep with current fab profile which is unable to fill the mobile market?

Well reduce capex as they already have. Slow down introduction of process nodes.
Do more of the other side of b2b business. They already do its just not so known here. They have huge software and security portfolio to build on building those embedded mega pillars. I dont know if they are there. The interview show how difficult it is. Its very weak talk. But thats the nature of it. Perhaps partner up with some huge software players to build the unique portfolio of competences.

Obviously its not in front of them. Those things never are. And surely i am in no position to tell what the solution is. But look they are striving to get there.

 

[Blandge]

In any case. We've gotten pretty far off topic so I'll cease to continue this discussion in this thread.

 

[krumme]

No need to get personal

 

[krumme]

Deleted

 

[SiliconWars]

This is a strawman. I never said it would.

You started off by banging on about how Intel hasn't been trying up till now. We've heard it all before. Even with their 22nm advantage Intel will still be behind Qualcomm.

Qualcomm has over 200 design wins - http://hexus.net/business/news/comp...-snapdragon-800-will-build-tablet-lead-intel/

the new Snapdragons will appear in 200 phones and tablets, leaving Intel "far behind" in design wins and market presence.

How many has Intel got? Just face it, Bay Trail has already lost, it was too late to mobile to matter, just like it's maker. Qualcomm already has all the design wins that matter this round. They will overtake Intel in tablets, guaranteed - isn't it supposed to be Intel who was going to take all of Qualcomm's mobile business?

You are making an assertion without any evidence again. Show me the evidence that Intel cannot afford bleeding edge fabs. How much does a bleeding edge 10nm or 7nm fab cost?

Did you actually read any of the previous couple of pages? Intel has cut capex once.twice by $1 billion each in two quarters. They can't afford to spend what they were supposed to spend on manufacturing this year.

http://semimd.com/blog/tag/14nm/

At 14nm/22nm, IC design costs are $150 million on average, process development costs are $1.3 billion and a 300mm fab is $7 billion, Manocha said. In comparison, a 450mm fab is expected to cost $10 billion to $15 billion, according to some estimates.

$10 billion to $15 billion for one fab. Intel made $11 billion profit last year and it will be less this year - a lot less. Fabs cost more and more money, Intel makes less and less, every year.

How much can Intel afford to spend on CAPEX in 2015 through 2017? For what reasons do you suspect that Intel will not make enough to spend that much on CAPEX?

Because they are making less and spending less every year. 2011 income was $12.9 billion. 2012 income was down to $11 billion. 2013 income will be ~$9.5 billion.

Can you detect the trends? The cost of manufacturing goes up, Intel's income goes down. Based on these two exceedingly obvious trends, why don't you tell us what Intel can afford to spend on capex through 2015-2017? Will it be more or less?

After all that you still haven't address the fact that you were making a red herring fallacy that Intel's manufacturing advantage hasn't yet helped them in mobile. You use a very infantile argument technique of ignoring all counter points and just making more assertions without evidence. I assure you that none of us take anything you say seriously when it's not backed up with sound reasoning.

The real problem here is you are selectively reading what you want to read, and not reading the very clear facts I am presenting.

 

[krumme]

Deleted

 

[krumme]

Well it does look like Intel already lost it on the mobile front from the progress of the s800 series. But man it is just tough that 5 months before your product hits street a damn fast and completely integrated solution from your competitor hits.

The little incentives and good will that might have been before from great huge partners like lenovo and acer must be gone.

Intel must be more shaken than stirred.

 

[CHADBOGA]

How many has Intel got? Just face it, Bay Trail has already lost, it was too late to mobile to matter, just like it's maker.

LOL Ridiculous wishful thinking.

 

[Blandge]

You started off by banging on about how Intel hasn't been trying up till now. We've heard it all before. Even with their 22nm advantage Intel will still be behind Qualcomm.

This is a complete misrepresentation of the statement I made. I said Intel did not have an mobile (atom) SoC on their latest manufacturing technology (22nm). This was to point out a failure on Intel's part. Don't try to paint me as a mindless Intel fanboy when I've done nothing of the sort. I presented a logical fallacy in your argument, and you erroneously equated that to me making a counterpoint to your argument.

The real problem here is you are selectively reading what you want to read, and not reading the very clear facts I am presenting.

The problem is that it took me 4-5 lengthy replies to get ANY facts out of you. Every time I responded you ignored everything I said and began making new assertions. What you've done finally done in this last post is what you should do EVERY SINGLE TIME you make an assertion. You post non-stop anti-Intel rubbish all over these forums rarely presenting evidence because you think it's some other person's responsibility to verify your claims. It's not.

 

[SiliconWars]

The problem is that it took me 4-5 lengthy replies to get ANY facts out of you. Every time I responded you ignored everything I said and began making new assertions. What you've done finally done in this last post is what you should do EVERY SINGLE TIME you make an assertion. You post non-stop anti-Intel rubbish all over these forums rarely presenting evidence because you think it's some other person's responsibility to verify your claims. It's not.

See, I'm quite often here discussing these same points over and over with others. Just because YOU finally found yourself in the CPU forum doesn't mean I'm going to go over the exact same points with evidence over and over again.

Use the search function in future when you are demanding evidence, because it's ALL there, discussed at length many times over the past few months, and that's why the search function exists.

 

[SiliconWars]

LOL Ridiculous wishful thinking.

Design wins for Intel?

 

[frozentundra123456]

Design wins for Intel?

I think he is referring to your obvious desire to see intel fail.

 

[Idontcare]

I had no idea that a company as successful as Intel, a company that successfully managed to manage itself such that it became the success it is now, was so utterly and absolutely "doomed" in a foregone conclusion fashion.

And it amuses me that the proposed solution to all of Intel's problems involve them eliminating anything that gives them critical differentiation in their products relative to their competition, that the desire by the armchair CEOs here is for Intel throw in the towel and just become a "me too" business provider alongside every other fabless ARM vendor.

Yes, that is Intel's problem, they have too much ability to control their future, they need to eliminate that and make themselves critically dependent on a third-party foundry provider, and in the process completely give up any ability to differentiate their product offerings on the basis of process node nuances versus the competition that would be using the same foundry node.

Its brilliant if the goal is to become a derivative product supplier, a "me too" supplier forced to compete on price and price alone with every other supplier hamstrung by the same process node characteristics in terms of power, density, timeline, cost, etc.

 

[CHADBOGA]

Design wins for Intel?

Will be announced soon enough.

 

[SiliconWars]

I had no idea that a company as successful as Intel, a company that successfully managed to manage itself such that it became the success it is now, was so utterly and absolutely "doomed" in a foregone conclusion fashion.

And it amuses me that the proposed solution to all of Intel's problems involve them eliminating anything that gives them critical differentiation in their products relative to their competition, that the desire by the armchair CEOs here is for Intel throw in the towel and just become a "me too" business provider alongside every other fabless ARM vendor.

Yes, that is Intel's problem, they have too much ability to control their future, they need to eliminate that and make themselves critically dependent on a third-party foundry provider, and in the process completely give up any ability to differentiate their product offerings on the basis of process node nuances versus the competition that would be using the same foundry node.

Its brilliant if the goal is to become a derivative product supplier, a "me too" supplier forced to compete on price and price alone with every other supplier hamstrung by the same process node characteristics in terms of power, density, timeline, cost, etc.

Do you have a solution to Intel's cratering income and rising fab costs or are you just wishfully believing along with the rest that Bay Trail is going to lead them to the promised land? If you know of anything else, or even have a theory I'd love to hear it, because I'm all out of reasonable ideas and nobody else appears to be offering anything except the aforementioned "Bay Trail is Intel's saviour" crap.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/1603012-did-intel-miss-the-mobile-boat is a pretty good read btw, for anybody who believes that Bay Trail is going to turn it all around.

 

[bullzz]

"Design wins for Intel?"

wait till IDF. $1000 laptops are just not interesting enough for consumers. so OEMs have to push for lower priced windows tablets. they dont have a choice

 

[bullzz]

ok, this is turning out to be intel hatred thread now
if you visit seekingalpha, you will see more pro intel articles that ones against. and you picked one among the minority
not only that, the guy who wrote the article clearly states he made a guesstimate that bay trail wil cost $50-57

could we get back on track

 

[jpiniero]

Do you have a solution to Intel's cratering income and rising fab costs or are you just wishfully believing along with the rest that Bay Trail is going to lead them to the promised land? If you know of anything else, or even have a theory I'd love to hear it, because I'm all out of reasonable ideas and nobody else appears to be offering anything except the aforementioned "Bay Trail is Intel's saviour" crap.

There's always cannibalizing AMD.

Intel has promised $150-200 Bay Trail Android tablets. We'll see if those materialize and how competitive they are with the ARM tablets. They still seem to be pushing Windows, which is a huge mistake, but they will learn.

 

[frozentundra123456]

There's always cannibalizing AMD.

Intel has promised $150-200 Bay Trail Android tablets. We'll see if those materialize and how competitive they are with the ARM tablets. They still seem to be pushing Windows, which is a huge mistake, but they will learn.

I know I am old school and in the minority, but running windows is a pre-requisite for any tablet I buy in the future after dealing with an Android POS for the last year. I see the ability to run windows as the only advantage Intel has, actually. Yes, they might eventually use their technical advantage to beat ARM at their own game, but their best advantage seems to me to be the ability to run windows.