The client group is actually profitable, their most profitable segment by far. I’m not sure how much of Dell’s revenue is laptops, but the company overall is significantly larger than HP or Lenovo.
The client group is actually profitable, their most profitable segment by far. I’m not sure how much of Dell’s revenue is laptops, but the company overall is significantly larger than HP or Lenovo.Lol, Dell is half Lenovo or HP in the laptop segment, so the "better pricing" is nothing else that chips sold at a loss and subsided by the profits Intel make with the formers, that s why Intel make no profit out of a huge 12.7bn quarterly sales.
Out of everything I hear about Intel, this is easily what scares me the most.Pat seems to think Intel is already back to process leadership:
The client group is actually profitable, their most profitable segment by far. I’m not sure how much of Dell’s revenue is laptops, but the company overall is significantly larger than HP or Lenovo.
I can’t prove a negative.It s not profitable, they just played with the numbers by stating that their foundries are selling the chips at a loss to their CPU divison, that s really a joke of an accounting report, they are telling you that their foundry business is a different firm that their CPU division all while arbitrarly deciding of the ressources allocations to make you believe that their chips are sold at a profit, are you that gullible to buy such a scam ..?.
I’m going by their earnings. Dell 88bn revenue for 2023, HP 53bn revenue & Lenovo is 53Bn revenue. Dell is nearly as big as Lenovo & HP combined.As for Dell they own about 10% of the PC market while Lenovo and HP are both at about 20%, that is, together they hold 40% of the market, so it s obvious that you are relying on urban legends for about everything if you thought that Dell was bigger than those two firms, and significantly, lol of a lol.
I'm sorry but I just don't see anything to defend here.This has to be the most negative thread I’ve ever seen here. I’ve read through the entire thing and basically the only info I’ve gotten is that a bunch of people really hate Intel.
Actual cliff notes of new info from listening to earnings call.
Overall not a great earnings report, not because Q1 numbers were necessarily bad but rather forward looking prospects for Q2 became more grim than expected.
- Intel is packaging limited at the moment for client and it is eating into Q2/Q3 revenue.
- SRF is hitting PRQ.
- Gaudi 3 has $500M in orders for H2.
- 18A PDK 1.0 is going to be available this quarter.
- Additional 18A customer from defense industry (meh).
- X86 Datacenter sales up by a tiny amount with Intel proclaiming they’ve stopped market share loss and gained a tiny amount back (dubious claim).
I can’t prove a negative.
I’m going by their earnings. Dell 88bn revenue for 2023, HP 53bn revenue & Lenovo is 53Bn revenue. Dell is nearly as big as Lenovo & HP combined.
I really don't know what the status is of Sierra Forrest. They made it sound like it is shipping, but then, in answer to first question (some transcripts have an error in them) Pat said that Sierra Forrest went to production this week)There was also some interesting comments on Sierra Forest and PRQ schedule. Gelsinger announced at the beginning of the call that SRF has PRQ'd but then later on Zinsner said that Intel will now be shipping after PRQ versus the previous practice of building inventory to have product ready to ship at PRQ. So, I'm not sure if SRF is actually shipping now or not, it seems not quite yet? Someone correct me if I'm misreading it.
I’m not really defending it. I have a bad habit of pushing back against group think and dog piling.I'm sorry but I just don't see anything to defend here.
Intel is a screeching pile of molten iron that used to be a war machine.
I've yet to see the shock of their situation actually penetrate the skulls over there. IBMisation is underway.
I have a bad habit of pushing back against group think and dog piling.
It s not profitable, they just played with the numbers by stating that their foundries are selling the chips at a loss to their CPU divison
But they aren't. What they are doing is showing how expensive it is to fund new nodes. The Foundry could cancel the future nodes and be profitable.
I getcha, but even if we're looking at this in a no money, only product way:I’m not really defending it. I have a bad habit of pushing back against group think and dog piling.
On another forum I appear to be a Qualcomm white knight (in light of their recent benchmark snafu), simply because there’s a large majority of people there that are really critical of anything that could be perceived as challenging x86.
I don't see a positive outside of EMR here. I don't have any expectations except a big sad stumble with SRF, because spamming e-cores feels like a commercial/license per CPU type of thing, not an actual good product.
But it wasn't revoked, it was only temporary to begin with and it wasn't extended thus was running out. Did Intel really plan to succeed at getting an extension in the current climate?
Wasn't it known before? I remember reading before that the Biden gov last year was thinking of revoking it prematurely but then opted to simply let it run out this year or something. AMD was said to want an export license as well for equal treatment. Didn't find the article where I read both of that, but the former is covered in this:All the articles I've seen are saying that it was revoked, but you are correct in that it was given as a temporary license to begin with. No one outside of Intel and the U.S. officials know when it was set to expire, so it's possible that it just expired naturally and the U.S. is refusing to renew it. Reportedly, when QC gave their recent guidance for Q2, they did so assuming zero revenue from Huawei, so at least QC was anticipating that the license would not continue beyond Q1 of this year.
Wasn't it known before? I remember reading before that the Biden gov last year was thinking of revoking it prematurely but then opted to simply let it run out this year or something. AMD was said to want an export license as well for equal treatment. Didn't find the article where I read both of that, but the former is covered in this:
US lawmakers rage over Intel Meteor Lake-powered Huawei PC
Special export license granted to Intel by President Trump unlikely to be renewedwww.theregister.com
AMD applied for a license to sell similar chips in early 2021 after President Joe Biden took office but never received a response to its application, a source said.
Reuters could not determine why Intel was granted its license and AMD was not. But the impact on CPU chip sales to Huawei was immediate, with the share of sales of Huawei laptops containing AMD chips plunging from 47.1% in 2020 to 9.3% in the first half of 2023, an internal AMD presentation with data sourced to NPD and GfK showed. Intel's share of sales of Huawei laptops containing its chips soared during the period from 52.9% to 90.7%, according to the presentation. That left the two companies with upwards of a $512 million dollar "estimated revenue discrepancy" by early 2023, according to the presentation.