Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel Reports Second Quarter 2024 Financial Results

intc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 137 posts

Re: Intel Reports Second Quarter 2024 Financial Results

#81

Post by johnnyanmac »

ProllyInfamous wrote: post #58
honkycat wrote: post #53

$152 billion in stock buybacks. We don't have an economy anymore, we are just handing money to the ultra-wealthy. US. Total economic collapse. Hard landing. This is the beginning of the end. We really had the chance to make something beautiful with this country, but the 1% bought and sold it into the ground. Half our politicians aren't even trying to keep it running anymore.

Heck, our politicians are at the point where they're taking their bribes in pure gold (see NJ's recent senatorial shame). A good friend of mine is the son of a former hedgefund manager... who told me in 2018 "owning real gold is foolish;" in 2024, he's recently told me about his expanding gold collection. I have made even more returns on silver/BTC, but anything "real" is probably durable enough to last for (hopefull…

to make sure I understand this: is this the rich getting ready for the collapse of the USD?

Re: Intel Reports Second Quarter 2024 Financial Results

#82

Post by NoPicklez »

johnnyanmac wrote: post #75
NoPicklez wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have very little understanding of the bloat that Intel might be carrying, or the projects they have underway that were not making progress or perhaps not the innovation expected. Financial reports are going to be exactly that, focused on the numbers and appearing to investors to be maximising their value. You want to carry a perception that you are focusing on the positives and the innovations being carries forwar…

>You want to carry a perception that you are focusing on the positives and the innovations being carries forward, as opposed to mulling over what "might be wrong". so, empty platitudes that turn into none or negative change. Gotta love the modern day business.

Stipulating in your financial report where your R&D is focusing and what those outcomes are hopefully going to be are not empty platitudes that turn into none or negative change.

I doubt that Nvidia putting in their financial reports last year they were focusing their R&D on AI hardware turned into none or negative change

Re: Intel Reports Second Quarter 2024 Financial Results

#83

Post by johnnyanmac »

NoPicklez wrote: post #82
johnnyanmac wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You want to carry a perception that you are focusing on the positives and the innovations being carries forward, as opposed to mulling over what "might be wrong". so, empty platitudes that turn into none or negative change. Gotta love the modern day business.

Stipulating in your financial report where your R&D is focusing and what those outcomes are hopefully going to be are not empty platitudes that turn into none or negative change. I doubt that Nvidia putting in their financial reports last year they were focusing their R&D on AI hardware turned into none or negative change

Lots of hope in your comment. Not much hope in my mind. It's just been too shitty a year for me to trust these reports. The worst parts are that the shareholders barely care if they lie. They want to be lied to. They aren't investing because of product confidence after all.

Pessimism aside: they did this exact song and dance some 7 years ago. So I'm not entirely operating off bad vibes but on history and current trends. Like I said, they already basicslly lost the AI race. If they want to compete for scraps, power to them. I just hope employees jump ship before the next layoff wave.

Re: Intel Reports Second Quarter 2024 Financial Results

#84

Post by steve1977 »

epolanski wrote: post #41
layer8 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s still far from clear that ARM for Windows will be going anywhere. And Intel is trying to increase ISA diversification with their foundry business.

I've seen reviews of the latest 13 inch Dell XPS and it's both more powerful and less energy hungry than the M3 in a MacBook air. It uses the Snapdragon Elite X ARM cpu. It also blows the latest mobile i7 ultra 155H on the same XPS 13 in performance while lasting almost 20 hours (compared to Intel's 6). The comparisons are made on software that runs on both (Geekbench, handbrake) but it's clear that there is a huge m…

I guess the Lunar Lake mobile CPUs will be more interesting than the Meteor Lake ones (e.g. 155H). But we'll see if they can keep the promises in regards to power consumption.

Re: Intel Reports Second Quarter 2024 Financial Results

#85

Post by shlant »

honkycat wrote: post #53

$152 billion in stock buybacks. We don't have an economy anymore, we are just handing money to the ultra-wealthy. US. Total economic collapse. Hard landing. This is the beginning of the end. We really had the chance to make something beautiful with this country, but the 1% bought and sold it into the ground. Half our politicians aren't even trying to keep it running anymore.

I hate that I can't tell if this is satire

Re: Intel Reports Second Quarter 2024 Financial Results

#86

Post by paulmd »

epolanski wrote: post #46
bluedino wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

10 years from now, when the downfall of Intel is being taught at business schools, what are going to be the big takeways and now-obvious mistakes?

Big takeaways: in consumer tech you live and die by the performance of your latest product. That applies to both CPUs and foundry. Now-obvious mistakes: I'm not including the obvious mobile argument as it belongs to the previous point, but they slept too long on GPUs. Even though the biggest supercomputers in the planet started doing computations on GPUs a decade ago they missed the ultimate parallelization-hardware…

they have been cooking on it for decades too - larrabee was 2009 after all. Xeon phi survived that collapse and continued for another decade.

Honestly the problem is the same then as it was today - having good hardware isn’t enough. You need software penetration and organic usage/ecosystem. And the world can support maybe 2-3 of those right now - nvidia, apple, maybe one other. Everyone else gets the bullshit “we are the ones you need a cross-platform “adapter” ecosystems with effectively no real corporate moat etc.

(amd, intel, the door to this room is locked… one of you will get an ecosystem and the other goes home in a box… the game begins now.)

Like even just in gaming, AMD’s continued refusal to do the devrel has hurt them, it’s cost them revenue. It’s not even just “the drivers” or the constant deficit in features and functionality, but getting the people out into the studios to assist in development and tuning is how it has to be, nobody is going to tune for your hardware if you don’t do it yourself.

Re: Intel Reports Second Quarter 2024 Financial Results

#87

Post by Decabytes »

paulmd wrote: post #60
epolanski wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen reviews of the latest 13 inch Dell XPS and it's both more powerful and less energy hungry than the M3 in a MacBook air. It uses the Snapdragon Elite X ARM cpu. It also blows the latest mobile i7 ultra 155H on the same XPS 13 in performance while lasting almost 20 hours (compared to Intel's 6). The comparisons are made on software that runs on both (Geekbench, handbrake) but it's clear that there is a huge m…

MT is one thing but in ST it’s still simply not even close. Even the Qualcomm SDXE pulls fully 15w less than AMD, and apple pulls 10w less than Qualcomm. 60w peak power consumption for a literal single thread. 35w average. https://old.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/1efcst2/ai_370_vs... https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Zen-5-Strix-Point-CPU-anal... We simply aren’t going to see x86 get to the subjective “apple experi…

> We simply aren’t going to see x86 get to the subjective “apple experience” of a laptop that runs equally well on or off battery, with day-long life during interactive low-intensity usage

I disagree. Apple themselves showed what you could do with an x86 processor in terms of battery life long before they went to ARM, and most manufacturers still aren’t even close. People have been talking about the amazing life in their products for ages before arm.

Meanwhile I can’t get my windows laptop to not burn itself up in my bag with an update, which also coincidentally uses a ton of battery power as the fans cool itself on full tilt

Re: Intel Reports Second Quarter 2024 Financial Results

#88

Post by paulmd »

Decabytes wrote: post #87
paulmd wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

MT is one thing but in ST it’s still simply not even close. Even the Qualcomm SDXE pulls fully 15w less than AMD, and apple pulls 10w less than Qualcomm. 60w peak power consumption for a literal single thread. 35w average. https://old.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/1efcst2/ai_370_vs... https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Zen-5-Strix-Point-CPU-anal... We simply aren’t going to see x86 get to the subjective “apple experi…

> We simply aren’t going to see x86 get to the subjective “apple experience” of a laptop that runs equally well on or off battery, with day-long life during interactive low-intensity usage I disagree. Apple themselves showed what you could do with an x86 processor in terms of battery life long before they went to ARM, and most manufacturers still aren’t even close. People have been talking about the amazing life in t…

As an owner of an ice lake macbook I can tell you definitively that it’s still utter shit compared to the apple silicon ones. Best case scenario it idles at 14w system power, while my 2020 m1 mba idled at Usually if it’s not totally idle it idles at 22w. And again, this is the problem, light load produces quite a lot of power consumption on x86 compared to arm.

I bought it for the meme, it was a laugh and I wanted a late-gen x86 model with no dGPU to give x86 the best shot (mostly bought it for windows use actually). But the “it’s just macOS/optimization magic!!!” isn’t true either. x86 MacBooks still fucking suck, even the ones without the absolutely shit-tastic AMD dGPUs onboard. Those idle at closer to 50w if you have a display plugged in, btw. There’s no way to turn them off because the display outputs are hardwired to the gpu, if you are using an external display the dGPU is forced on. I tried, my old work MacBook was an i9 and it fucking sucked during the summer.

The idea that macOS is just uniquely lightweight and can somehow wring better perf/w out of computational tasks than Linux or windows just isn’t supportable either. Certainly if it were true it would also show up in MT and not just 1T loads. Reality is perf/w is mostly a constraint of the processor and not the OS… just like the OS can’t magically make applications use less ram and “turn 8gb into 16gb” either. It takes X cycles for Y processor to execute Cinebench and the OS does not matter that much in the big picture.

It maybe does help with sleep states and idle power, things like grand central scheduling. But 1T load is a load state, not idle.

Re: Intel Reports Second Quarter 2024 Financial Results

#89

Post by epolanski »

LarsDu88 wrote: post #68
epolanski wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen reviews of the latest 13 inch Dell XPS and it's both more powerful and less energy hungry than the M3 in a MacBook air. It uses the Snapdragon Elite X ARM cpu. It also blows the latest mobile i7 ultra 155H on the same XPS 13 in performance while lasting almost 20 hours (compared to Intel's 6). The comparisons are made on software that runs on both (Geekbench, handbrake) but it's clear that there is a huge m…

There's way more to ARM adoption than simply power consumption. When apple went to the M1, they got their entire software ecosystem to go along with the migration. That's the fundamental strength of Apple. They can do things like kill standards at will. Microsoft can't necessarily do the same thing for the vast library and catalog of x86 software.

Sure, but at the end of the day, the bulk of enterprise users need little more than Office + Teams + a browser.
Post reply on HN