Intel Reports Second Quarter 2024 Financial Results

Post by paulmd » Fri, Aug 02, 2024, 6:31 PM UTC

ac29 wrote: post #106

paulmd wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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 That really surprising since my 8th gen intel laptop (2 generations older than ice lake) idled at under 5W in Linux. So does my newer 12th gen intel laptop.

Post by tz18 » Fri, Aug 02, 2024, 7:13 PM UTC

crowcroft wrote: post #102

softfalcon wrote: post #3

This sounds worryingly like “sales are down, cut costs to maintain profitability to spike our stock numbers” and not enough focus on what I believe is actually wrong, which is that they can’t seem to reliably make competitive processors in a stiff market. Anyone else feel like this is bean counters at Intel playing the wrong game? I personally feel like leadership at Intel lost the plot almost a decade ago.

I'm not saying you're wrong, although even after reducing headcount by 15k they still have about as many employees as TSMC, NVIDIA and AMD combined.

Post by LarsDu88 » Fri, Aug 02, 2024, 8:00 PM UTC

epolanski wrote: post #89

LarsDu88 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 by bgnn » Sat, Aug 03, 2024, 12:29 AM UTC

NoPicklez wrote: post #52

softfalcon wrote: post #3

This sounds worryingly like “sales are down, cut costs to maintain profitability to spike our stock numbers” and not enough focus on what I believe is actually wrong, which is that they can’t seem to reliably make competitive processors in a stiff market. Anyone else feel like this is bean counters at Intel playing the wrong game? I personally feel like leadership at Intel lost the plot almost a decade ago.

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…

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Aug 03, 2024, 12:42 AM UTC

softfalcon wrote: post #12

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?

In my opinion, one the most reliable signs is when companies stop repeatedly investing into their product innovation. The moment they start behaving like an established behemoth (monopoly/oligopoly) and you see repeated stock buybacks and frequent layoffs, the end is coming. This applies to most large, inefficient corporations that get too comfy with success and forget how to pivot fast, take risks, and fiercely figh…