61–70 of 102 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is 3rd hand, but I heard that the 14nm was rushed with a crazy schedule, and as a result the greybeards who actually knew everything all left. Intel is having to rebuild all that institutional knowledge from scratch again.
Any idea where most of them went?
Is there any reputable reporting, or even just wild gossip, about why Intel is behind? The cynical answer is “they were focused on profit margins and didn’t invest in process”, but is it possible they bet hard on some technology that didn’t pan out? Ultraviolet lithography? Some exotic indium gallium arsenide magic that didn’t work in mass production?
I'm not sure if we have any good clues as to what's going wrong with Intel's 7nm efforts, but it seems reasonable to guess that they weren't putting as much effort as their competitors into getting ready for EUV.
And given how long Intel's had these issues at this point, it seems pretty clear that they have some broader management issues.
20% YoY Revenue increase, 43% YoY Growth in Datacenter Segment. 76% Growth in Non-Volatile Memory solution, another 7% YoY growth in Client Side computing. This is truly amazing results. I get stabbed over at Anandtech every time I made an argument for Intel as an AMD investor. The Internet is full of Intel bashing comments but reality is Intel has been making record revenue quarter after quarter. For the not so good…
This year is already proving to be a watershed one for Intel, largely due to AMD's continued resurgence and taking the performance crown in mobile (Renoir) and expected in desktop (Zen3). Apple announced their move away from Intel silicon and even AWS making strides in their own ARM server chips (Graviton).
By itself and without further delays, 7nm will already be a hail mary of sorts due to the TSMC's pace and roadmap. But remember that 10nm yields have not been good so will it be able to handle producing server and desktop chips.
If there's another delay (e.g. 7nm in 2023), would Intel need to sell of their fabs?
20% YoY Revenue increase, 43% YoY Growth in Datacenter Segment. 76% Growth in Non-Volatile Memory solution, another 7% YoY growth in Client Side computing. This is truly amazing results. I get stabbed over at Anandtech every time I made an argument for Intel as an AMD investor. The Internet is full of Intel bashing comments but reality is Intel has been making record revenue quarter after quarter. For the not so good…
Unclear if Intel is following that path.
Intel is a company that's living on it's distribution legacy. Ask yourself - why do regular people still buy Intel PCs? Because they are easy to buy. A great non Intel hardware and software laptop+aio by AMD or someone else would be a mortal wound on $INTC.
This is a 2000s view of Intel that is not accurate in 2020. Look at the numbers. - 7% growth for consumer (the “Intel PCs” you mention) - 43% growth for data centers - 70%+ growth in nonvolatile storage (SSDs)... much of which goes into high end servers in data centers Will there be more data centers And cloud offerings in 3 years, or less? Many More! Will there be more or less PC sales in 3 years. For Intel it’s les…
Apple's timing here is spot on. If Intel was firing on all cylinders, it would be a lot harder for them to pull off a processor change.
Arguably 2016 would have been the ideal time to switch because that's when the delays started. But the second best time is now, as they say.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are some now by AMD, of course, with the new 4900HS chips. Linus was fawning all over the Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 with the 4900HS. Then, we'll see Apple's ARM entries. I don't know that these are mortal wounds but they are certainly the thin edge. 4900HS is 25% faster than the i9-9880HK (Intel's fastest contender) and uses much less power.
There is a scandal around the Asus ROG Zephyrus G14. AMD version of it has sealed vents with plastic covers. https://linustechtips.com/main/topic/1187443-asus-caught-bei...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Ask yourself - why do regular people still buy Intel PCs? Regular people don’t buy PCs at all and haven’t for a couple of decades.
Regular people didn't but PCs in 2000 that's just not true. I think most consumers buy laptops nowadays, but that shift started happening around 2005ish, not 2000.
Sorry I've got no idea what this means.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Giving up manufacturing would reduce Intel to what AMD now is, except with worse designs.
They're clearly not reaping any reward from their process, TSMC has them beat hands down and they continue to show lack of forward progress towards smaller nodes. They have a much bigger IP portfolio than AMD, and frankly, it appears their foundries are a cost center/boat anchor rather than a profit driver for next-gen silicon. They don't have to give up their existing 14nm capacity, but next-generation processors co…
20% YoY Revenue increase, 43% YoY Growth in Datacenter Segment. 76% Growth in Non-Volatile Memory solution, another 7% YoY growth in Client Side computing. This is truly amazing results. I get stabbed over at Anandtech every time I made an argument for Intel as an AMD investor. The Internet is full of Intel bashing comments but reality is Intel has been making record revenue quarter after quarter. For the not so good…
INTC investors are quite unhappy tonight. Down 11.25% at 54.20. Anyone expecting the Robbin Hooders to understand comparative lithography, well... there's a bridge still available in NY. Maybe INTC will still make a lot of money but there's a "nanometer gap", damnit!