Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intel's Q4 report out

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
January 15, 2009 8:02:43 PM

Since there s no specific business area to post this in:

From Intel refrains from Q1 outlook on "uncertainty"

Quote:
Profit for the fourth quarter ended December 27 fell to $234 million, or 4 cents a share, from $2.27 billion, or 38 cents a share, last year, Intel said. Analysts were expecting a per-share profit of 4 cents, according to Reuters Estimates.

Revenue fell to $8.2 billion from $10.7 billion last year.



So it looks like some of the AMD fans predictions of "billions" in losses were considerably off :) 

AMD's quarterly report is due out one week from today, so stay tuned...

More about : intel report

January 15, 2009 8:07:57 PM

It is 2.5 biilion in losses compared to same qtr previous year. This isntr good news unless AMD is actually taking up the difference. All it means is the cpu industry is getting hammered. Look for bad numbers from AMD too
a b à CPUs
January 15, 2009 9:22:01 PM

^ No, according to the article it is $2B in lowered profits from a year ago. Huge difference from "losses" which means you actually lose money :) 

I know, it's a hard concept for AMD fans to grasp, this strange idea of a "profit". But trust me, it's a good thing :) .

And I think we all know AMD didn't take up the difference - that would be an astronomical increase in marketshare, plus AMD would have been shouting it from the rooftops and Thunderpants would have posted a dozen drive-by threads by now.

My guess, and it's only a guess, is that AMD will post at least $500M in losses, maybe even surpass their previous low-water mark of $600M in losses.
Related resources
January 15, 2009 9:29:53 PM

I understand the differences between revenues and profits, but Intel cant go at this pace either, if those revenues continue. And, lets hope that figure isnt that bad for AMD also, as itll put even more of a crunch on the competition, which we need
a b à CPUs
January 15, 2009 10:15:18 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
I understand the differences between revenues and profits, but Intel cant go at this pace either, if those revenues continue. And, lets hope that figure isnt that bad for AMD also, as itll put even more of a crunch on the competition, which we need


Why couldn't Intel keep making a small profit indefinitely? By definition, they are paying all the bills with a small sum left over. No, they couldn't grow significantly without using another source of revenue, such as the billiions they already have squirreled away from previously more profitable quarters, and R&D would suffer, but they're still making money instead of losing it. I'm sure the shareholders all recognize what a lousy economic climate we're enduring and will not bail out to the extent that AMD shareholders have (which is basically why the price has fallen and remained in the $2 range).

I just don't see much hope for AMD in the near future - they are going to be on the Abu Dhubai IV line indefinitely I would guess. Yes, ATI was a bright spot for them last quarter, but $50M in profit from that one segment doesn't even pay the debt on the purchase. I'd guess a big loss and some new financial dealings with the UAE to be announced, or acquistion talks emerging, or something along those lines.
January 15, 2009 10:38:50 PM

Intel took a one-time loss due to their ownership of lots of Clearwire stock-- $1 Billion. If you neglect this, the profits were at a much healthier $1.2 billion. Still not as great as prior quarters, of course, and it's conceivable that even this would vanish given a long and deep enough recession, but it's less likely.
January 15, 2009 10:40:18 PM

Does this include all of Intels losses tho? Their investments in other companies, and those subsquent companies have faltered, and thus the losses. This also may make for a total market change down the road, one which Intel isnt immediately ready for, such as low low pricing. R&D will suffer. IBM reported the lead in patents last year, and thats just 1 competitor Intel has, as they try to expand in other areas. Theyre entrenched in many areas, some where they may have to cut n run if this would continue, and make other directions/choices unobtainable at this time. In other words, itll curtail their growth, and thats not how theyre setup. SSDs are currently of little value in this economy, as itll take high volume to lower pricing, and high prices and high volume isnt happening in the HW market.
If this were about AMD, and we had their figures, itd be easier to see whats going on, but Intel is trying to push ahead, and theres rumblings out there about delays etc, meaning skt775's life may have just been extended. What this means is, AMD has easier competition for a longer period, and it may stunt advancement. At this point its all speculation, and no one knows how itll effect both companies down the road, but we all know, it isnt good
January 15, 2009 11:02:39 PM

desktop sales are anticipated to take a hard hit this year. that's bad for everyone. actually all sectors will take a hit but the desktop market is supposed to be a fairly dramatic one. i would go grab the link but i believe it was on slashdot so it wouldnt be hard to find. it was also on yahoo i believe.
January 15, 2009 11:14:57 PM

Yea, DT is losing to lappys, and net and notebooks all carve into the bigger picture. Someday, there wont even be DTs, maybe just netbooks with hookups to monitors and TVs. Things are changing, thats for sure. Im just worried for both companies in regards to having cutting edge parts. Being huge like Intel is going to present itself with its own monolithic problems, and we already know how AMD is struggling
January 15, 2009 11:21:38 PM

indeed. the articel underscored the damage netbooks are doing to margins on higher end products. problem is, netbook is enough for most people.
January 15, 2009 11:51:24 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
It is 2.5 biilion in losses compared to same qtr previous year. This isntr good news unless AMD is actually taking up the difference. All it means is the cpu industry is getting hammered. Look for bad numbers from AMD too




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwcKyrHHQac

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/Category/catego...

Ci7 965EE/3.2GHz LGA1366 6.4 GT/s $1079.99

X4 940 / 3.00GHz Socket AM2+ 1800MHz (3600 MT/s) $299.99

$780 difference at TigerDirect

Stay tuned!
January 16, 2009 3:49:02 AM

roofus said:
indeed. the articel underscored the damage netbooks are doing to margins on higher end products. problem is, netbook is enough for most people.


Really?

1. For the time being, netbooks *aren't* cannibalizing notebook sales. At least according to Paul O.
2. Did you know that the Atom processor actually delivers *greater* margins for intel than many of the more powerful cpus?
3. When we do get to the time where netbooks start cannibalizing sales, which company has the largest beachhead in the market?

January 16, 2009 5:39:52 AM

So, Lynnefields a possibility of being delayed, as is Havnedale. Being as large as Intel is, and sales falling off the map, their invertory must be massive as well, and they arent selling. Like Ive been saying, being smaller also has its advantages, while Intel has to keep alllll those fabs going. Anyways, this sucks
a c 123 à CPUs
January 16, 2009 6:08:47 AM

enigma067 said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwcKyrHHQac

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/Category/catego...

Ci7 965EE/3.2GHz LGA1366 6.4 GT/s $1079.99

X4 940 / 3.00GHz Socket AM2+ 1800MHz (3600 MT/s) $299.99

$780 difference at TigerDirect

Stay tuned!


Core i7 920 $294.99

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Q6600 $189.99

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Q9550 $ 309.99

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

In the end all those I listed are better compareable CPUs. But you try using the ultra high end one like AMD does when ppl here know better.

One word: FAIL

As for the profits thing, Jay don't try to make it worse than it is. Intel is making money. They are not losing money. They are not making as much as before but still making a profit is better than losing. I fear AMDs report as I am sure if Intel is hurting they are hurting as well.
January 16, 2009 6:19:06 AM

Have you read the digi times article? It confirms what Ive been saying all along, and been taking crap about too. Intels current inventories are waaaay too high, and theyre delaying product. Now, since they arent ramping up to the new cpus as quickly, and they certainly arent making tons of old ones, what are they going to do with all those fabs? AMD will have their own problems, and maybe more severe, but this threads about Intel, and theres some serious problems starting here
January 16, 2009 6:33:08 AM

JD, if you believe Digitimes has an in to what Intel is doing with their fabs and what their inventory levels are I think you are being naive. I do believe they have higher inventory but that is a guess on my part. My friend at Intel says it it not looking good and he did say that Intel gained market share. That means AMD is doing even worse.

AMD is just not getting any breaks. They finally make a profit in Q3. Q4 will be back to bleeding in my opinion and Q1 2009 will be even worse because of the current financial climate and the standard historical lowest sales in the year.
January 16, 2009 6:33:09 AM

This is what Im refering to http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20090115PD218.html
People need to stop thinking Intel is so proserous and wont be greatly effected by whats going on. All the crap AMD has gotten for its delays , and it caused major harm to AMD, so, Intel may be delaying as well. Like I said, this isnt good. I dont see this as a victory, nor should anyone when AMD struggles either
January 16, 2009 6:35:14 AM

How does that line up with Paul O. saying that Intel is going to drive to the next processor node as fast as the possibly can?
January 16, 2009 6:35:25 AM

Thereve been a few fanboy comments here, mine arent. Take it for what it is.
January 16, 2009 6:38:13 AM

Whats that have to do with roadmaps? Possibly? Including that word means just doing and going along as normal too. Its a wide open statement.
a b à CPUs
January 16, 2009 2:09:02 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Theyve posted twice about Intels delays, as well as AMD problems with all DDR3 products
Everythings slowing down, and having all the fabs to keep busy is going to be hard to do
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20090114PD221.html
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20090113PD203.html


The deal is, Intel already has a DDR3 chipset out and given AMD's problems with the switch, it looks like Intel will have that market all to themselves for a while, sorta like with the netbook market last year.

You know, Intel only has 3 45nm fabs and they could just reduce their output to keep inventory down and people employed. Or maybe sell one to Abu Dhubai :) . I read somewhere that Intel does not plan to lay off employees despite the economic downturn. And as for the inventory, some sites are reporting that Intel plans to cut prices on the Q9950 to below AMD's 940, and similarly the Q9300/Q9400 below the 920. Since yields are high due to MCM, Intel can easily undercut AMD's top of the line with their midrange.

Finally, you should realize that IBM prides itself on its patent portfolio, and they try to come in as #1 every year since the 1970's in patents awarded. I think Hitachi has beat them out a few times but it usually is IBM at #1.
a b à CPUs
January 16, 2009 2:13:50 PM

pausert20 said:
JD, if you believe Digitimes has an in to what Intel is doing with their fabs and what their inventory levels are I think you are being naive. I do believe they have higher inventory but that is a guess on my part. My friend at Intel says it it not looking good and he did say that Intel gained market share. That means AMD is doing even worse.

AMD is just not getting any breaks. They finally make a profit in Q3. Q4 will be back to bleeding in my opinion and Q1 2009 will be even worse because of the current financial climate and the standard historical lowest sales in the year.


Actually Q3 was another loss for AMD, not a profitable quarter. Their ATI division finally made a profit, some $50M, but it didn't even pay the interest on the $5.4B acquisition loans.

AMD has had 8 consecutive quarterly losses, and will report another one in 6 days from now. I'd guess another writedown of the ATI value, loss of marketshare, etc will be the lowlights of the report.
a b à CPUs
January 16, 2009 3:01:58 PM

And yet more bad news for AMD: AMD to cut nine per cent of workforce

Quote:
The short story is that nine per cent of AMD employees will be laid off, and those who remain in the US and Canada will see their pay reduced. Layoffs and pay cuts in other countries are a little trickier because of employment laws, but expect similar actions where possible.

Pay cuts range from about 20 per cent at the top, going down in steps the lower you get to the bottom. The lowest tier workers will have their pay reduced by about five per cent. There is really no good news from this, other than the prospect of keeping the company viable for some time to come.




I suspect a lot of AMD/ATI engineers will be looking for jobs elsewhere shortly.
a b à CPUs
January 16, 2009 5:25:43 PM

Quote:
Everyone is gonna lose, including nvidia and ati.

I think amd's numbers may be surprising though next quarter. Just the fact that the phenom 2 drops into existing AM2/AM2+/DDR2 mobo's is huge, it means one can make a huge upgrade without having to buy a new mobo and new ram. That can pursuade a lot of buyers.
Most buyers dont need i7 type power anyways, especially with newer powerful video cards that are so cheap and gobs of DDR2 available for pennies.


I don't think the upgrade market for desktop is that big, especially for AMD (which lately only has something like 15% if I remember correctly). AMD would do much better if they could get the server upgrades, seeing as how they get over $2K apiece for the Shanghai's.

If Intel does drop the price hammer with the low to mid Penryns, expect AMD's ASPs to drop significantly, and thus even bigger losses next quarter.

Several financial analysts are predicting AMD to bankrupt this year.
January 16, 2009 9:03:34 PM

Quote:
Everyone is gonna lose, including nvidia and ati.

I think amd's numbers may be surprising though next quarter. Just the fact that the phenom 2 drops into existing AM2/AM2+/DDR2 mobo's is huge, it means one can make a huge upgrade without having to buy a new mobo and new ram. That can pursuade a lot of buyers.
Most buyers dont need i7 type power anyways, especially with newer powerful video cards that are so cheap and gobs of DDR2 available for pennies.

How many people do you think bought phenom and are upgrading to deneb, A few thousand? Hundred thousand? The problem is that phenom did not sell to well, And where it did sell i.e pre built systems the people probably wont be upgrading. No doubt there are a few that will but really, How many?
January 16, 2009 9:16:49 PM

I know you guys like good news so here is some more.



"Although both Intel and AMD were originally expected to fully transition to DDR3 across their product lines in 2009, with the two players now postponing their DDR3-only chipset schedules, the DDR3 generation is not expected to arrive until 2010, according to sources at motherboard makers.

Since DDR3 memory prices have not fallen as much as Intel expected, while demand for its Core i7 CPU and X58 chipsets also has not yet met expectations, Intel has decided to postpone its DDR3-only 5-series chipsets until September this year.

Meanwhile, AMD's is still struggling with technical difficulties to achieve stability and compatibly with the DDR3 controller built into its AM3-based CPUs, and so the company is also unlikely to transition to DDR3 until it is able to come out with a workable BIOS, added the sources."

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20090114PD221.html


"Intel has recently decided to postpone its next-generation mainstream CPU Lynnfield along with the P55 chipset to the end of August or the beginning of September this year, and may postpone them to an even later time depending on the market situation, according to sources at motherboard makers.

Both Lynnfield and P55 were originally scheduled to launch by the end of July. The economic decline which has caused motherboard makers to suffer overstocked chipset inventory is the major reason for the pull back, according to the sources.

After the P55 launches, Intel plans to phase out non-IGP P45 and P43 chipsets and will transition its 4-series IGP chipsets to the entry-level.

In additional news, Intel will provide engineering samples of its next-generation entry-level CPU Havendale to motherboard makers in February this year, while design validation test (DVT) will be complete in July to August with mass production in September to October. However, Intel has postponed shipping to January next year to give its current entry-level CPU inventory more time to clear."

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20090115PD218.html

Welcome to the jungle....... :D 
January 17, 2009 2:49:49 AM

I don't agree with what Digitimes is saying about Intel but we won't know until that time comes too us.
a b à CPUs
January 17, 2009 4:18:34 PM

According to Reuters: AMD to take $622 million charge, cut 1,100 jobs


Quote:
Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD.N) will eliminate 1,100 jobs, cut salaries and take a new $622 million charge for its acquisition of graphics chip maker ATI, bringing total writeoffs for the deal to $3.17 billion.

The company, which has been criticized for overpaying for its $5.4 billion 2006 purchase of ATI Technologies Inc, warned in December it would have to take an additional charge after taking a $800 million impairment charge in its June quarter and more than $1.5 billion in writeoffs taken in 2007.



Ed at Overclockers estimates AMD's Q4 report to show at least $500M loss, not including the above charge:

Quote:
Since 2003, AMD has reported Net Income of -$274.5, $91.0, $165.0, -$166.0 and -$3,379.0 for 2007. With an estimated loss of $2.5 billion for 2008, cumulative losses amount to a staggering $6 billion.



We'll know in 5 days. I'd expect more financial experts will be jumping on the AMD bankruptcy prediction bandwagon next Friday..
a b à CPUs
January 17, 2009 4:30:38 PM

caamsa said:
I know you guys like good news so here is some more.



"Although both Intel and AMD were originally expected to fully transition to DDR3 across their product lines in 2009, with the two players now postponing their DDR3-only chipset schedules, the DDR3 generation is not expected to arrive until 2010, according to sources at motherboard makers.

Since DDR3 memory prices have not fallen as much as Intel expected, while demand for its Core i7 CPU and X58 chipsets also has not yet met expectations, Intel has decided to postpone its DDR3-only 5-series chipsets until September this year.

Meanwhile, AMD's is still struggling with technical difficulties to achieve stability and compatibly with the DDR3 controller built into its AM3-based CPUs, and so the company is also unlikely to transition to DDR3 until it is able to come out with a workable BIOS, added the sources."

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20090114PD221.html


"Intel has recently decided to postpone its next-generation mainstream CPU Lynnfield along with the P55 chipset to the end of August or the beginning of September this year, and may postpone them to an even later time depending on the market situation, according to sources at motherboard makers.

Both Lynnfield and P55 were originally scheduled to launch by the end of July. The economic decline which has caused motherboard makers to suffer overstocked chipset inventory is the major reason for the pull back, according to the sources.

After the P55 launches, Intel plans to phase out non-IGP P45 and P43 chipsets and will transition its 4-series IGP chipsets to the entry-level.

In additional news, Intel will provide engineering samples of its next-generation entry-level CPU Havendale to motherboard makers in February this year, while design validation test (DVT) will be complete in July to August with mass production in September to October. However, Intel has postponed shipping to January next year to give its current entry-level CPU inventory more time to clear."

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20090115PD218.html

Welcome to the jungle....... :D 


Actually JDJ posted the same link a few posts above yours. Anyway, I wouldn't be surprised to see Intel delaying some products in light of the bad economy. However all reports I've seen state Intel is planning to go full-speed with 32nm and Westmere, which is where my interest lies. Most of the heavy lifting for 32nm has already been done, with the D1D fab starting to tweak the process for volume supposedly.
January 17, 2009 6:33:57 PM

fazers_on_stun said:
According to Reuters: AMD to take $622 million charge, cut 1,100 jobs


Quote:
Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD.N) will eliminate 1,100 jobs, cut salaries and take a new $622 million charge for its acquisition of graphics chip maker ATI, bringing total writeoffs for the deal to $3.17 billion.

The company, which has been criticized for overpaying for its $5.4 billion 2006 purchase of ATI Technologies Inc, warned in December it would have to take an additional charge after taking a $800 million impairment charge in its June quarter and more than $1.5 billion in writeoffs taken in 2007.



Ed at Overclockers estimates AMD's Q4 report to show at least $500M loss, not including the above charge:

Quote:
Since 2003, AMD has reported Net Income of -$274.5, $91.0, $165.0, -$166.0 and -$3,379.0 for 2007. With an estimated loss of $2.5 billion for 2008, cumulative losses amount to a staggering $6 billion.



We'll know in 5 days. I'd expect more financial experts will be jumping on the AMD bankruptcy prediction bandwagon next Friday..



From the way you speak and hold yourself its obvious you are greatly biased blindly toward Intel and against AMD.

For your own sake you better hope AMD doesnt go bankrupt. Even though i know they will not becuase that would be the nail in Intel's coffin...

AMD will never go bankrupt people not unless another institution could be right there to take there place. This economy is hard on everyone right now and things are going to get worse!

Intel is adjusting to the enviroment in this economy right now like it should. Yes Intel's profit's are going to be down but they will be fine. If what they say about holding back on releasing i5 is true then thats a good example of marketing and that is bad for everyone.

But its not like there are alot of people wanting to buy cpu's right now anyway. This sector has seen a massive slump since this depression has rolled into it's later stages.This slump will continue for awhile but when that slump starts dissipating people will buy cpu's like the baby boomers had children!

AMD will be perfectly fine as long as they are selling a product that people want which they do currently its just sad that they released a great cpu now in this depression and people want it but are scared to spend that kind of money right now.

IDK about you guy's but im going to make good money off this depression!
a b à CPUs
January 17, 2009 10:09:09 PM

xx12amanxx said:
From the way you speak and hold yourself its obvious you are greatly biased blindly toward Intel and against AMD.


No. While I think Intel products are currently clearly superior to those of AMD's, I have also pointed out that the shoe was on the opposite foot some 3-6 years ago when AMD had the clearly superior product.

The reason I started this thread, was in response to some AMD fans posting that Intel would suffer "billions" in losses for Q4, and although nobody went Sharikoo-koo and predicted Intel to "BK by Q2", some did post fairly nonsensical items. So now that we have the actual facts, I'm bringing them to everyone's attention. As for my speculation about AMD, we'll know the actual facts in another 5 days.

Quote:
AMD will never go bankrupt people not unless another institution could be right there to take there place.


That strikes me as a fairly ridiculous statement. Of course AMD can go bankrupt, and a lot sooner than "never". AMD is just a company, a currently rather-poorly-run company, not some religious totem. And they, just like Intel or any other company, will be bankrupt just as soon as they are unable to meet their debt obligations. In case you haven't noticed, AMD has been selling off parts of itself the last few quarters, in an effort to keep its core business going. This is usually a sign of a company in deep sheep-dip.

Quote:
This economy is hard on everyone right now and things are going to get worse!


I agree with the first part - as for the second, some analysts are thinking the economy will start to recover this summer.

Quote:
Intel is adjusting to the enviroment in this economy right now like it should. Yes Intel's profit's are going to be down but they will be fine. If what they say about holding back on releasing i5 is true then thats a good example of marketing and that is bad for everyone.


I forget how many tens of billions in reserve Intel has, but I agree they can survive for years in a harsh economy. Not forever, of course. As for i5 being delayed, that's really of no interest to me as I didn't want one anyway. DDR2 is the past, not the future.

Quote:
But its not like there are alot of people wanting to buy cpu's right now anyway. This sector has seen a massive slump since this depression has rolled into it's later stages.This slump will continue for awhile but when that slump starts dissipating people will buy cpu's like the baby boomers had children!


Joe 6-pack buys from Dell, HP and Walmart. He buys a take-home-in-a-box computer, not a CPU. That's where the real money is - volume sales. And as stated above, the market is shifting to lower-priced products like netbooks, away from desktops. While I agree that sales will improve once the economy rights itself, much of that demand will be fueled by advertising. Personally I think that when Joe realizes he has excess cash to spend, he will rush out and buy a new car or big-screen TV before he gives any thought to a new computer.

Quote:
AMD will be perfectly fine as long as they are selling a product that people want which they do currently its just sad that they released a great cpu now in this depression and people want it but are scared to spend that kind of money right now.


I'm sure Hector will sleep better tonight, after having read this guarantee from you :) . After all, he just gave himself a 20% paycut.

Quote:
IDK about you guy's but im going to make good money off this depression!


Excellent business plan, but a bit lacking in details... Are you sure you're not actually Hector Ruiz??
January 18, 2009 2:45:46 AM

They didn't put everything on hold take a look at this.

Quote:
Intel on Track with Processors Featuring Graphics Core in 2009.

Intel to Roll Out Processors with Graphics Cores This Year

[01/16/2009 03:52 PM]
by Anton Shilov
Despite some over-conservative expectations and reports, Intel Corp. is on track to release its central processing units (CPUs) with integrated graphics cores this year, the company said during its most recent conference call with financial analysts.

Answering the question from Hans Mosesmann – an analyst from Raymond James, a financial services holding company – Stacy Smith, chief financial officer of Intel, said that the code-named Havendale processor with integrated graphics core for desktop and mobile computers will be available “in the second half” of this year.

Intel’s Havendale processor is a multi-chip module (MCM) in LGA1160 form-factor containing Nehalem micro-architecture-based dual-core CPU in addition to graphics and memory controller hub (GMCH) that features dual-channel DDR3 memory controller, PCI Express 2.0 x16 interface to connect add-on graphics cards as well as integrated graphics core. It is projected that both chips on the MCM are made using 45nm process technology.

Since Havendale CPU line has memory controller as well as PCI Express interconnection inside, there will be no need for GMCH (or North Bridge) on the mainboard. Instead, the new processors will connect directly to code-named Ibexpeak platform controller hub (PCH) that will carry hard drive controller, wired and wireless network controllers, monitor physical interfaces, PCI controller and other input/output as well as platform-related capabilities.

Earlier some web-sites reported that Intel’s processors featuring integrated graphics cores will only be out in 2010. Still, even despite the fact that Mr. Smith said that the chips will ship for revenue in 2009, it remains to be seen, whether products on their base will emerge this year.

“You can expect volume production of Nehalem into mainstream price points for desktops and notebooks in the second half of this year,” said Paul Otellini, chief executive of Intel.
January 18, 2009 3:36:41 AM

Intels igps suck goat, theyve had no monetary problems, and their best chip in most DT apps, is only 20% faster than AMDs, and its costs are higher than its benefits. It continues to mainly make and sell cpus that are only slightly faster than AMDs chips, and people say Intel is way superior. I just laid out the facts. Look em up, find the links, its as Ive said.
Intel has much more of an infrastucture than AMD, and is leading AMD by thin margins in performance in their products. Having 5x the resources, we see up to 30% in a few apps as proof of Intels superiority. Yes, it looks as tho Intel is just slaying AMDs products in performance, especially when you add in their resources. Some may dispute my numbers, but AMD has a few wins as well. Thats the picture boys n girls. Thats what Intels doing for you.
January 18, 2009 6:14:33 AM

JD, What are you trying to say here. That Intel processors are faster? That AMD processors are slower?

You talk infrastructure and margins in performance.

Please state what you are trying to convince us of.

Thanks
January 18, 2009 6:26:51 AM

What are you asking me? Could you clarify your question? So me and others can understand better what you ask?

I think its pretty straight forward
January 18, 2009 1:01:08 PM

Quote:
Intels igps suck goat, theyve had no monetary problems, and their best chip in most DT apps, is only 20% faster than AMDs, and its costs are higher than its benefits. It continues to mainly make and sell cpus that are only slightly faster than AMDs chips, and people say Intel is way superior. I just laid out the facts. Look em up, find the links, its as Ive said.
Intel has much more of an infrastucture than AMD, and is leading AMD by thin margins in performance in their products. Having 5x the resources, we see up to 30% in a few apps as proof of Intels superiority. Yes, it looks as tho Intel is just slaying AMDs products in performance, especially when you add in their resources. Some may dispute my numbers, but AMD has a few wins as well. Thats the picture boys n girls. Thats what Intels doing for you.




let all of us know what you AMD guys get for your billions.
January 18, 2009 1:23:33 PM

Quote:
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forum [...] ost3557964

It doesnt include Yorksfield, but it gives you an idea of what billions and billions of profit bring us the consumer, and then imagine how itd be without competiton?


Theirs another way of looking at this articl JDJ, first the Q6600 is
still the chip to beat, and both phenoms fail at that.
Second how many billions did AMD spend on the native core
phenoms, which gain over the FX in games were nonexistent,
and the new techniques on the Ph2's still can't beat the 2year
old soon to be retired Q6600.
I guess AMD did pretty good with their billions ?
a b à CPUs
January 18, 2009 2:59:00 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Intels igps suck goat, theyve had no monetary problems, and their best chip in most DT apps, is only 20% faster than AMDs, and its costs are higher than its benefits. It continues to mainly make and sell cpus that are only slightly faster than AMDs chips, and people say Intel is way superior. I just laid out the facts. Look em up, find the links, its as Ive said.
Intel has much more of an infrastucture than AMD, and is leading AMD by thin margins in performance in their products. Having 5x the resources, we see up to 30% in a few apps as proof of Intels superiority. Yes, it looks as tho Intel is just slaying AMDs products in performance, especially when you add in their resources. Some may dispute my numbers, but AMD has a few wins as well. Thats the picture boys n girls. Thats what Intels doing for you.


From your Xtremesystems link in other threads, IIRC the i920 was 21.6% on average than the 940, with a 10% lower clock. As we all know, the i965 is currently Intel's best chip. And the SAP benchmarks showed Nehalem as being double the performance of Shanghai.

Personally I think that if AMD had a clue as to the current economic conditions 3 years ago, they would never have bought ATI. Certainly they would not have overpaid for the purchase by triple its value.

I recommend reading this article on MSNBC: For businesses big and small, it's lights out
Instead of restructuring, more companies are quick to liquidate
.

Quote:
The number of business bankruptcy filings rose sharply in 2008, with 31 percent more companies looking to liquidate -- instead of just restructure their debt -- in the third quarter than in the first.

They have little choice. Many companies are loaded down with debt amassed in the days of easy money. Servicing that debt is harder because of falling revenue. Lenders, facing their own troubles, are not as eager to refinance. And the buyers that can afford an acquisition right now are few and far between.

January 19, 2009 11:31:14 AM

Intel is still doing ok in these times check it out.

January 19, 2009 12:02:48 PM

Here's a Intel making a profit this quarter.

January 19, 2009 12:09:56 PM

DISREGARD LAST POST

January 19, 2009 7:39:49 PM

Intel is slowing down because it can. It has a huge lead over AMD in technology and performance, Intel can slow down and still choke AMD to death with price cuts. Remember the i7 is unchallenged and undisputed, not even AMD fans dispute that.

Intel was incompetently run in the past, but its gotten its act together. There's no way an upstart like AMD should have ever taken the performance crown, that was embarrassing and a wake up call to Intel.

Unfortunately, AMD is the incompetent company nowadays, and it is on the verge of bankruptcy. Those of you who want to see AMD survive should buy the new Phenom II chips NOW and not wait for the AM3 platform to come out. There is limited time left for AMD. The credit markets are closed, it can't borrow anymore money, and unless it makes a profit soon, the debt will just crush it.

AMD is on its deathbed. Having competitive chips at the mainstream level doesn't cut it if you can't make a profit selling them! Intel can subsidize its mainstream chips with its high end chips that are very profitable, AMD has no high end chips so everything has to be sold at rock bottom prices.

The situation is critical, AMD supporters have to put their money where their mouth is and buy AMD regardless of performance or value vs. Intel. Yes the Quad Core Intels are attractively priced, but better buy AMD because AMD will die without your purchases.

The ATI acquisition was stupid because it put AMD at risk of bankruptcy. AMD didn't have room to make a major mistake, Intel can make lots of mistakes and keep on going because of its size and profitability in the past. AMD has lost all of its advantages it had over Intel and it is billions in debt while Intel has a small debt load compared to revenues or profits. The outlook is bleak, without something like a miracle, AMD is probably finished. Only YOU can prevent AMD's demise by buying AMD chips NOW and ignoring Intel.
January 19, 2009 11:08:00 PM

All Im saying is, P2 is slightly faster than than Kentsfield, and Yorksfield is slightly faster than P2. i7? Its a very very small % of Intels sales, and will continue that way, as its just too expensive, and until i5 is out again, will always be. A 2 tiered scenario. So, the bulk of sales, the bulk of influence if you will, are sold in mainstream Q94xx on down, which is where AMD is currently sitting in performance. Its doesnt matter if higher clocked versions exist, as they all oc great, its the initial purchase that makes both companies money, nothing else.

So, having a cpu that competes in the highest selling point for both companies, where the bulk of sales and profit will come for DT, and having Intel winning bigtime with marketshare and marketing and having much more resources, much more physical fabs etc, AMD is right there with them. I think it may be different if youd flipflop this, and put Intel in such a position, people would admire Intels capabilities for doing what AMD is doing, and thats my point here. Put Intel behind, indebt, having 1/3 the resources, and yet able to compete, Im thinking alot of peoples ideas would change. Buying ATI was a need, as we will all soon see. While I commend Intel for trying to make Larrabee, and it5s implementation will make huge differences in many things, and gaming may and probably will be the least of its abilities, AMD simply didnt have the resources at the time to do their own LRB, so ATI was the choice. One way or another, they needed ATI, and with it, if it brings them down, it certainly would have without it
January 19, 2009 11:34:14 PM

Intel is not recession-proof. their sheer size allows them to limp around for a lot longer than a small company but they can be damaged just the same.
January 20, 2009 8:00:07 PM

jdj, What do you expect for AMDs financials? Also lol at the chart on the page you linked, Look at the numbers, Around a 10% difference but the chart shows it to be about 300% worse.
January 20, 2009 8:04:30 PM

10% is worrysome, and who knows about AMD? May be worse, may be same, or possibly better? Theyre already on the low end anyways, so the effects will show less % wise in the negative, and more in the positive
January 20, 2009 8:10:22 PM

Also, if you look at common inventories, it was at 3.2 million as a standard, so its a half million or 16% over where theyd like to normally be, especially after the holidays
!