Intel Misses Revenue Targets and Issues Weak Outlook Amid Record Revenue

Paul Alcorn
Editor-in-Chief

Paul Alcorn is the Editor-in-Chief for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • mischon123
    Too many obfuscating names for overpriced half to 2/3 defective chips that have to be binned low because of production and thus yield issues. Those are the consumer chips. If 1/3 of the chiproduction cannot be sold at the quality-pricepoint - this is catastrophic. We ve seen that Intel has a huge problem going one process iteration down and most 2/3..or more of the production is faulty - this will cap market saturation massively.

    Because of that - nobody wants the job because Intel cannot reform production. Because of the horrendous dev prices..16bn $ revenue can almost be called minuscule. The offset is awfully small. Pringle knows how to bake chips. AMD knows how to bake chips. Why not Intel?
    Also Intel is beeing perceived as the bully. This never goes down well in the midrun.
    Reply
  • TJ Hooker
    @mischon123 what on earth are you talking about?
    Reply
  • bit_user
    21710866 said:
    @mischon123 what on earth are you talking about?
    I assume the yields on their 10 nm node?

    A source would be appreciated.
    Reply
  • chickenballs
    "Overall, the company posted yet another full-year revenue record of $70.8 billion"

    wow this means people are still buying their cpus even though they keep refreshing their Skylake architecture and increase prices
    and they have to thank the "experts" who keep recommending gamers to buy i7s and i9s to play CS and Battlefield
    Reply
  • bit_user
    21711040 said:
    wow this means people are still buying their cpus even though they keep refreshing their Skylake architecture and increase prices
    In case you didn't notice, they've been increasing clock speeds and core counts, along the way.
    Reply
  • chickenballs
    21711052 said:
    21711040 said:
    wow this means people are still buying their cpus even though they keep refreshing their Skylake architecture and increase prices
    In case you didn't notice, they've been increasing clock speeds and core counts, along the way.

    while their competitor has increased core counts even more

    the i7 8700K is 499 usd on Newegg
    and i7 9700K is 549 usd
    do you still remember how much the previous mainstream i7 cost?
    Reply
  • bit_user
    21711059 said:
    21711052 said:
    21711040 said:
    wow this means people are still buying their cpus even though they keep refreshing their Skylake architecture and increase prices
    In case you didn't notice, they've been increasing clock speeds and core counts, along the way.

    while their competitor has increased core counts even more

    the i7 8700K is 499 usd on Newegg
    and i7 9700K is 549 usd
    do you still remember how much the previous mainstream i7 cost?
    Well, you're getting more performance for the additional cost. Your previous post didn't acknowledge that anything was gained for the higher prices.

    And no, I'm not happy about those prices. But then, I'm not buying Intel CPUs right now, either.
    Reply
  • chickenballs
    21711064 said:
    21711059 said:
    21711052 said:
    21711040 said:
    wow this means people are still buying their cpus even though they keep refreshing their Skylake architecture and increase prices
    In case you didn't notice, they've been increasing clock speeds and core counts, along the way.

    while their competitor has increased core counts even more

    the i7 8700K is 499 usd on Newegg
    and i7 9700K is 549 usd
    do you still remember how much the previous mainstream i7 cost?
    Well, you're getting more performance for the additional cost. Your previous post didn't acknowledge that anything was gained for the higher prices.

    And no, I'm not happy about those prices. But then, I'm not buying Intel CPUs right now, either.

    yes thats called progress
    by your logic intel should charge tens of thousands for a 4 core cpu because its so much faster than the Pentium Pro from 1996 which had a msrp of several thousands of dollars

    and yet you are defending them
    how uh nonsensical ;-)
    Reply
  • spentshells
    Article title is quite deceptive.

    "Intel is increasingly profitable, AMD has been able to make more money than usual."

    That feels more accurate.
    Reply
  • shmoochie
    21711513 said:
    Article title is quite deceptive.

    "Intel is increasingly profitable, AMD has been able to make more money than usual."

    That feels more accurate.

    What is deceptive about it? It seems like a succinct outline of the article to me.
    Reply