Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
That's really horrible news coming from Intel. Thanks to TCE for posting the news. What in hell is going on at Intel? How can they communicate such important information to shareholders via such indirect channels? This alone is a big no go for me.
I will wait until the shareholder meeting before I make a decision. I still believe mobile is of very high importance for Intel's future. Intel needs volume for its new fabs and currently, only mobile and the foundry business provide enough volume going further. In both areas, Intel failed big so far and if they are now fully giving up on it, I think the stock is to be avoided, at least until significant progress is proven in these areas.
Intel will be attacked in servers once it can't afford anymore to keep up with its competition in the process race. From there on I fear that PCs will be next, once mobile devices and PCs converged further. There is no second best in this game and Intel didn't even achieve a mediocre ranking in mobile - just ridiculous!
It would really be interesting what the issue actually is with fabbing integrated modems on Intel processes. Krzanich should communicate more actively what is actually the reason why Intel fails so big. I think they have all the ingredients that are required to be competitive with Qualcomm, Mediatek and the likes. They have a dense process, their CPU cores are low power enough since Silvermont, Goldmont hopefully will close the performance gap soon (though really late) and the modem as standalone version is good - not best in class, but good. That should be enough to release a competitive package, but some very big rock is in Intel's way and I don't think it is a good way to not communicate the root cause with shareholders.
Is there anyone from inside Intel who can get some information about this? This should really be known by everyone inside the company, at least I don't think it is a good way to hide such information from the (core) staff either.
On the other hand, I am pretty confident that, once this big rock is out of its way, Intel will finally gain market share in mobile and compete without contra revenue and such tricks. There is no magic with what Qualcomm, Mediatek and Samsung do.
The real issue is that it took Intel's management (not only upper management) so long to realize that there is such a big obstacle in their way and take care of it much sooner, instead of making everyone think that "next year will be the breakthrough in mobile" (TM).
On the other hand, as stated before, there are some teams at Intel which simply don't do the work they are paid for nicely. Some of them really deserve to be fired, sorry to say that. These guys let Intel burn billions of dollars in mobile. I think no other company would have been so patient with them. Some staff members really should think about whether they are part of the problem instead of blaming Krzanich. There is a need to increase pressure on those teams who failed so utterly in what seems to be state of the art technology. Not really something Intel should have a problem with.
It is not only mobile, but also the PC client group didn't do enough in the past years to improve the performance of their products which, in the end, keep users from updating their PCs. No updates, no money, no job. Everybody is part of the problem, not just management.
Bye bye flum. Happy trading with your emotions!
If you want to know what self confirmation bias looks like in action, have a look at flummy. Turned from bull to bear within a second.
Now start insulting me, that's all you can contribute here, since you know nothing about the topic itself. Good news is, you'll be gone soon. Bye bye!
Come on. They wouldn't have significantly more design wins if they had a faster modem. It is mainly about integration and cost. That's where they failed, we all know that. Once they fix it, they compete in price, not modem speed. That won't help Qualcomm.
Some interesting insights and speculation about the technology behind 3D Xpoint:
I don't know who makes less sense - Borusa or those occasional traders rushing into this thread from time to time
This is not a car forum, but ...
Now it seems official: Samsung will fab Qualcomm's high end line of chips.
Amazon releases its first CPUs. Not much doubt the big guys in cloud computing would love to ditch Intel CPUs - the question is: Will they be able to (one day)? I don't have much doubt they will, eventually ...
Umh, we know that Intel and Samsung have a denser process, don't we? The remaining characteristics are unknown, that's true, but I don't have any reason to believe that TSMC has a lead there. Considering the much higher Capex from Intel and Samsung I doubt this is the case. Still, no proof though ...
I basically agree. Intel, and to a certain extent Samsung probably as well, have a much more narrow and specialized toolchain for their processes. At least that's what I would expect - I suppose noone on this board has got this information out of first hand from all the three, Intel, Samsung and TSMC, so it is only guesswork.
I'd expect TSMC to have the much better general purpose process options and toolchains, e.g. for stuff like mixed signal or integrated memories (NVM as well as RAM).
That doesn't mean that Intel can't learn how to do this business, but they'll also have to change their mindset a bit. Things like customers are king, accepting third party roadmaps that are strictly to fulfill, deliver despite any yield or quality issues and so on, providing the adapted tools and libraries up front and in time to the customers in decent quality. All those things likely need a change in attitude for Intel but could do wonders for its own products and roadmaps, so that would be a good thing overall.
In addition, Intel would likely have to maintain its specialized process options for e.g. Its own high frequency processor cores independently of the general purpose foundry process. On the other hand, they could offer an edge to customers in this regard who are willing to pay for such a know-how.
Regarding process lead, I really don't see TSMC having an edge over Intel or Samsung. Both have the better process currently, with Intel still leading a bit. The unknowns are yields, performance and power characteristics, costs and so on. But we only have speculation at this point so I don't see reason to prematurely declare TSMC the winner here. They likely have an edge regarding general purpose process options but I think Samsung is able to learn fast in this regard and Intel certainly has the required skills as well. The problem with Intel really is will and leadership, not capabilities. It's good to have Krzanich as process guy as CEO - the right man for this task.
Not really related to Intel, but Toshiba just posted a record loss after the accounting scandal got public. There's not much left from the once so mighty japanese semiconductor tech. Maybe Toshiba has to sell its crown jewels now, including its memory business. Maybe Western Digital will (have to) buy that part too. Not likely Toshiba will invest much in this technology going forward.
The chinese will have to pump a lot of money into this black hole to keep the pace. Very interesting changes.