Interesting to see such incredible earnings. My stocks are down about 7 percent across the board in the last month, but clearly that is disconnected from these earning reports due to monetary policy and changes. Microsoft, Intel, even Tesla, all ridiculously profitable right now. Reading the Intel report is kind of shocking for me actually. Unlimited demand for expensive CPUs right now.
That is funny if you look at last month - it pretty much the same, but more importantly is since Nov 2017 which was likely the beginning of this Spectra/Meltdown stuff and about the same, yes it went up during that time and down last Summer when AMD went up
You last line gave yourself away, it is obviously you don't have Intel stocks. Possibly AMD which make your statement true. But not down as bad as just Today.
What are you talking about the OP last line? His stocks being down 7% is probably true (likely talking avg of them all, about like everyone), and if you owned intel for the last Q you're probably far worse than him. June 6 Intel was $57.03, it's ~45 today. That is a major hit. Still not a bad stock if you've owned it all year I guess, you went from 41 (jan) to 45 (today). Still 10%, beating banks, most funds etc and you add on the DIV too! I believe you should sell on any big gain for INTC in the next Q or 2 as they will go down all year next year with 7nm vs 14nm server/desktop/mobile. That will be rough pricing for Intel (kills margin/net income etc), or they will lose a lot of share and that's not so good when the other guy will likely be selling BETTER chips at 7nm in almost everything. IE, games may catch up where AMD ties or wins all, instead of down ~10% basically over many games avg. They already do VERY well on the app side.
You have no idea when he bought etc either. His actual last line could just mean he's surprised they could sell pretty much ONLY higher end stuff (they moved production massively to server/hedt top end stuff, shorting the low end according to their report), and still make a record Q. Yeah, might seem surprising to many that you can sell yet more ultra expensive chips in down sales years. We went from 384mil down to what 250mil pc units now? Huge drop yet intel/nv both sell high end massively and make bank doing it. NV didn't even sell a card below 1070/1080 for well over a year because AMD went low only...MORONIC management should be fighting for the top 80% of the PROFIT, and only the rest if forced by salvage etc. If I have a choice of selling a HEDT or low end apu crap cpu, I'll ALWAYS sell the higher margin top end products first and forever if I can...LOL. Business 101. If you can't sell those any more, THEN you make junk under $200.
Just quit pricing products wrong (too low) and stop using products like HBM/HBM2 that kill margin/sales due to shortages (too difficult to pump it out). Go fast enough (GDDR5x for both those) for top end unless you can PROVE HBM/2 are major differences in perf. If it's just expensive for ZERO gain, you're wasting profits.
Would you sell a car with 8 tires instead of 4 if they did nothing? No point, just wasted margin/income. Bandwidth on HBM1/2 wasn't worth mentioning as it does nothing so far or NV wouldn't win everything...LOL. 4k doesn't mean squat today, next they'll claim 8k is where you should run our card to show HBM2 works! HAHAHAHA. Whatever, slap GDDR5x (whatever top speed rung is for next cards) on next gen and pump the crap out of them EASILY and CHEAPER. Then charge like NV and bank 50-60% margins with a billion dollar quarter if you do the same on cpu side (charge what they are worth!). If you win, you PRICE HIGH. PERIOD. Or you failed. Make hay...
Don't bother wasting your time explaining logic to HStewart when it comes to Intel. They can do no wrong. And AMD can do no right either; they must have either killed his cat or beat his grandma or something. Really has a stick up his ass about it.
Just exchange HStewart with non-AMD and that is you statement.
All I am doing is theorizing on why AMD stock is sinking and why Intel is rising. Reality is not in gaming machines, Microsoft knows it with 896 core server.
If you notice by Intel own reports - the price of desktop cpus - actually went down - that is what we can call the AMD effect on Intel. Thanks AMD for reducing Intel prices.
To me it looks like notebooks increase by 5% and desktop decrease by 5% for 2018 Q3 vs 2017 Q3 But oddly for Q3 vs Q2 Intel saw increase 12% for notebook and 15% desktops. Intel also had a 1% drop in desktop price.
I have no indication of Desktop vs Notebook percentage but it likely very low, but AMD appears to help Intel - especially in Q3.
the q2 vs q3 jump happens every year, it's called "back to school", there'll be another increase from Q3 to Q4 called "christmas", and then a slump in consumer spending for the next two quarters.
I can see that for notebooks, but desktops are hardly desire anymore - especially since you can not take a huge desktop to class room. That part could explain why notebooks got increase why desktops got decrease. But what about 15% increase in desktops - maybe because they got 1% decrease in cost. A would think new 8th gen desktop chips helps.
I expect that a lot of recent desktop sales has to do with the increase in core count in CPUs. At least for gamers and professionals that can benefit from the additional threads. Admittedly, most games cannot support more than 4 threads, if you like to keep other stuff running while you play, it can make a difference.
64% margins...LMFAO, that just shows IMHO they are cheaping out HUGE to make such a massive margin (compared to most companies) it must be all that saving of PCB layers and using toothpaste for TIM ^.^.
kind of "crappy" that no matter how "bad they do" they still walk away with champagne in both hands eating caviar (something along those lines) I wonder what Ngreedia margins are (even though they always seem to claim one year ahead of everyone else??) 150% :P
Less that they're cheaping out and more that they are price-gouging with the most rapacious markups they can get away with. You don't bloat your margins massively with nickel-and-dime cost-cutting.
While I agree there might be price gouging, I do like where the EPS is going. Enterprise customers are on life cycle upgrades so they represent a stable income source. In the home computer market, we've had more than enough CPU power to handle the average home computing tasks. If someone wants to throw down money for a 9900k that gives them the same performance in a game as a 8400, go for it.
--Intel had growth of over 66% in their modem business, which had revenues of $1.2 billion this quarter. Revenue from notebook processor sales increased 13%, and desktop revenue was up 9%, with Intel overall growing PC volumes by 6% year-over-year.
this doesn't make sense, subtracting modem revenue from clients computing, the rest of it don't make up.
I think it very simple to explained - Intel competition has been push node side a lot and Intel has shown that it can make significant improvements without changing the node. Of course the competition wants to state that current generation is same as original 14 nm version which is not true. Intel has proven that it can do it and more than just adding cores. I have 4th Generation Lenovo Y50 and 8th Generation Dell XPS 2in1 - except for possibly the video on the XPS, the Dell is significantly faster than the Y50 and half the width and same number of cores. Also AMD concentrated on game desktop machine and that is not Intel primary focus - which is actually mobile laptops. AMD does have some in that market - but they got into late and by that time with the push of Ryzen on their hill, Intel was able to improved Mobile performance and size and make a difference.
Gamers may differ with this but industry see that even with not having 10nm ready, that Intel can delivered newer products with more performance. Also make firmware and even hardware changes for Spectre/Melthown stuff
Another factor is trust - the average people see Intel has more trustworthily, for me personally, I have used Intel for decades and that means a lot to me. The average user does not care about what is stated on forums. But some of comments from Anti-AMD make it very hard to EVER consider AMD. My purchase of Dell XPS 15 2in1 was hard because of AMD GPU - but the technology in it override the video. EMiB is awesome technology and CPU performance is amazing. But also in the Dell XPS 2in1 designed. I did think it might have been a better decision to get a new Dell XPS 15 with Coffee Lake and NVidia GPU - but I find having power in 2in1 is nice.
Who cares though? Would you really rather have a denser, lower frequency product on a desktop CPU? For the vast majority of the desktop products, 14nm is actually a great node. Sure, Enterprise and mobile need to move to 10nm because of power savings, but I'd rather use more power (within 100W or so) on a standard desktop and have higher clocks.
And again, you prove yourself a fool if you find it 'hard' to purchase a product because of the comments of some people using it. If you base your purchasing decisions on what some fanboy says instead of what the hardware will actually deliver, then you're not a very intelligent person.
Just admit it; in your mind Intel can do no wrong, and you will buy it no matter what the circumstance. This "some of comments from Anti-AMD make it very hard to EVER consider AMD" is just an idiotic smoke-screen around your obvious heavy bias for Intel products. I have _never_ in all my years met some so devoid of logic and devoted to a company as you are.
I'm a bit late on this comment, but in case others are even further behind on their reading...
The 13% and 9% numbers are REVENUE growth, while 6% is VOLUME growth. So Intel is selling more units *and* charging more for each unit compared to last quarter.
I don't know if they are "stuck" at 14nm or just milking the sh!t out of it, look at their profits. Why build new 10nm fabs when you can make billions with the old 14nm ones.
You are right you do not know, especially about situation. They invested ten of billions of dollars on fabs that still do not produce any chip for the mass market right now. what is the point of investing so much money on a technology if you don't sell it? Unless they can't mass produce right now...
It thought AMD's good product launches will impact Intel just like every one keep saying it again and again. What did I miss? Did customers forget AMD totally?
You have places like Staples that went all in on intel when it comes to what machines to display(even if they have AMD machines hidden away in back). I suspect payoffs to be "Intel only" for what is on display, or the old, "We don't want you selling more than 10 percent of your computers with an AMD processor" approach that they have done before.
If you don't see a computer out on display, and don't know enough to look online for what they actually offer(and know to look for a Ryzen 5 2500U based laptop for example), then you won't be buying an AMD based machine from many of these stores. It's pretty sad that those who decide what machines should be out on display have no computer knowledge.
It feels like history is repeating itself. Whatever AMD disrupt, good or bad, Intel can just charge whatever price and win.
Honestly, if paying 30% more than MSRP is a good deal for you than you deserve to be screwed by Intel.
My only hope is one day people will stand up against these behaviors and fight for their consumer rights. Let's hope social medias can break these false perceptions dictated by similar companies.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
36 Comments
Back to Article
Alistair - Thursday, October 25, 2018 - link
Interesting to see such incredible earnings. My stocks are down about 7 percent across the board in the last month, but clearly that is disconnected from these earning reports due to monetary policy and changes. Microsoft, Intel, even Tesla, all ridiculously profitable right now. Reading the Intel report is kind of shocking for me actually. Unlimited demand for expensive CPUs right now.HStewart - Thursday, October 25, 2018 - link
That is funny if you look at last month - it pretty much the same, but more importantly is since Nov 2017 which was likely the beginning of this Spectra/Meltdown stuff and about the same, yes it went up during that time and down last Summer when AMD went uphttps://www.bing.com/search?q=intc+stock&form=...
You last line gave yourself away, it is obviously you don't have Intel stocks. Possibly AMD which make your statement true. But not down as bad as just Today.
https://www.bing.com/search?q=AMD+Stock&filter...
TheJian - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
What are you talking about the OP last line? His stocks being down 7% is probably true (likely talking avg of them all, about like everyone), and if you owned intel for the last Q you're probably far worse than him. June 6 Intel was $57.03, it's ~45 today. That is a major hit. Still not a bad stock if you've owned it all year I guess, you went from 41 (jan) to 45 (today). Still 10%, beating banks, most funds etc and you add on the DIV too! I believe you should sell on any big gain for INTC in the next Q or 2 as they will go down all year next year with 7nm vs 14nm server/desktop/mobile. That will be rough pricing for Intel (kills margin/net income etc), or they will lose a lot of share and that's not so good when the other guy will likely be selling BETTER chips at 7nm in almost everything. IE, games may catch up where AMD ties or wins all, instead of down ~10% basically over many games avg. They already do VERY well on the app side.You have no idea when he bought etc either. His actual last line could just mean he's surprised they could sell pretty much ONLY higher end stuff (they moved production massively to server/hedt top end stuff, shorting the low end according to their report), and still make a record Q. Yeah, might seem surprising to many that you can sell yet more ultra expensive chips in down sales years. We went from 384mil down to what 250mil pc units now? Huge drop yet intel/nv both sell high end massively and make bank doing it. NV didn't even sell a card below 1070/1080 for well over a year because AMD went low only...MORONIC management should be fighting for the top 80% of the PROFIT, and only the rest if forced by salvage etc. If I have a choice of selling a HEDT or low end apu crap cpu, I'll ALWAYS sell the higher margin top end products first and forever if I can...LOL. Business 101. If you can't sell those any more, THEN you make junk under $200.
Just quit pricing products wrong (too low) and stop using products like HBM/HBM2 that kill margin/sales due to shortages (too difficult to pump it out). Go fast enough (GDDR5x for both those) for top end unless you can PROVE HBM/2 are major differences in perf. If it's just expensive for ZERO gain, you're wasting profits.
Would you sell a car with 8 tires instead of 4 if they did nothing? No point, just wasted margin/income. Bandwidth on HBM1/2 wasn't worth mentioning as it does nothing so far or NV wouldn't win everything...LOL. 4k doesn't mean squat today, next they'll claim 8k is where you should run our card to show HBM2 works! HAHAHAHA. Whatever, slap GDDR5x (whatever top speed rung is for next cards) on next gen and pump the crap out of them EASILY and CHEAPER. Then charge like NV and bank 50-60% margins with a billion dollar quarter if you do the same on cpu side (charge what they are worth!). If you win, you PRICE HIGH. PERIOD. Or you failed. Make hay...
sa666666 - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
Don't bother wasting your time explaining logic to HStewart when it comes to Intel. They can do no wrong. And AMD can do no right either; they must have either killed his cat or beat his grandma or something. Really has a stick up his ass about it.HStewart - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
Just exchange HStewart with non-AMD and that is you statement.All I am doing is theorizing on why AMD stock is sinking and why Intel is rising. Reality is not in gaming machines, Microsoft knows it with 896 core server.
If you notice by Intel own reports - the price of desktop cpus - actually went down - that is what we can call the AMD effect on Intel. Thanks AMD for reducing Intel prices.
close - Monday, October 29, 2018 - link
All you're doing is trolling. And sad thing is that you're not even good at it.HStewart - Thursday, October 25, 2018 - link
I think what is most interesting is to look at volumes and prices of desktop and notebookshttps://www.intc.com/investor-relations/investor-e...
To me it looks like notebooks increase by 5% and desktop decrease by 5% for 2018 Q3 vs 2017 Q3 But oddly for Q3 vs Q2 Intel saw increase 12% for notebook and 15% desktops. Intel also had a 1% drop in desktop price.
I have no indication of Desktop vs Notebook percentage but it likely very low, but AMD appears to help Intel - especially in Q3.
DanNeely - Thursday, October 25, 2018 - link
the q2 vs q3 jump happens every year, it's called "back to school", there'll be another increase from Q3 to Q4 called "christmas", and then a slump in consumer spending for the next two quarters.HStewart - Thursday, October 25, 2018 - link
I can see that for notebooks, but desktops are hardly desire anymore - especially since you can not take a huge desktop to class room. That part could explain why notebooks got increase why desktops got decrease. But what about 15% increase in desktops - maybe because they got 1% decrease in cost. A would think new 8th gen desktop chips helps.danjw - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
I expect that a lot of recent desktop sales has to do with the increase in core count in CPUs. At least for gamers and professionals that can benefit from the additional threads. Admittedly, most games cannot support more than 4 threads, if you like to keep other stuff running while you play, it can make a difference.Dragonstongue - Thursday, October 25, 2018 - link
64% margins...LMFAO, that just shows IMHO they are cheaping out HUGE to make such a massive margin (compared to most companies) it must be all that saving of PCB layers and using toothpaste for TIM ^.^.kind of "crappy" that no matter how "bad they do" they still walk away with champagne in both hands eating caviar (something along those lines) I wonder what Ngreedia margins are (even though they always seem to claim one year ahead of everyone else??) 150% :P
Lord of the Bored - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
Less that they're cheaping out and more that they are price-gouging with the most rapacious markups they can get away with. You don't bloat your margins massively with nickel-and-dime cost-cutting.PeachNCream - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
While I agree there might be price gouging, I do like where the EPS is going. Enterprise customers are on life cycle upgrades so they represent a stable income source. In the home computer market, we've had more than enough CPU power to handle the average home computing tasks. If someone wants to throw down money for a 9900k that gives them the same performance in a game as a 8400, go for it.Kvaern1 - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
It's not price gouging. It's milking an owned luxury item market.One is illegal, the other isn't.
PeachNCream - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
That's a good point and an important distinction. I was being a bit too casual about referring to it as price gouging.wiz329 - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
Gross margin doesn't include any depreciation. In a capital-intensive industries, having high gross margins doesn't mean a lot.iwod - Thursday, October 25, 2018 - link
--Intel had growth of over 66% in their modem business, which had revenues of $1.2 billion this quarter. Revenue from notebook processor sales increased 13%, and desktop revenue was up 9%, with Intel overall growing PC volumes by 6% year-over-year.this doesn't make sense, subtracting modem revenue from clients computing, the rest of it don't make up.
HStewart - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
I think it very simple to explained - Intel competition has been push node side a lot and Intel has shown that it can make significant improvements without changing the node. Of course the competition wants to state that current generation is same as original 14 nm version which is not true. Intel has proven that it can do it and more than just adding cores. I have 4th Generation Lenovo Y50 and 8th Generation Dell XPS 2in1 - except for possibly the video on the XPS, the Dell is significantly faster than the Y50 and half the width and same number of cores. Also AMD concentrated on game desktop machine and that is not Intel primary focus - which is actually mobile laptops. AMD does have some in that market - but they got into late and by that time with the push of Ryzen on their hill, Intel was able to improved Mobile performance and size and make a difference.Gamers may differ with this but industry see that even with not having 10nm ready, that Intel can delivered newer products with more performance. Also make firmware and even hardware changes for Spectre/Melthown stuff
Another factor is trust - the average people see Intel has more trustworthily, for me personally, I have used Intel for decades and that means a lot to me. The average user does not care about what is stated on forums. But some of comments from Anti-AMD make it very hard to EVER consider AMD. My purchase of Dell XPS 15 2in1 was hard because of AMD GPU - but the technology in it override the video. EMiB is awesome technology and CPU performance is amazing. But also in the Dell XPS 2in1 designed. I did think it might have been a better decision to get a new Dell XPS 15 with Coffee Lake and NVidia GPU - but I find having power in 2in1 is nice.
peevee - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
"Of course the competition wants to state that current generation is same as original 14 nm version which is not true"Yes, the current generation is actually BIGGER. More like 16 if the numbers would mean anything.
Drumsticks - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
Who cares though? Would you really rather have a denser, lower frequency product on a desktop CPU? For the vast majority of the desktop products, 14nm is actually a great node. Sure, Enterprise and mobile need to move to 10nm because of power savings, but I'd rather use more power (within 100W or so) on a standard desktop and have higher clocks.HStewart - Saturday, October 27, 2018 - link
Note also Intel has shown they can enhance 14nm mode recently with more performance, core and even power savings with changing node.I think rise in stock prices is because they have shown that they can overcome this and even over come security issues
HStewart - Saturday, October 27, 2018 - link
Without changing mode for above - it would nice to edit - sorry I think faster that I type. It better that way then other way aroundsa666666 - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
And again, you prove yourself a fool if you find it 'hard' to purchase a product because of the comments of some people using it. If you base your purchasing decisions on what some fanboy says instead of what the hardware will actually deliver, then you're not a very intelligent person.Just admit it; in your mind Intel can do no wrong, and you will buy it no matter what the circumstance. This "some of comments from Anti-AMD make it very hard to EVER consider AMD" is just an idiotic smoke-screen around your obvious heavy bias for Intel products. I have _never_ in all my years met some so devoid of logic and devoted to a company as you are.
Black Obsidian - Monday, November 5, 2018 - link
I'm a bit late on this comment, but in case others are even further behind on their reading...The 13% and 9% numbers are REVENUE growth, while 6% is VOLUME growth. So Intel is selling more units *and* charging more for each unit compared to last quarter.
Supercell99 - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
I don't know if they are "stuck" at 14nm or just milking the sh!t out of it, look at their profits. Why build new 10nm fabs when you can make billions with the old 14nm ones.Eliadbu - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
You are right you do not know, especially about situation. They invested ten of billions of dollars on fabs that still do not produce any chip for the mass market right now. what is the point of investing so much money on a technology if you don't sell it? Unless they can't mass produce right now...sseemaku - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
It thought AMD's good product launches will impact Intel just like every one keep saying it again and again. What did I miss? Did customers forget AMD totally?lemans24 - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
Yes...Intel is in NO way affected by AMD prices on ANY of their products as the last year of revenues clearly indicates!!Targon - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
You have places like Staples that went all in on intel when it comes to what machines to display(even if they have AMD machines hidden away in back). I suspect payoffs to be "Intel only" for what is on display, or the old, "We don't want you selling more than 10 percent of your computers with an AMD processor" approach that they have done before.If you don't see a computer out on display, and don't know enough to look online for what they actually offer(and know to look for a Ryzen 5 2500U based laptop for example), then you won't be buying an AMD based machine from many of these stores. It's pretty sad that those who decide what machines should be out on display have no computer knowledge.
darkich - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
Sickening..eva02langley - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
It feels like history is repeating itself. Whatever AMD disrupt, good or bad, Intel can just charge whatever price and win.Honestly, if paying 30% more than MSRP is a good deal for you than you deserve to be screwed by Intel.
My only hope is one day people will stand up against these behaviors and fight for their consumer rights. Let's hope social medias can break these false perceptions dictated by similar companies.
peevee - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
It is not consumers who choose Intel CPUs, it is corporations and govs. All kinds of deals can be made with people who spend OTHER PEOPLE'S money.Dotans - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
AMD does not disrupt anything but the media and clueless analyst.On Q3, both AMD and Intel were capacity constrains and the OEMs are taking any inventory available.
Klimax - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
Little reminder: Those 30% goes to shops, not Intel."False perceptions" cut both ways...
peevee - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
How come their net income is higher than their operating income? Sold something?Brett Howse - Friday, October 26, 2018 - link
That's fixed now. Was correct in the text but typo in the chart.