Hmm...interesting. That being said, Samsung's main profit source isn't chip development, it's the sale of mobile device. While I think it is appropriate for Samsung who really doesn't care if it sells an Exynos or not as long as it makes a huge profit from the phone/tablet, it's not really appropriate for Intel which lives and dies by the sale of its microprocessors.
Just my opinion though :-)
I don't think so. The minute Intel splits design and foundry, it loses its key advantages as an IDM. If it did that, might as well build chips at TSMC or Samsung.
What I don't understand then is why Intel even entertained the notion of building other people's phone chips on that slide. If Intel executes on this roadmap it will "win" the high end of the smartphone space by the end of the year 2015 (assuming of course XMM 7360 is a winner, too, since the modem is important).
Moorefield/Merrifield will be critical in building OEM relationships. Look for a design from each of the "big 6", even if those designs aren't particularly widespread.
Unless Q has something we don't know about (which is unlikely, but always possible), I view this as a big enough crack that Moorefield can lodge itself into until it can bring in backup in the form of Broxton ;-)
Okay, semi_equip_junkie. It's back to ignore for you, then. Insulting somebody's profession and quality of work is as low as it gets.
You and the rest of the folks here who want to bash me can do so in threads that I can't see. Enjoy.
You read too much into what I say. Right now, Qualcomm is printing money from its best-in-class apps processors and they really are top notch.
Of course, the competitive landscape gets tougher for them and much better for its competitors if they succeed. I am NOT long Qualcomm because I believe that there's more money to be made better on the under-loved, underdogs in this space (I am long NVDA/INTC/BRCM) than there is in betting on the leader which essentially has a monopoly.
My NVDA has performed rather well, INTC has been an OK performer, and BRCM is still in the doghouse.
Time will tell how these bets work out. Always watching for new developments.
I believe the GPU is an enhanced/new architecture - it has to be, because DX11 requires substantially more hardware to support it. Intel's GPU already takes a perf/mm^2 hit to implement this, but this will be a required feature come next year if you want to play in Windows RT/8.1 tablets.
Next year, we see a showdown of NVIDIA's Kepler, Qualcomm's Adreno 420, and Intel's Gen 8. Should be fun.
Look at what Qualcomm is doing...they're already in the apps processor lead for phablets with SD800, and yet they're releasing 805 which is built on the same process node, but jacks up the CPU clock, includes a lot of new hardware on the GPU (DX11 support requires things such as hardware tesselation), and removes the modem. Also, much wider memory interface and beefed up ISP.
Clearly this is not going to be in the same power envelope as SD800 otherwise Qualcomm has learned to bend the laws of physics. Already SD800 has been known to throttle, so on 28nm HPm, it's just going to get worse.
You don't need to be a genius to know that Qualcomm is basically gunning to put this into high end 10" tablets due to the increased power draw at the advertised specs. As far as what I've heard...well, I'm not asking you to make any investment decisions based on it. Just relaying what I'm hearing.
BTW, this isn't to say that I don't like Qualcomm's offerings...they're still obviously the best in the business. But I am seeing some real desperation to keep pushing the envelope on GPU because they are afraid of somebody else taking the graphics crown for tablets. This may have been sparked by NVIDIA's Logan demo and/or the Cherry Trail leaks.
I disagree - wallisweaver is a good guy and he makes a lot of excellent points. He is not a loser, and I think calling him that is exceptionally unfair.
"Well, when you say that Intel is dead money for at least three months and that PC sales will be collapsing in 2014"
So, you don't think Intel's guide of 5-7% revenue decline in PCs isn't a "collapse"? This will be what, the third year in a row of declines? The structural decline of the PC is something that really makes the investment case difficult, particularly since Intel cannot control it with all of the best execution in the world.
"No one would summarize your latest article by saying it was an objective look at Intel's strengths and weaknesses - they would all say that you beat Intel like drum."
Except that many did. How did I "beat Intel like a drum"? Seemed to me that I gave a realistic assessment of what's going to drive the stock, but you are free to disagree.
"You apparently get caught up in your short-term emotions and you should just walk it off instead of venting in a new article things that are not objective and balanced"
Not objective and balanced? I'd say that my latest piece was *incredibly* objective and balanced. Saying that Intel is lying about their guidance and that Intel surely lowballed things here doesn't seem as balanced as saying, "invest as though the guidance is real, but if you're OK with that then you could potentially be handsomely rewarded if things are better than expected".
"your couple of rants on LTE"
Oh, you mean how Intel expects baseband revenues to be down during 1H 2014 because volume LTE shipments won't really happen until the second half? If XMM 7160 were so competitive, then Infineon would be growing *now*. I don't see how I got this one wrong.
"your rant on the number of Haswell releases"
Haswell ramped very late. So did Bay Trail. Again, don't see a problem with what I had to say on either topic.
"your constant bounces back and forth on ARM"
I'm pretty stable on my view of ARM - it's a good, but very likely overpriced, company. That being said, ARMH has done better than INTC has over the last few years
SD805 won't be going into phones. It's such a watt-guzzler that it's being relegated to tablets. I am hearing from contacts that the OEMs/ODMs in Taiwan still think it's too hot even for tablets.
Qualcomm seems rather desperate to push the performance envelope on 28nm, even at the expense of power.
Yes, guidance. Intel's products look great, and 2015 and beyond will be great. But are you really looking forward to having your share price in 2014 being dependent on news-flow and crossing your fingers for a "beat"?
I don't know if you are actually long INTC, but the #1 thing you should care about as an investor is the return that you expect on your investment. I love Intel the company. Always have, always will. But my frustration with Intel the stock is finally beginning to show after many years of owning it, hoping for the company to finally deliver growth.
Increase readership? Are you joking? Pro-Intel articles are much, much better viewed than negative ones.
Even though you think I'm trolling for PVs, I'm really not. The vast majority of my paid work is fixed payment on a per-article basis. I don't write "for pageviews".
Sorry to hear that. I suppose that all you want is blind pumping of Intel, rather than realistic assessments of the situation. That's fine.