Cherrytrail/Atoms tech is used in low end Celerons and pentiums. Don't worry.. Intel knows what its doing. You and Essa haven't a clue.
lol. Intel spent, what 20+ billion on 'mobility', It's laying of 12000 people, and repositioning itself, and yet you say Intel knows what it's doing? No questioning from a share holder eh? Just trust in management?
Explain Intel's IoT and 5G strategy, how and when it hopes to be competitive in those sectors?
They got their money's worth back with cherrytrail and now with the LTE modems in Apple. They need LTE for their IOT effort and technology expertise is never wasted.
Cherrytrail eh? How many units do you think Intel sold? How much of the $10 price to Apple do you think goes back to Intel once they have paid TSMC for that LTE modem? Will Intel make enough to cover the development cost of that part? What about the *billions* Intel has spent on these projects?
So, Intel need IoT effort. Why would that be? What is Intel's strategy to compete with "LTE enabled IoT SoCs"?
DumbEssa needs to get a job. He has zero knowledge of how the industry works.
Zero knowledge eh?
why not cancel things that won't sell? Seems like a good idea to me. You, or was it your shrill dual, Essa, have been jabbering about the failure of these products for years. Are you hosting us all for a champagne dinner tonight?
These are 'future' products (Sofia LTE and Broxton). If 'Essa' or anyone else could see that Intel would struggle with these parts (spec wise, sofia would have struggled even if on time) why did Intel spend millions (hundreds?) on the projects?
Given BK's talk of IoT and 5G as key points of Intel's strategy, how does this all sit with you?
ARMH moves up as Apple sells off. Does anyone on Wall Street know they are related?
After all the years of your ARMH talk, you would think you would have picked up the basics. Clearly not. ARMH earns more per SoC from the Chinese than it does from Apple, and who is Apple losing out to, in China?
Ashraf is a disingenuous #$%$. plain and simple. I urge you and others to bash him out of here mercilessly.
FYI, you've got the wrong guy over on iHub...
Intel has much more transparency into what they offer than the competition does.
Utter rubbish. All the foundries have to be extremely open due to the way things are built (ie, the tools). Intel is much more closed (as it uses it's own tools - for the most part).
Could you elaborate why Intel wants to get this deal go through?
One of the biggest strategic threats to Intel is the ARMy in servers, especially for generalized compute workloads. One of the biggest drivers for the ARMy servers, is China...Intel would be wise to put any blockers up that limit the reach of the ARMy. By 'allowing' this deal Intel could (would?) slow down the ARMy getting into that compute workload space.
AMD can't license x86 technology to another venture without Intel's approval. Why isnt BK doing something!! AMD is blatantly breaking the cross-patent agreement.
Perhaps it's not the ISA they are licencing, perhaps it's CPU's and other IP blocks? Intel has done this before with it's CPU's, why can't AMD?
Perhaps it's in Intel's interest to let this deal go through...
[Yes, as evidenced by ARM's $40 stock price. You keep trying to put lipstick on the mobility pig. Give it up. It just makes you look silly and churlish. ]
It's facts. No lipstick needed.
Must be that mobility decline that Intel avoided. Thank goodness.
Mobility is growing. Intel avoided this growing market by it's inability to deliver products when it said it would.
No way TSMC can support their high CapEx with commodity smartphones.
Why would that be? You have to get your head around how much these high end SoC's sell for...It's the BoM costs, not the retail prices...
Example (over on anandtech), the LeEco Le 2, 3GB LPDDR3-1866, Helio X20, 10 Core, 20nm TSMC part. Retails, for USD170. How much to you think the SoC costs? What about their high end, Le Max 2, 6GB LPDDR4-3733, Snapdragon 820, 14nm Samsung, retails USD 385. That SoC?
You are looking at 20 bucks for a high end SoC, and the price drops quickly down the performance/feature curve.
Fare enough. Isn't the new Xeon processors with built-in FPGA, derived from a TSMC 20nm part?
"are you sure Intel is shipping 14nm FPGA's?"
I am sure.
Any link? the only reference I could find was associated with the E5-2600 v4 news from a few days ago.
revenue from 16/20 nm was 23% in Q1 which is 1% less compared to to Q4 2015 -
it was 16% in Q1 2015
not too impressive IMO while Intel started shipping 14 nm FPGA's
Semi, are you sure Intel is shipping 14nm FPGA's?
It's all about huge fix cost - IOW get volume up quickly.
Even with declining PC market Intel has the advantage of manufacturing CPU's which use the same tool set. So CPU can carry the major burden to recover fix cost - that's a completely different scenario for the foundries (TSMC).
Not only equipment cost are skyrocketing also the cost for a new design.
I think Intel can make far, far more profits with NAND and cross point memory (compared to APUs) which both are or will be part of the "server infrastructure" -
the ARM camp relies on third parties
Not sure of your point here in the context of my reply to will_amd_yu.
People think these high end phones (600 USD+) have an 'expensive' SoC but they don't. You are only talking single $ numbers separating these SoC's from the mid end phones that sell for hundreds less.
[Oh, noooooooooooooo - we agree on something!!! Say it isn't so, say it isn't so.]
If BK was trying to change the culture at Intel, what took him so long? The problems have been self-evident to even the casual observer for months.
I'd argue that BK has been trying to change things from the beginning. His little secret projects (such as Quark) etc.
Don't you think he's trying to change the culture?