• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Intel get kicked by AMD

  • Thread starter Thread starter Abz
  • Start date Start date

Abz

Abz

Abz

Associate
Joined
27 Jul 2004
Posts
678
Location
London
Intel is well known for its CPU's, and motherboards. Hence I have posted this thread in this section of the forum.

An article I read online stated that Intel is going to rid 10% of the 100,000 work force it has because of profit losses by mid 2007

Intel's loss shows a decrease of just over 1.1 billion in profits in just 3 months compared to last year, which indicates that Intel is in big trouble.

Their main competitor is AMD who bought ATI for about £2.4 billion, stating that AMD are doing very very well.

They are trying to save just over £1.6 billion by 2008.

What does this mean to us consumers....

Well Intel needs to get back on its feet, so that means that they will rush on production on new products so that they try to sell more!

But will there be problems with these new products, because its rushed?
Will AMD be the new top dog of CPU's?
What future holds for Intel?

Only time will tell... only time will tell

What you think! :confused:

Abz

(Source: BBC)
 
Intel do far more than just sell processors. They have huge deals with hundreds of manufacturers and won't be going bust anytime soon.
 
Bust is not the problem....

Its qulity.... will they still produce qulity products, even though they are under pressure...
 
Aha... seems am a bit slow here...

Will close this post...


... how you close a post???
 
Sounds like they are in a bad way.. makes you wonder why the hell they stood around and did nothing for so long when AMD was owning the market with the A64. Soon as intel knew about the A64 they should have been hard at work with a come back, god knows why its taken all this time... too busy focusing too much effort on TV adverts maybe :rolleyes:

Maybe Core 2 Duo mite just be enough to get intel back on track. Everyone and their nan is buying a C2D, it looks to remain the CPU for choice for def the rest of this year and prob the most of next yr.
 
I think it's quite obvious Intel isn't going anywhere. a lot of companies reduce their staff numbers to cut costs, it's quite normal.
 
*points at core 2 duo*

By the time that really gets into its swing, especially amoung us enthuiasts (which is where the A64 caught on), intel will probably regain enough market share. But frankly, I'm not too bothered, so long as there is competition.
 
matt1 said:
I think it's quite obvious Intel isn't going anywhere. a lot of companies reduce their staff numbers to cut costs, it's quite normal.
Click to expand...

Very true I agree but cutting 10,000 jobs is quite a lot... Although Intel is a big company....

They already saked over 1,000 managers ....
 
Socaddict said:
especially amoung us enthuiasts (which is where the A64 caught on), intel will probably regain enough market share. But frankly, I'm not too bothered, so long as there is competition.
Click to expand...

People who actually know more than the model name of their CPU account for 1% or less of Intel/AMD's actual market. AMD64 caught on because it was just plain better than Intel's offering at that point in time. In the server market, Opteron was shown to perform at a much higher level than the equivalent Xeon...

The enterprise-level market is probably worth considerably more to AMD/Intel than the home user which is why the initial Clawhammer/Sledgehammer CPUs were such an important step for AMD: perception is everything. Intel was the household name in terms of performance and reliability. It had to take an enormously capable CPU to crack that ethos. In terms of the server market, all Intel has done with their new Xeons is level the playing field.

In the desktop market, Core2Duo is now obviously king and OEMs WILL capitalise on that fact: home sales of Intel will increase, AMD contracts permitting.

Why have Intel cut jobs? Management is heading into a more stream-lined era so it stands to reason that people in every industry are being axed. Look at the automotive industry, the NHS, etc. It just looks bad for Intel because they've fired 10,000 people. It's no different to a small company firing one of its ten personnel. And anything can account for it: improved manufacturing methods, increased automation in manufacturing/administration/etc. all mean some people are made surplus to requirement. Not just profit losses.
 
My theory on this matter is as follows....

Intel invested vast sums of money in the developement of the NetBurst architecture and its manufacture...only to see AMD anihilate them in almost every arena. I think they begun work on the Core architecture a good while ago BUT needed to minimise losses. To do this they flogged the P4 for all it was worth...with the lowest expenditure possible (for example the first dual cores which were two single cores spliced together!!) until Core was ready. While they were developing this they sought to regain some kudos and so approached Steve Jobs singing the praises of their Core chips...Steve Jobs was impressed and announced the Apple switch to Intel chips...Most people assumed this would be to P4's and almost laughed Steve Jobs into oblivion...then they saw the benchmarks...and were silent :)

Intel released their Core chips and all is well...the redundancies are merely a consequence of their long term strategy.

Of course I have no evidence of this and it is pure speculation with a smattering of personal opinion....but I have a little more respect for Intel now. I'm convinced that they think long term...a beast like Intel cannot move fast and so must think ahead.

:) :) :)
 
i think you'll find its called progress, modernisation, more factories are becoming totally automated than ever before, intel might just be doing the exact same thing
 
Am sure at the end of the year with amd having to cut its cpu's so drastically to try and compete with intel, we may see amd doing such aswell.
 
Jabbs said:
Am sure at the end of the year with amd having to cut its cpu's so drastically to try and compete with intel, we may see amd doing such aswell.
Click to expand...

i doubt that will happen. amd has made targets year in year out, on the other hand intel been losing money.
its sad many ppl have lost there jobs but its one of many things intel need to do for the long term.
 
Theres a lot more to it especially in the server world but intel are doing very well with conroe but not as well as amd in server world and that is where all the money is hence the profit loss. The big step will be the quad cores as that is what industry and businesses will look for. Remember that intel are hand in hand with dell who sell a hell of a lot to both random people and comapnies. They will still come out well in the end. For such a large company cutting jobs will be because they dont need the staff rather than for finiacial reasons in employing so many at the moment. Time will tell
 
mercyless said:
i doubt that will happen. amd has made targets year in year out, on the other hand intel been losing money.
its sad many ppl have lost there jobs but its one of many things intel need to do for the long term.
Click to expand...


I wish I had been loosing money as quick as intel, I would end up £800,000,000 richer! thats not exactly what I call a great loss, fair enough there not making as much profit as they have been in the past but in anyones terms 800 million is a lot of money to make! when you think that the AMD annual turnover is 'only' £1.4 bil then intel are making 60% of AMD's turnover in profit. Despite AMD's catchup, they have barely scratched the surface
 
mrthingyx said:
Why have Intel cut jobs? Management is heading into a more stream-lined era so it stands to reason that people in every industry are being axed. Look at the automotive industry, the NHS, etc. It just looks bad for Intel because they've fired 10,000 people. It's no different to a small company firing one of its ten personnel. And anything can account for it: improved manufacturing methods, increased automation in manufacturing/administration/etc. all mean some people are made surplus to requirement. Not just profit losses.
Click to expand...


Very intreasting, and I totally agree, however saying that the account figures and the balance sheet looks very sick, hence causing the business to axe jobs to invest in maybe new business ventures or people.


Or maybe outsource people in the far east which is cheaper and more productive...

Most UK business are doing this now...


Edit: Intel rushed the production of Intel D Processor, then after a few months it released the Core2Due to compete with AMD X2 and I must say its doing very well....
 
Last edited:
lucifersam said:
AMD annual turnover is 'only' £1.4 bil then intel are making 60% of AMD's turnover in profit. Despite AMD's catchup, they have barely scratched the surface
Click to expand...


Very true... but keep in mind...

Intel has been in business before 1992, they are probebly the oldest company in term of CPU making.

AMD is far smaller than Intel and I would give it couple of years before it becomes as good as intel...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom