• 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 Now Operating On A Net Loss, $1.61 Billion In The Red

article from earlier this year:

960x0.jpg


www.forbes.com

It Is Time To Take Intel Seriously As A Chip Foundry

Intel has now secured more than $50B from US and European government incentives, customer commitments..., and its financial partners.
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com

forecasts are forecasts (anything can happen in the future). today is today.
plans are x, customers are y. results are results. words are words. does this post a point have.? it is a linked article.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
So like AMD and Nvidia will they go fabless and spin off the fab part of the company?
Click to expand...

This is inevitable, the truth is Intel don't even use Intel fabs anymore, Its GPU's are made on TSMC 6nm, Battlemage will be too, and Luna Lake is on TSMC 3nm.

Why? Because Intel cannot afford to keep up with the latest, which it needs to if it wants to become the second largest fab, TSMC spend $40 bn a year to stay at the cutting edge, that's getting on for Intel's annual revenue and TSMC have a head start, they are already there, it would cost Intel a whole lot more to catch up.

TSMC are able to do this because they have such customers as Apple, Nvidia, AMD, Texas Instruments, Qualcomm to name just the top 5 and now Intel are spending billions on buying TSMC wafers, guys they are now paying their main rival very large sums of their money to make chips for them, for that reason alone Intel fabs are cooked, the moment Pat signed TSMC's contracts it was over.

Why this was never going to work anyway, a resurgent AMD and entry by ARM eating Intel's lunch, Intel no longer have 98% of the data centre market share, they are no longer selling to literally everyone chips for up to $50,000 a pop, one thing AMD did was drag the price WAY the F Down to about $15,000, Intel have had to follow suit or be priced out entirely, with that dramatic cut in price Intel no longer have the funds to up keep its fabs, they are now selling more chips than ever, along with everyone else but at a massively reduced price forced up on them by a very competitive fabless X86 chip designer. < the crux of it.

Some people are now designing their own ARM based chips where as before they would have bought X86, Apples M chips and AWS Graviton to name two, while AMD closed out 2023 with 33% data centre market share, probably near 40% now, and growing... ARM have another 9%, Intel are rapidly heading for sub 50% market share, if they are not already there.

Its dire for a company formerly of its size, Intel are starting to sell off the family silver wares and you don't do that for no reason.

For Intel's fabs to compete with TSMC they will need a slice of Apple, Nvidia, AMD, Qualcomm.... Never going to happen, these people are happy to work with TSMC because there is no conflict of interest, TSMC don't make their own X86 products, they don't make any products of any kind, Intel need to make Apple, Nvidia, AMD, Qualcomm products while at the same time making their own products that compete with them directly, not a hope in hells chance.

No matter how much tax payers money Intel can blag out of a naïve US government its money wasted, its money to keep them ticking over paying for upkeep with no actual costumers to sell to, even them selves because Intel the chip designer can't keep up knee capping its self making chips at fabs that struggle to compete with Samsung.

This is already as good as done, its not a question of if, its a question of when, when is as soon as possible, before this bottomless money pit drains them of everything.
 
Last edited:
I'll keep going back to this point:
How did Intel kill off the RISC workstation vendors?
Not with better products or reliability.
No, it was volume, volume, volume and volume.
And just good enough products often good enough because Intel's volume allowed them to lead in fabs.
Imagine Athlon/Opteron vs Pentium 4 if Intel had not been on the better node?

So when Intel turned down Apple request to fab their phone SOC as it was to low margins? And similar margin obsession with Atom (whose existence for most of its life was like Intel selling new chipsets constantly: keep Intel's old fabs busy).

That is started Intel's decline. Lucky for Intel that it took so long and some if the years since then were record profit years.

Problem is Intel do not know their own history and have a rose-tinted version where they weren't a supplier of a mediocre ISA with crazy volume and think it was their ISA and design which got them to the top.
 
humbug said:
TSMC are able to do this because they have such customers as Apple, Nvidia, AMD, Texas Instruments, Qualcomm to name just the top 5 and now Intel are spending billions on buying TSMC wafers, guys they are now paying their main rival very large sums of their money to make chips for them, for that reason alone Intel fabs are cooked, the moment Pat signed TSMC's contracts it was over.
Click to expand...
I guess they have to hope China doesn't invade anytime soon huh? Our goose will be sooo cooked when if it happens.
 
I don't know why Intel is so precious about letting others use it's foundries, they have plenty of legacy nodes that could be used to make chips for other industries such as car manufacturing.

With Intel you kind of get the feeling with them is that they've had it so easy for so long they just don't what it's like to battle their way out problems and there's a large degree of entitlement and arrogance that runs through the company (especially the CPU division) that customers will stick with Intel come what may. I'd would give Patrick Gelsinger another year/eighteen months to start turning things around, if can't steer Intel in the right direction Intel should look at hiring someone like Rory Read who saved AMD from the brink to take over their.
 
Freddie1980 said:
I don't know why Intel is so precious about letting others use it's foundries, they have plenty of legacy nodes that could be used to make chips for other industries such as car manufacturing.

With Intel you kind of get the feeling with them is that they've had it so easy for so long they just don't what it's like to battle their way out problems and there's a large degree of entitlement and arrogance that runs through the company (especially the CPU division) that customers will stick with Intel come what may. I'd would give Patrick Gelsinger another year/eighteen months to start turning things around, if can't steer Intel in the right direction Intel should look at hiring someone like Rory Read who saved AMD from the brink to take over their.
Click to expand...
One of the things Intel does well is OEM relations and supply chain, and that was a Rory Read speciality - so maybe not the right person?

Of course, Intel also does plenty of OEM arm twisting but that fits back to your point that they set themselves as something special rather than the company which got a licensed to print money of the IBM PC with a design which until the 486 was really really poor (pity programmers in the days of 86 and 286 - and never forget that back in 1981 the Motorola 6800 was in the running with is 32 bit registers).

And the 486 was only as advanced as it was (but with plenty of 8086 baggage) because Intel has been printing money for so long at that point. Volume, volume volume was why Intel triumphed over other in 1980s but by the 2000s they had forgotten that when they did not take low(er) margin huge volume phones seriously.
 
Last edited:
Joxeon said:
I doubt the US would let china take control of TSMC and would probably ensure its destruction.
Click to expand...

Even if they captured the facilities intact China can't just take control of TSMC - to do anything useful requires the people, knowledge base/experience, design process, tooling and maintenance which relies on international partners, etc. etc. it would take them a lot of time and resources to actually put those foundries into useful production and they likely already have a lot of the information which can be gleaned from the facilities through espionage.
 
must be time to watch Dr Strangelove again.

need a sense of humour when the world is filled with colourful megalomaniacs and their helpers. (or victims). I avoid political discussions. but it's in the background unfortunately..
 
Last edited:
TrixP10 said:
So tell me how do they do that. Increase prices??
Click to expand...

By not R&D spending?

arknor said:
it's a dumb article they lost 1.6b but spent 5.6b on R&D & MG&A


R&D and marketing, general and administrative (MG&A) to approximately $20 billion in 2024

If they wanted to make a paper profit they could
Click to expand...

All of them measure their profits after operating expenses, that includes R&D, spent money is not money in the bank. If everyone measures profit before costs then no one losses any money, ever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom