backtop


Print 55 comment(s) - last by Viditor.. on Apr 21 at 11:08 PM

Intel is in for a volatile 2006

Intel saw its profits drop by 38% in the first quarter to $1.35 billion dollars -- that was down from $2.18 billion a year ago. However, the earnings of 23 cents per share just barely eked pasted analysts' expectations of 22 cents per share.

"The first quarter was a little better than I was expecting. The second-quarter (estimate) was worse than I modeled. We're in for a rough quarter with Intel," said ThinkEquity Partners analyst Eric Ross. Things have pretty much been down across the board for Intel. Reuters reports:

The company lowered its full-year revenue forecast to a 3 percent fall from 2005. In January, Intel had forecast 6 percent to 9 percent revenue growth in 2006. Intel also cut its estimate of 2006 gross margin to 53 percent from its January forecast of 57 percent.

Much of the drop can be attributed to AMD's recent gains on the desktop and in the server arena. While Intel shares have dropped 24% in the past year, AMD shares have risen 80% during the same period.

Intel has aggressively cut prices to stay ahead of AMD's surge and its new Core lineup is expected to give them a boost later in the year. Only time will tell if AMD's Socket AM2 processors will have what it takes to keep up with Core products.





Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

It will all turn back around soon
By bamacre on 4/20/2006 10:24:03 AM , Rating: 2
Intel has a lot of good stuff coming out this year, things are going to rebound, and fairly well, too.




RE: It will all turn back around soon
By AstroCreep on 4/20/2006 10:37:52 AM , Rating: 2
It wouldn't surprise me, anyway.
The new products they have lined up are (finally) focusing on real performance, not just being 'fast', and they will absolutely play up the fact that their next gen stuff beats AMD in most aspects, especially with the lawsuit and all...


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By dmcanally on 4/20/2006 10:52:26 AM , Rating: 2
Why does everyone gobble up the intel hype (hype not evidence) about conroe and ask for seconds? When real world performance numbers come out and we see that Conroe performs better than k8 by just a little if at all will you people finally realize that you shouldn’t take intel’s word for it?


By AnotherGuy on 4/20/2006 10:56:16 AM , Rating: 2
Tell her it's up to either a new comp or a new wife


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By bamacre on 4/20/2006 10:56:36 AM , Rating: 2
Still in denial, huh? :D


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By dmcanally on 4/20/2006 11:06:36 AM , Rating: 1
no I just don't jump ship because the dude selling life boats says we are sinking...


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By bamacre on 4/20/2006 11:14:08 AM , Rating: 2
Yup, still in denial.

Hey, this is good for everyone. I've built amd and intel systems, don't have a problem with with either one. Except for the fact the competition between them is nothing to the sort of that between ATI and Nvidia. And that will hopefully start changing, which is good for all of us.


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By dmcanally on 4/20/2006 1:58:35 PM , Rating: 2
Not in denial, just don't trust intel the same as I wouldn't trust AMD.


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By zsdersw on 4/20/2006 3:53:07 PM , Rating: 2
Bull...

You certainly trust AMD more than Intel, and this quote from you is a strong testament to it:

quote:
When real world performance numbers come out and we see that Conroe performs better than k8 by just a little if at all


So you're trusting that the best available from AMD when Conroe ships will be only a little slower, if at all. You're placing trust in something we haven't really seen yet; exactly what you're saying people shouldn't do with Conroe.


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By dmcanally on 4/21/2006 10:27:45 AM , Rating: 1
Whe did I say "the best available from AMD"? Don't assume and don't put words in my mouth. Even so, "the best available from AMD" when conroe comes out will be about the same performance of "the best available from AMD" right now.


By zsdersw on 4/21/2006 11:21:00 AM , Rating: 2
Then perhaps you should explain what you meant in your quote that I had in my reply.

It's not really an assumption to interpret what you said as meaning to imply "the best from AMD".. considering that the K8 architecture will be what's out when Conroe ships.


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By hstewarth on 4/20/2006 10:58:32 AM , Rating: 1
There have been non-Intel previews of the Conroe showing off its performance on the Net. It doesn't matter much, just wait to this summer when people start getting them.

AMD really should be worry about the Conroe that much, it is the Woodcrest chip that they should be really worry about. I have not seen any previews on it but with its dual independent 1333Mhz bus at FB-Memory that 4x the speed of current memory. This is going to be one fast machine. Conroe and AMD AM2's will look like Celorons compared to it.


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By dmcanally on 4/20/2006 11:01:23 AM , Rating: 2
links? Are there real numbers with close to equal machines?


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By hstewarth on 4/20/2006 11:23:57 AM , Rating: 2
There are many benchmarks out there - just Google for "Conroe FX 60" Here are 2 such, can't remmeber the forum with results with AMD people dropping there jaws.

http://www.hothardware.com/viewarticle.aspx

http://www.anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i...

Please keep in my these were only at 2.4 and 2.66Ghz, the 3Ghz Woodcrest and eventually the 3.33Ghz Conroe EE would be signficantly faster.


By dmcanally on 4/20/2006 1:44:36 PM , Rating: 2
if there were emoticon's on here I would insert a rolleyes...


By dmcanally on 4/20/2006 1:57:20 PM , Rating: 2
looks like I will be using this emoticon too...

:footinmouth:


By harshbarj on 4/20/2006 3:13:29 PM , Rating: 2
Those reviews can't be trusted as intel set them up. All they(anandtech/hothardware) were able to do is hit the start button. Till they can get these chips in the lab and truly bench them anyone would be foolish to trust them. As a rule NEVER trust scores put out by manufactures.

from anandtech

"Intel setup the systems, Intel installed the benchmarks and Intel only let us run what it had installed. "


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By bbomb on 4/20/2006 3:45:29 PM , Rating: 2
Too bad it took Intel 5 years to catch up to the peformance of AMD's ancient K8 architechture. I wonder when AMD plans to revamp its cores and release K9.


By zsdersw on 4/20/2006 3:54:38 PM , Rating: 2
Too bad you don't realize that it takes 5 years for a new architecture to come out from either Intel or AMD.


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By Viditor on 4/20/2006 12:00:26 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Intel has a lot of good stuff coming out this year, things are going to rebound, and fairly well, too

They do have a very good desktop CPU (apparently) coming out. But how does that mean things will necessarily rebound for them?

1. Even if Conroe is the best thing since sliced bread, they can only produce enough for them to be ~10% of their desktops in Q3, and ~20% in Q4. This isn't enough volume for them to turn the financials around.

2. AMD will still continue to gain significant growth in servers. Even if Woodcrest is amazing, it won't be qualified till well into next year (about the time K8L is expected)...and as it doesn't have HT connections, it won't compete with Opteron in the Enterprise market at all. And leave us not forget that Opteron goes Quad Core @65nm by the end of this year.

3. The 8xx and 9xx lines will be relagated to the Celeron level of pricing, so they may gain marketshare in that sector but at the cost of almost all of their margins (i.e. they will gain marketshare but lose revenue share). These will be the balance of their desktop chips (80%+ in Q3).

4. We still have yet to see Merom...

5. Conroe's lead could well be very short-lived as K8L with double the FPU power just might leapfrog it early next year...but the jury is still out on that, and that won't effect this year anyway.


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By Phynaz on 4/20/2006 12:06:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
1. Even if Conroe is the best thing since sliced bread, they can only produce enough for them to be ~10% of their desktops in Q3, and ~20% in Q4. This isn't enough volume for them to turn the financials around.


Link?


By sircuit on 4/20/2006 12:36:42 PM , Rating: 2
RE: It will all turn back around soon
By mikecel79 on 4/20/2006 12:24:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
2. AMD will still continue to gain significant growth in servers. Even if Woodcrest is amazing, it won't be qualified till well into next year (about the time K8L is expected)...and as it doesn't have HT connections, it won't compete with Opteron in the Enterprise market at all. And leave us not forget that Opteron goes Quad Core @65nm by the end of this year.


According to the below link AMD will not release Quad core Opterons until 2007. Got a link that says otherwise?
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/chips/0,39020354,...


By Viditor on 4/20/2006 7:59:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
According to the below link AMD will not release Quad core Opterons until 2007

Sorry, I should have been clearer...
They will start producing them this year, but release isn't until Q1 2007. Listen for the 65nm production comments in the following:
http://tinyurl.com/fkxe3


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By Tegeril on 4/20/2006 2:45:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
1. Even if Conroe is the best thing since sliced bread, they can only produce enough for them to be ~10% of their desktops in Q3, and ~20% in Q4. This isn't enough volume for them to turn the financials around.


Errr. http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/04/19/intel_to_ship_co...


RE: It will all turn back around soon
By smitty3268 on 4/20/2006 3:21:11 PM , Rating: 2
It's pretty simple: To buy a $2000 computer, just buy her a $1000 piece of jewelry first.

If you really can't afford that, then you probably shouldn't be getting a new computer anyway.


By smitty3268 on 4/20/2006 3:23:47 PM , Rating: 2
Replied to the wrong thread... Too bad there's no editing - now I just have to look like an idiot. ;)


Price War!
By Phynaz on 4/20/2006 10:51:00 AM , Rating: 2
Sounds like Intel is gearing up for a price war. Cool, cheap Conroe's.

How do I convice the wife I need a new PC after a year and a half?




RE: Price War!
By dmcanally on 4/20/2006 10:53:38 AM , Rating: 2
You grow a pair, slap her to the floor, throw your computer out the window and tell her you are going to buy a new one.


RE: Price War!
By Phynaz on 4/20/2006 11:47:13 AM , Rating: 2
Never had a girl, huh?


RE: Price War!
By dmcanally on 4/20/06, Rating: -1
RE: Price War!
By TiberiusKane on 4/20/2006 12:40:37 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
by dmcanally on April 20, 2006 at 10:53 AM

You grow a pair, slap her to the floor, she throws you out the window and tells you to get a new woman.


Fixed that for ya.



RE: Price War!
By dmcanally on 4/20/2006 1:43:24 PM , Rating: 2
if you have to get permission from your woman to buy a damn computer, you have much bigger problems at hand.


RE: Price War!
By KCjoker on 4/20/2006 5:26:27 PM , Rating: 2
Ain't that the truth. I've never had to ask for permission and I never will. Likewise she doesn't have to ask for my permission to buy something. If the item is a car or something like that then yes we consult each other. Some men these days are such wimps, afraid to display a backbone and a set of balls.


RE: Price War!
By Zelvek on 4/20/2006 7:33:24 PM , Rating: 2
of coarse that would mean that on a lower income you would actualy need to cunsult her on a new computer now wouldn't you?


RE: Price War!
By ZmaxDP on 4/20/2006 12:41:52 PM , Rating: 3
Wow,

Someone just hammered themselves out of the gene pool. If he ever had a chance, that just finished it.


RE: Price War!
By dmcanally on 4/20/2006 1:42:11 PM , Rating: 2
hahaha.


RE: Price War!
By Darth Farter on 4/20/2006 1:08:30 PM , Rating: 2
not too sure of "cheap" conroe's.

that 4mb 2.67Ghz model from all those previews comes in at $530 apparently.

thought this one was going to be less then $300 according to the hype... so not that cheap at all, premiums are going to be charged...

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=31126


RE: Price War!
By mikecel79 on 4/20/2006 6:48:56 PM , Rating: 2
That's still about $470 cheaper than the processor they were comparing it to. Take a look at that link you sent, the cheapest Conroe is going to be $210. I'd call that pretty cheap for a next generation processor.


RE: Price War!
By Darth Farter on 4/21/2006 12:48:31 PM , Rating: 2
smartiepants. $200 is a conroe with half the cache, and apparently lower fsb, so today's equivalent of a celeron/sempron, only charging a premium of $210.

and remember next gen always comes cheap too like the920/A64 3000+ so this makes your whole point invalid... :-/


By rushfan2006 on 4/20/2006 11:40:54 AM , Rating: 3
I've used Intel chips until about 8 years ago when I tried AMD..been building with AMD ever since merely on price/performance factor. Now, ever since I read the back story to AMD's current case against Intel...and having read the full claim...I really hate Intel. I mean true I'm going on information from a court claim written by lawyers paid to defend AMD, but assuming even just half of what's in that claim is true of Intel -- they are still scumballs.

Quite interesting read in any case -- lots of drama in it, but some of the stuff Intel supposedly does to steal business from AMD is amazingly underhanded -- in one case they supposedly demanded one of the executives at a large OEM to be fired...why? Because that executive was spearing heading a campain to bring AMD "in-house" for a new pc line the OEM was about to debut. Up until that point the OEM was all Intel.

So I really don't care if Intel starts to lose business (and btw if the roles were reversed I'd say the same of AMD)...any business that conducts itself as such...deserves every lost profit or bad karma they can get.




By bldckstark on 4/20/2006 12:10:52 PM , Rating: 2
Keep in mind that AMD did not say that the things Intel have done are wrong in a general sense. They say they are wrong because they have a monopoly on the X86 market. In other words, AMD can, has, and will do the same things as long as they are not found to be a monopoly and have to stop.

Doesn't it state in the suit at some point that this is all fair game and normal business practice around the world, but it is illegal if you are a monopoly?

I love my AMD's, but if Intel is close to the same performance and costs less, then I'm buying them. That is the same reason I bought AMD the first time, in 1994 (75MhZ).


By redbone75 on 4/20/2006 2:03:18 PM , Rating: 3
I really don't doubt that Intel has done some of the things AMD has accused them of. Large corporations try every trick in the book to get that one step ahead of the competition (or so other corporations bringing lawsuits against them would have us believe). I think AMD's current market position, rather, their lack of desired market position, is strongly tied into their lack of advertising over the past decade or so. They've made gains in the consumer desktop area by offering budget computers at chain stores like Walmart, and that's wonderful for them; however, can anyone tell me of that catchy little jingle or AMD Inside logo/sticker that has made AMD a household name over the years? No? Their server and workstation gains have been amazing, all due to the incredible performance offered, but the corporate world is a bit different than the ordinary consumer level. Word of mouth can only get you so far, and I seriously applaude AMD for the inroads they have made thus far, but come on AMD. Don't blame your current state solely on your enemy's alleged tactics and monopolistic position when you've done little to seriously market your own products over the years. I'm not defending Intel, by no means. Hell, you'd be rather foolish to think that Intel hasn't done at least a few of the things they are being accused of, but AMD would have done the same if the roles were reversed. Look at the iPod. Apple has been relentless in barraging the world with ads and commercials and posters and... you name it they've done it. Now, the iPod is the undisputed king of portable music players, even though there are products out there that are arguably superior to it (Creative Vision: M). But, I haven't seen any other company besides Sony with an advertising campaign for their media players. And that's the moral of the fable: you've got to tell people about your product in order for them to know about it. No magic to it.


By rushfan2006 on 4/20/2006 4:55:29 PM , Rating: 2
I have to admit you have a very good point about AMD's lack of advertising. When you think it about - its kind of remind's me of that show "Mind of Mencia" when he goes "DEE DE DEE" (ie. as to imply stupidity or something obvious). No wonder AMD isn't as big as they could be -- they never have strong ad campaigns.

Of course if you read the suit they claim or what to lead you to believe anyway..that Intel hinders their ad campaigns as well.

As far as two comments above my original, about saying the suit doesn't claim that Intel is actually doing wrong -- its just wrong that Intel is a monopoly. Well first I didn't interpret it as such...to me it fully and clearly looked like AMD was saying its wrong. The next thing is don't forget its ILLEGAL to do what Intel is doing (on the assumption that Intel is actually doing what AMD claims)...right or wrong , good or bad...its illegal according to US law.

All personal emotions and conspiracy theorists aside...the original reason Uncle Sam went after Microsoft was for Anti-Trust Law violations.

At any case, of course go with the best performing product with the best price -- we are consumers..that's what we do...get the best goods at the best price. But what I am saying is I won't go out of my way for Intel...even if you have an AMD chip and an Intel chip at the same price -- but the intel performs very slightly better like say 5% better..."yesterday" (figuratively speaking of course) I would of bought Intel...today I'd go "ahh doesn't matter its only 5%" and would buy the AMD.



By Zelvek on 4/20/2006 7:51:51 PM , Rating: 3
How many of you work in retail? I do and I would say that maybe 1 out of 6 people have ever heard of intel or AMD they don't and maybe 1 out of 4 of those who have heard of them actualy stand by one or the other (at this point they mainly stand by AMD). If I explain to them what is going on (I explain how one uses a sort of short division and the other long so the speed does not mater)they will go with AMD. The problem comes along when 1 out 5 desktops that are made are AMD, they are almost all Intel it is not the consumer it is the manufacture. I must admit that it is now becoming more evenly matched now but with companies like Dell it still has far to go. The avererage consumer looks at price if it cost more it must logicaly be better the sam hapens with sony. Most people who shop for computers think that every thing is mad by the manufacture HP, Dell, Gateway, etc.


By Viditor on 4/20/2006 8:11:01 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I really don't doubt that Intel has done some of the things AMD has accused them of

Many people have witnessed it first hand, including Anand. He mentioned several accounts that he's knew of in his blog when the suit was first announced.
http://tinyurl.com/q86qw

"I've known about this sort of stuff for quite some time, in fact, I'd say that out of the 48 pages AMD's legal team put together there's a lot missing. AMD told me that they aren't putting all cards on the table, but here are a couple of other things that I've seen personally:

I can't even begin to count the number of times where motherboard manufacturers have told me that they could not:

1) Send an AMD motherboard for review
2) Promote an AMD motherboard
3) Let us take pictures of an AMD motherboard

Out of fear of Intel retaliation. Remember the original Athlon days when no motherboard manufacturer would dare make a board for the K7? All of the frightened manufacturers were afraid of them losing their Intel chipset allocation if they supported the K7"


By hstewarth on 4/21/2006 2:51:22 PM , Rating: 1
I wish threads would stick to subject.. this is on Intel not on stupid AMD vs Intel suit.


AMD has lost 1/4 of it's value in 30days...
By DallasTexas on 4/21/2006 12:45:10 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, yeah..Intel is this and that and AMD is best thing since toilet paper, blah blah.

Some not so obvious facts missing..
1. AMD has lost 1/4 of it market value since Conroe was shown and 65nm up and running. While they still have done very well over the years (I know, I own 1,500 shares of AMD), the long term writing is on the wall.
2. AMD has actually had HIGHER desktop share than today back in the early 90's. That may come as a surprise to some of you MySpace engineers in here.

Granted, AMD will continue to do well. I will likely keep my shares and hope they will climb back up to $41 or so and then see what happens. However, the biggest and baddest chip maker around, Intel, remains well, the biggest and baddest chip maker.
I "rent" AMD stock but wil always "own" Intel. :-)




By Viditor on 4/21/2006 11:08:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
AMD has lost 1/4 of it market value since Conroe was shown and 65nm up and running

I know it's easy to lose the forest for the trees here (so much press on Conroe), but the reason for the recent drop has very little to do with Conroe...
At the same time as the Conroe showing, it was also revealed that Intel has a much larger unused inventory than previously thought, and they are planning on dumping their Netburst chips on the market for next to nothing in an attempt to stop their marketshare loss. This "Price War" is what dropped AMD, not Conroe...as proof of this please note that Intel shares have dropped as well (though they were already near historic lows).
Remember that 70% of AMD's chip income is from Opteron, which won't be affected by Conroe at all...and Woodcrest won't have an effect until it's fully qualified next year sometime (when K8L is scheduled to make an appearance). Also, Conroe can only be up to 10% of intel's shipments next quarter. This is why Intel is guiding for even more drops in profit ahead...
While it's true AMD has lost 25% in the last month, they are still 50% higher over the last 6 months...
One last point...for the first time ever, AMD's Gross Margin is higher than Intel's and Intel is guiding for an even lower Gross Margin next quarter (49%) while AMD is guiding for a flat to higher one.


It's about growth
By White Widow on 4/20/2006 10:59:06 AM , Rating: 2
Intel's problem is that is has stopped being a growth company and everyone still expects it to be. With 80%+ of the marketshare, it's hard to grow a lot year on year if the industry as a whole is not growing as quickly. AMD can keep "growing" by taking away Intel marketshare, but who is Intel gonna take it from?




RE: It's about growth
By dmcanally on 4/20/2006 11:02:26 AM , Rating: 1
maybe AMD? being that they are inferior right?


Bad news for Intel.
By Xonoahbin on 4/20/2006 6:27:19 PM , Rating: 3
Even if they do have an absolutely crazy chip in Conroe, people are very apparently losing their trust in Intel. Problematically, once you begin to lose customers' faith, it's hard to gain it back. I think people are finally realizing Intel hyped up stuff with its gHz wars and that it was an inferior chip. The problem for Intel is that even if they have a good chip, people won't believe them. They believed them in the past and got burned.




Smell the coffee Intel
By Anemone on 4/20/2006 7:02:35 PM , Rating: 1
It's getting past time to intro Conroe and Merom. But maybe they need another quarter to stink before they realize, no one is interested in their current products!

Corporate ignorance in a bottle.




"Nowadays, security guys break the Mac every single day. Every single day, they come out with a total exploit, your machine can be taken over totally. I dare anybody to do that once a month on the Windows machine." -- Bill Gates













botimage
Copyright 2015 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki