Print 22 comment(s) - last by Justin Case.. on Oct 20 at 7:30 PM

Intel records Q3 revenue of $10.1 billion USD

Things are looking pretty good in Santa Clara, California these days. Intel today announced that its third quarter revenue reached new records as result of its strong processor portfolio.

The company recorded revenue of $10.1 billion USD -- an increase of 15 percent from Q3 2006. Operating income was also up 64 percent year-over-year to $2.2 billion USD, while net income increased 43 percent to $1.9 billion USD.

"A combination of great products, strong and growing worldwide demand, and operational efficiency from our ongoing restructuring efforts led to record third-quarter revenue and a 64-percent year-over-year gain in operating income," said Paul Otellini, Intel's President and CEO. "Looking forward, we see each of these elements continuing to improve into the fourth quarter. We are very pleased with the results and optimistic about our business."

Intel reports that its microprocessor set new records during the quarter while the average selling price (ASP) remained relatively flat. Intel shipped more than two million quad core processors during Q3.

In addition, chipset and flash memory sales also set new records during the quarter, while motherboard shipments were down.

Intel's third quarter was quite profitable and it expects to record revenue of $10.5 billion USD to $11.1 billion USD during the fourth quarter. The company will have help thanks to its new 45nm-based Penryn desktop/server processors which are due to launch November 12.

Intel will follow-up in the first half of 2008 with new 45nm Menlow platform along with Penryn-based quad core mobile processors during the second half of 2008.

Intel will then crank things up even further with its 45nm Nehalem processors in the summer of 2008.

Intel’s good fortunes during the quarter still weren’t enough to stop job cuts. The company announced in late September that it would cut 10 percent of its IT staff worldwide to “stay agile and stay efficient."

Comments     Threshold

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

Is it just me or...
By chrispyski on 10/16/2007 10:10:25 PM , Rating: 2
Did Intel just recently announce another 2000 layoffs as part of there restructuring?

What's the deal here?

RE: Is it just me or...
By AmberClad on 10/16/2007 10:14:35 PM , Rating: 2
Sounds like streamlining operations and cutting dead weight. If I recall correctly, the layoffs were in their IT dept, not engineering or R&D.

RE: Is it just me or...
By feelingshorter on 10/16/07, Rating: 0
RE: Is it just me or...
By JumpingJack on 10/17/2007 12:29:54 AM , Rating: 5
Or it could mean that your figures are coming from Tier 1 OEMs and that the gap is being made up by Intel continuing to take more and more share from the channel ... as AMD continues to shun them in favor of keeping their Tier 1 supply to thei Tier 1 likining's :) ...

I believe they stated inventory was a little leaner than anticipated in the conference call...

RE: Is it just me or...
By Oregonian2 on 10/17/2007 3:07:59 AM , Rating: 2
Processors also are used in things that aren't PC's. They're used in embedded applications as well (particularly ones that want to leverage Intel development tools).

RE: Is it just me or...
By feelingshorter on 10/17/2007 11:27:33 PM , Rating: 2
Again not my statistics and I hardly think a Morgan Stanley analyst (who predicted) would miss that. What the WSJ was iterating is stock owners are weary if growth will continue, since sales of PCs have been flat. So if OEMs over order, then their profits will just decrease later on until all the CPUs previously ordered are sold.

Intel is also reducing spending by about $600 million.

Again, I'd rather believe the analysts (more than 1) that are worried about the outlook since the numbers don't add up. Oems have to sell whats ordered first before ordering more. I hardly think people who have millions invested in Intel have faulty statistics.

RE: Is it just me or...
By afkrotch on 10/18/2007 9:38:16 PM , Rating: 2
Have you looked into homebuilders? Alternative products? There's also been the constant change of processors that has OEMs making more purchases.

Once Penyrn and Phenom release, that's another increase in chip sales. Also OEMs have to purchase different variants, unlike in the past.

Before all you had was single core. Not much selection. Then the addition of dual core. Now you we have quad cores and dropped single cores. Worse for notebooks as it'll have all three in the future.

The more different procs available, the more OEMs have to stock to give users options for their builds. As long as Intel and AMD create different procs, OEMs will be stuck buying new ones, even if they already have a stockpile of older procs in the warehouse.

RE: Is it just me or...
By feelingshorter on 10/17/2007 11:15:22 PM , Rating: 2
The gap is by percentage. Meaning if they are taking up more and more market share, the percentage shouldn't change.

Not to mention what i said was straight from a wall street journal article and i'd rather believe them than people's "maybe" this and maybe that.

45nm Nehalem 2008
By enumae on 10/16/2007 10:23:01 PM , Rating: 4
Intel will then crank things up even further with its 32nm Nehalem processors in the summer of 2008.

Initial Nehalem will be 45nm, right?

RE: 45nm Nehalem 2008
By sprockkets on 10/16/2007 11:18:59 PM , Rating: 2
should be. And it was planned for late 2008.

To go from 45 to 32nm in a 6 month time span sounds ridiculous.

RE: 45nm Nehalem 2008
By daftrok on 10/17/2007 12:16:33 AM , Rating: 2
To go from 45 to 32nm at all sounds ridiculous. I feel bad for the engineers having to design that chip.

RE: 45nm Nehalem 2008
By Justin Case on 10/20/2007 7:30:49 PM , Rating: 2
They must have really strong magnifying glasses.

RE: 45nm Nehalem 2008
By JumpingJack on 10/17/2007 12:32:16 AM , Rating: 3
Well, Intel is launching 45 nm in about 3.5 weeks, roughly a year later the 'tock kicks in with Nehalem at 45 nm (guesstimating end of Q3'ish/beginning of Q4'ish -- about a year from now), then a year after that 32 nm in 2009, latter half end of Q3'ish/Q4'ish -- seems like they are goaling to that cadence...

RE: 45nm Nehalem 2008
By crystal clear on 10/17/2007 4:19:23 AM , Rating: 3
The below should clear up any misunderstandings.

Speaking to industry leaders, developers and industry watchers at the Intel Developer Forum (IDF), Otellini showed the industry's first working chips built using 32 nanometer (nm) technology, with transistors so small that more than 4 million of them could fit on the period at the end of this sentence. Intel's 32nm process technology is on track to begin production in 2009.

The company also demonstrated for the first time the next-generation chip architecture codenamed Nehalem, due out next year.

More on this subject-refer to the link.

Profits up
By AmberClad on 10/16/2007 10:16:24 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure Intel even did all that much in the previous quarter. It seems more like what AMD didn't do, like make sure enough Barcelonas were available to the channel.

RE: Profits up
By Oregonian2 on 10/17/2007 3:13:26 AM , Rating: 2
Intel seems to have been gaining in the server market. One analyst commented about the gross margins being up to 59% which wasn't forecasted until the end of next year -- so the product mix must have shifted with more server (higher margin) parts being sold. Having a flat ASP might indicate those server chips "compensating" for dropping desktop part prices. AMD needs to get things into gear really quick.

By gigahertz20 on 10/17/2007 1:22:26 AM , Rating: 2
After hours it's up 5%, very nice. I'm glad I bought Intel stock back in July 2006, but I really wish I would have invested some money into Nvidia (NVDA)....I decided to go for Intel but I kick myself every time I think about how I didn't invest in Nvidia.

By jadeskye on 10/16/07, Rating: -1
RE: money
By mikeyD95125 on 10/16/2007 10:15:06 PM , Rating: 5

RE: money
By Radeon117X on 10/16/2007 10:54:35 PM , Rating: 2
I'm with you there mikey....

Why would you want a Celeron M? I hope you mean to do some serious suicide runs on it or something or else i dont know what to think about you.

In any case, these are some profits for Intel. They really pulled off a nice set of combos in the market....with Core 2 Duo, and then with Quad availabilty, all while keeping consumer cost down, with great performance. AMD needs to come back in the game a bit more forcefully (octacore :)) and then prices will go even lower, which is always a good thing for us consumers .

RE: money
By Targon on 10/17/2007 12:19:20 AM , Rating: 2
AMD will eventually release an 8 core processor, but it has been shown that even going to 4 cores provides a minimal benefit for most applications. The big factor there is needing the extra links between the cores, and the complexity of such a thing.

What AMD really needs to do is a bit more in the system architecture area. If AMD pushes for the HTX slot to be used for graphics, and they get NVIDIA to go along with the idea, that could be a HUGE improvement for video card performance(the speed of a HyperTransport link should be so far above PCI Express that performance improvements should be significant). Also, making sure that the other components on most motherboards are connected via a HT link could also lead to performance benefits.

AMD has shown that having the focus be on overall system architecture can lead to significant performance improvements, but with that as their focus, when there is a delay in releasing new system architecture improvements, it lets Intel catch up and pass them.

RE: money
By murphyslabrat on 10/17/2007 9:52:05 AM , Rating: 2
The benefits of a dedicated socket would not be much in terms of bandwidth. Already, PCI-E 2.0 x16 has a theoretical bandwidth of 16GB/s. Where a dedicated socket would prove beneficial is with latencies, especially under AMD's HyperTransport heirarchy.

Where this could provide cost-saving as well as an increase in performance, is cheap video cards utilizing system memory. This access would gain a minor speed boost, but would have half of the latency issues. This would, in turn, increase performance while not requiring any onboard RAM (for the extreme budget models). Meanwhile, we would see an increase in performance for mid-range cards with smaller VRAM buffers, as transfers from main memory to VRAM would start sooner, though run at a similar speed.

"There is a single light of science, and to brighten it anywhere is to brighten it everywhere." -- Isaac Asimov
Related Articles
Intel to Cut 10 Percent of IT Staff
September 24, 2007, 2:47 PM
Intel Sets Official "Penryn" Launch Date
September 18, 2007, 1:17 PM
"Nehalem" Taped-out and Running Windows
September 18, 2007, 12:04 PM
Intel Plans Mobile Quad-Core
September 5, 2007, 3:15 PM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki