[Fudzilla] TSMC outstrips Intel

[ShintaiDK]

1) I didn't mention R&D anywhere.
2) Intel has cut CAPEX twice this year already while TSMC has raised theirs.

You do know that Intel already payed for 3 large 450mm ready fabs? And TSMC sure needs to raise its, to get rid of all its outdated fabs with no upgrade path.

 

[Phynaz]

Who else can he be meaning? Arkaign keeps repeating the same lines about Intel's overwhelming "fundamental superiority" in all things - clearly he can't believe that includes Apple and Qualcomm and Samsung who have more money, market share and by the looks of things better engineers as well?

I'll take that as "Yes".

 

[blackened23]

apparently some people still haven't looked at the numbers. Numbers speak a very direct language that i guess some people dont want to read, lest it destroy the fabric of their alternative narratives.

It's almost like they're spreading FUD. Hardly surprising.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Yes, they cut it to 11 Billion. I know you didn't mention R&D, but I fail to see why having a larger CAPEX expense is significant of anything. Companies build their fabs at different times. Who cares if Samsung spends more on CAPEX in one year than Intel? all that means is that Samsung is building a Fab that year and Intel isn't. It certainly doesn't indicate that Samsung is catching up technologically with Intel.

For example, they may be building a fab that is 2 nodes behind Intel. They incur the expense in order to stay within striking decent or to keep up with production, but they aren't "catching up".

Thank you for the good post.

Don't expect a proven Intel basher/ARM fanboy to really think like that. Capex simply refers to the purchase of capital equipment. If you don't have a leading process recipe (that's what R&D does for you...and Intel outspends EVERYBODY ELSE here), you're not going to be building chips on a next gen process tech.

Wake me up when anybody else is building FinFETs that yield. Oh, wait, last I heard TSMC's 20nm yields were at 20-30% and Samsung's 20nm at 10%. I wonder how bad it'll be for them trying to get FinFETs to market.

Anyway...carry on with the anti-Intel/pro-ARM. I just pop in every so often to point out facts to counter the metric ton of BS that's spread by the media and by random forum goers. I must be a masochist.

 

[Arachnotronic]

i see this in multiple threads. Anytime intel is possibly doing something good ppl downplay, obfuscate, subjectively interpret and are skeptical of it. People do the same to amd, mostly because the company hasnt really executed well in the past in its primary markets.

back to my earlier point. SiliconWars you miss the point of my earlier statements regarding TSM.

TSM is

1) smaller than intel including lagging edges
2) 5x smaller than intel at its leading edge (28nm) (taking INTC's COGS vs TSM's revenues into consideration)
3) Only generates a fab margin not an IEM margin (intel makes both)
4) makes the vast majority of its money fabbing for customers at lagging edges
5) You focus on Net Income which is a GAAP measure. Focusing on what really matters (free cash flow). You see Intel's free cash flow margin has been 50% to 100% that of TSMs. TSM has massive capex needs (same as intel) but doesnt generate nearly as much cash to cover them. In fact at the current trajectory the company is going to have to raise debt to cover its dividend after capex

one can argue all day long about intel's future prospects positive or negative. That doesn't change the above points though. You could be happier working at TSM for sure. But again doesn't change the following points where people are comparing apples and oranges.

Another great post from somebody who obviously follows the financials of these companies beyond a cursory look at "net income".