• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Question Intel 1Q21 Earnings

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
3,493
3,758
136
Non-GAAP EPS beat by $0.25, GAAP EPS miss by $0.25.

Revenue = $19.7B, beats by $1.75B led by PC. Datacenter lower than expected.

Full year outlook raised.

More to come. . .
 

Gideon

Golden Member
Nov 27, 2007
1,264
2,377
136
Datacenter volume down 13% Y/Y and ASP down 14%.

Desktop volume down 4% Y/Y and ASP down 5%.

Notebook volume up 54% Y/Y and ASP down 23%.
And this is what Ian has to say about the notebooks:

Notebook volumes up 54% YoY Notebook ASPs down 23% I suspect that's a lot of educational market. Govt/Enterprise down another 20% this Q

So that's probably a lot due to educational market. Will see how this changes in the coming quarters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97

IntelUser2000

Elite Member
Oct 14, 2003
7,412
2,099
136
Notebook volume was up 54% but ASP was down 23%. All hail the Chromebook!
Datacenter volume down 13% Y/Y and ASP down 14%.

Desktop volume down 4% Y/Y and ASP down 5%.

Notebook volume up 54% Y/Y and ASP down 23%.
They can say whatever BS they want in their presentations, but competitive reasons are the big reasons behind the drops. They are most competitive in the Notebook segment.

Desktop? Crap.
Server? It's debatable whether it's a little better or little worse than Desktop. Crap again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
9,197
1,815
126
-4% volume for desktops isn't that bad given that there's a lot of people still working from home. The ASP decline is however problematic.
 

KompuKare

Senior member
Jul 28, 2009
656
188
116
Isn't the -14% server ASP decline despite officially barely moving prices?
Which would imply very deep discounts to big customers to keep them Intel.
No matter how competitve Renoir is, +54% notebook volume with a large ASP decline must tell a story about availability and OEM relationships.
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
9,197
1,815
126
Isn't the -14% server ASP decline despite officially barely moving prices?
Intel did officially cut prices with Cascade Lake Refresh. I think it's just that Cloud providers are buying more AMD now.

No matter how competitve Renoir is, +54% notebook volume with a large ASP decline must tell a story about availability and OEM relationships.
I'm not joking about the Chromebooks. Most of them are using very old Atoms.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
17,132
6,132
136
Interesting to see how far the client group is getting ahead of datacenter. Intel can thank Cooper Lake and Cascade Lake-AP for that. And Ice Lake-SP hah.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97

dmens

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2005
2,159
674
136
Interesting to see how far the client group is getting ahead of datacenter. Intel can thank Cooper Lake and Cascade Lake-AP for that. And Ice Lake-SP hah.
If AMD announces another blowout quarter next week on server sales then you know the Intel excuse of "cloud digestion" is total BS. And you still cannot buy a Icelake SP setup at Super Micro, so earnings call blabber about the ICL server ramp being "superb" is yet more BS.

The analysts on the call lobbed softball questions at the new CEO to not sabotage relationships right away. No hard questions on 7nm, ASP falling off a cliff, etc. Too bad.
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
9,197
1,815
126
What do you consider blowout? A billion datacenter rev would be nice surprise. That would close in on 20% of Intel.
Problem is that they lump the server sales in with the consoles. I doubt you would be able to get that kind of hard number out of them.
 

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
8,459
3,287
136
If AMD announces another blowout quarter next week on server sales then you know the Intel excuse of "cloud digestion" is total BS. And you still cannot buy a Icelake SP setup at Super Micro, so earnings call blabber about the ICL server ramp being "superb" is yet more BS.

The analysts on the call lobbed softball questions at the new CEO to not sabotage relationships right away. No hard questions on 7nm, ASP falling off a cliff, etc. Too bad.
Yeah, this is all we got on future nodes:
Harlan Sur: (20:48)
Good afternoon and a nice job on the quarterly execution. It was good to see the unveiling of the IDM 2.0 strategy back in March. Was also good to get the seven-nanometer update and continued execution on getting that ramped in 2023, but that’s just the point milestone, right? So in order to sustain your technology and performance leadership with the IDM 2.0 strategy, it’s going to require the team to maintain a cadence on both internal optimization but also, more importantly, to maintain a cadence of continued node shrinks to five-nanometer and then ultimately to three-nanometer. I think the Intel team had previously articulated node migrations kind of every two, two and a half years. Pat, I think you said a yearly cadence back in March, but I assume that that was internal optimization. But on the move to seven to five, can we expect the team to ramp 5 nanometers two, two and a half years after your seven-nanometer ramp and then three-nanometer ramp two, two and a half years after 5?

Pat Gelsinger: (21:56)
Hey, thank you for the question, Harlan. And overall, as I said on the call, we’re seeing very good progress on the seven-nanometer team. they’re executing now. We’re very confident of the changes that we made on that, right, and the move to really embrace EUV, and since we’ve done that, we’ve just seen superb execution. And as I said, in the Unleashed event, we expect to move to a yearly cadence or better for our process technology. And we’re going to be laying that path out very clearly. We’re excited about our team’s ability to get us back to process parity and ultimately to sustain leadership yet again.
So, nothing really. Everything is 'superb', yet we are provided no evidence. SMH.
 

moinmoin

Platinum Member
Jun 1, 2017
2,440
3,047
106
  • Like
Reactions: IEC and lightmanek

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
9,197
1,815
126
If they are doing chiplets, there's a lot they can get away with if the chiplets are tiny. Like say you had one 40 mm2 7 nm CPU chiplet and the rest of the product was on 14 or 10 or TSMC or whatever.
 

dmens

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2005
2,159
674
136
"And we’re going to be laying that path out very clearly. (Hope nobody notices I didn't answer the question and didn't lay the path out clearly at all.)"

Ian on twitter pointed out that some of the answers raised more questions than they actually answered:


The x86 licensing is the biggest joke in "IDM 2.0". What company is actually going to pay Intel to use a x86 core in their SOC when they most likely already have a ARM license thus access to IP from a customer service oriented company, with drop-in cores that communicate on widely adopted bus standards, use less power, and is not riddled with security holes?
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
17,132
6,132
136
If AMD announces another blowout quarter next week on server sales then you know the Intel excuse of "cloud digestion" is total BS. And you still cannot buy a Icelake SP setup at Super Micro, so earnings call blabber about the ICL server ramp being "superb" is yet more BS.
That stuff did rather jump out. But I figured anyone that's been following Intel over the last 4+ years would have noticed those details.

The analysts on the call lobbed softball questions at the new CEO to not sabotage relationships right away. No hard questions on 7nm, ASP falling off a cliff, etc. Too bad.
Lots of questions still on 7nm. Intel still hasn't mass-produced anything but 4c dice on 10nm that we know of (Tiger Lake-H and Alder Lake-S still haven't reach market in quantity). How are we to believe that 7nm is "on track" when Intel apparently isn't even buying up any more EUV machines? Astute readers on this forum have been able to track who's buying EUV equipment and who isn't.

So, nothing really. Everything is 'superb', yet we are provided no evidence. SMH.
Only evidence we have is of what Intel is NOT doing.

If they are doing chiplets, there's a lot they can get away with if the chiplets are tiny. Like say you had one 40 mm2 7 nm CPU chiplet and the rest of the product was on 14 or 10 or TSMC or whatever.
Haven't we seen that already with Xe?

 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97

ASK THE COMMUNITY