Revenue down 22%.
Edit: Oh and it gets better... Intel posted a loss!
While this is certainly not the AMD earnings thread (so I hesitated to respond), you'll note AMD did not change full year guidance. This includes margins, so the margin dip appears to be temporary.
It is Q2 related only due to Amortizations regarding the Xilinx acquisition. See Appendices in the slide presentation.so the margin dip appears to be temporary.
Yeah and my point is you should not claim a 3 year lag, when it was a 6 month lag.SSDs were not ready for prime time in Jan. 2008. The Intel X25M was the first SSD that didn't absolutely suck, and it came out a year later.
You might as well say the original iPod was a failure because it used a hard drive instead of flash. Yeah, it was a better product when it used flash, but that wasn't an option when it was introduced.
Isn't that from the cost of the Xilinx acquisition? In that case, it's just a great tax write off.
Write off? For what? If anything it appreciated in value.
I have said this for YEARS here, that Intel needs to stop relying on their reputation or bad things will happen. NO I don't think they will go under, but it may be time for the monopoly to end, and be a 50-50 race, and thats only if they get their act together in the next couple of years. I mean Alder lake has a few strenghts, but a lot of weaknesses also, and using it in their SPR server chip is hurting badly, hence them being like 2 years late.Thinking about this some more, this is really a remarkable crisis for Intel. A good turnaround needs a hard reality. Intel needs to get themselves in order fast. A lot of axes will fall I think, unfortunately, on Intel management.
Yeah and my point is you should not claim a 3 year lag, when it was a 6 month lag.
Please check your facts before commenting. The batteries in the MacBook Air 2022 and MacBook Pro 2021 are not glued in.glued in batteries


You will see a downturn there as well, it will be milder and will happen later.
Have you used an iPhone 13? I have a pro max and it outclasses every other phone I have owned. It is no surprise to me they are selling like hot cakes.
You're redefining when the Macbook Air was introduced based on standards unique to you to try to excuse Intel's total failure to recognize market trends? Whatever you need to do to defend them I guess.
Nailed it.I expect AMD to not have Intel's issues last quarter. However, I expect AMD to reduce its server growth projections.
Once again, I wonder why you keep making it sound like you're the only one who saw Intel's problems on the internet. People were bearish on Intel on any tech forum on the internet. Literally everyone was saying the same as you about Intel.I have said this for YEARS here, that Intel needs to stop relying on their reputation or bad things will happen. NO I don't think they will go under, but it may be time for the monopoly to end, and be a 50-50 race, and thats only if they get their act together in the next couple of years. I mean Alder lake has a few strenghts, but a lot of weaknesses also, and using it in their SPR server chip is hurting badly, hence them being like 2 years late.
That wasn't my point anyway. Samsung is a follower and they are doing great in the Smartphone market. Also inventing a category is good, but you can do better in revisions.
You have companies like Framework that has replaceable motherboards and they sell replacements for every part. You have many mini PC vendors coming up. It's ripe with new ideas even though it's a very established market. The mentality Apple has towards repair is still pretty bad by the way.
You may complain about the market created by Ultrabooks but it did result in higher quality systems and sort of stemmed the tide into more and more Netbooks. Yes it didn't get as big as they expected but now we see the benefits. I am a big fan of ultra light(2.5lbs or under) convertible laptops for example. You've got many more choices into form factors than you did then. Also note that the average joe consumers don't care about the things we do.
What do you call the super light and portable systems aimed for the Japanese market? Did Apple really invent it or they did they market it really well so people think they did? Previous to Airs and Ultrabooks no company in NA cared to make one. Yet in Japan the local companies did because their people liked very portable systems. Laptops like Portege way predate the Macbook Air.
We have lots more choices now. That's why Apple vs rest argument still exist. Even Apple is another choice.
Anyway if everyone is smart, no one is. If everything is innovative then none are. The truly innovative thinkers are often once in a generation thing. Steve Jobs did a good thing. But now he's dead and gone!
Maloney would have resulted in a far better result for them. But it did not work out. Now Pat has to work first to reverse the decline rather than in the alternate timeline where he could have spent all the time strengthening it.
Well, maybe you didn't see the roasting I got from several posters that did not believe as we do.Once again, I wonder why you keep making it sound like you're the only one who saw Intel's problems on the internet. People were bearish on Intel on any tech forum on the internet. Literally everyone was saying the same as you about Intel.
Everyone knew Intel was in trouble and that COVID gave them 2 more years of growth that they really didn't deserve.
Intel canceling ARC wouldn't really surprise given their history with GPUs. And with ARC I mean the gaming architecture not the compute/datacenter products. The gaming part however always has the benefit of getting some more money from the same core R&D but also incurs additional cost. Not sure it is a net positive.
It was really Apple that really pushed the ultrabook to popular levels with the MacBook Air in 2008.I said that. And without his push we wouldn't have the Ultrabook category at all. Plus he was said to be few in the company who thought mobile devices would be a thing while most at Intel were content with success of Core.
So I hope the new management has foresight to deal with this and keep the gaming GPU line. Because I assure you if they don't they'll pull ALL dGPU efforts in a few years.
I agree. They were, but a few yrs ago they started diverging. Easier driver development also.Server compute GPUs are completely different from gaming gpus now. There shouldn't be much of an overlap.
Server compute GPUs are completely different from gaming gpus now. There shouldn't be much of an overlap.
Serious question as I am a dual platform user and have used 8/11/12, what make 13 so special?
Desktop is dead during recession.Battery life. Brighter screen. Smaller notch. Better cameras. My 12 Pro Max would barely last a day. My 13 Pro Max lasts 1.5-2 days.
Anyways, it is good to see AMD doing well as we move into a recession, but I am personally concerned about their launch schedule. Genoa and Bergamo aren’t dropping until next year, and Zen 5 in any chip won’t land until 2024. A lot will happen between now and then, and I expect that on the desktop side of things AMD will have issues with Intel.
Dektop will get $500 16 core CPUs during recession, I like.Desktop is dead during recession.
The 15-year period requirement is strictly for tax purposes and is not required for GAAP reporting and most companies won't follow a 15 year schedule for financial reporting purposes. Companies determine themselves both the schedule and method of amortization in financial reporting. Without knowing what they are amortizing or the method, it's impossible to know how this line item will be handled going forward. For instance, even if they decided to have a 15 year amortization schedule for these expenses, they could choose to do a declining balance method and heavily front load the cost such that it gets reported over 15 years but the vast majority of the cost is reported in the first few quarters and becomes basically negligible after that. We have no idea how it is structured or what value AMD is placing on these intangibles. I absolutely do not expect AMD to keep a heavy amortization line item for 15 years from these acquisitions. They'll most likely want to get them off the books sooner than later so most likely they will front load the costs but stop short of reporting an operating loss. I'd be very surprised if they have report high numbers on this line item for more than a few quarters.
With that said, this is completely irrelevant from the point I was making. The point is, that while companies can use non-GAAP to put together some shady numbers sometimes (and even GAAP isn't immune), it is easy to see why the GAAP and non-GAAP numbers for AMD are so different this quarter and it makes sense why they are reporting non-GAAP the way they are. They are using it to show how the business performed without the costs of the recent M&A included which is very useful information. I'm not going to go into the small details of AMD's earnings report in an Intel thread so if you want to continue to discuss AMD, I suggest you post about it in that thread, but what AMD's results do show us is that they were able to take market share from Intel, especially again, in the more lucrative markets. The macro environment effected Intel and AMD very differently and so it gives light to Intel's own earnings report.
