Question Intel Q2 Results - Terrible

[jpiniero]

https://d1io3yog0oux5.cloudfront.net/_0f37de80c52d83ac6338b4805dea84aa/intel/db/887/8856/earnings_release/Q2+22_EarningsRelease+%281%29.pdf

Revenue down 22%.

Edit: Oh and it gets better... Intel posted a loss!

 

[Karnak]

To sum up the call and Intel's situation:

 

[FangBLade]

To sum up the call and Intel's situation:

it's a matter of perspective

 

[scannall]

Intel has spent the last 15 years or so making a lot of really bad decisions. I'm just a little surprised it took this long to catch up with them. And why the chips act thing is a bad idea. Make taxpayers pay for their bad behavior? Reward being selfish and short sighted, with no consequences? Ugh.

 

[linkgoron]

Insane that it took Intel this long to get here. Their execution has been terrible for years.

 

[FangBLade]

AMD is little but efficient, while Intel is big but fragmented, they need to clean house from top to the bottom.

 

[Hitman928]

https://d1io3yog0oux5.cloudfront.net/_0f37de80c52d83ac6338b4805dea84aa/intel/db/887/8856/earnings_release/Q2+22_EarningsRelease+%281%29.pdf

Edit: Oh and it gets better... Intel posted a loss!

They are actually projecting to post a loss (have negative free cash flow) for the whole year.

 

[jpiniero]

The UPI thing might explain it. Launching single socket SKUs but not 2S and above.

Intel doesn't really do 1S for Big Boy Xeons. Maybe it's more popular than it looks but Ice Lake Server only had two models and Cascade had 4.

Maybe this UPI bug will change things. Or Pat is talking about Xeon W.

 

[positivedoppler]

Here are some Brian Krzanich focus not related to engineering that distracted Intel enough while AMD was on life support. MICA was really cringe.

Intel Unveils Its Bejeweled Smart Bracelet 'MICA'

The new wearable will debut at the Opening Ceremony Spring/Summer 2015 fashion show during New York's Fashion Week.

www.pcmag.com

Intel CEO Krzanich is a proud \

His keynote speech on Tuesday was a mix of geekdom and diversity planning.

www.usatoday.com

Newsroom Home

Intel Newsroom home page

newsroom.intel.com

 

[nicalandia]

The UPI thing might explain it. Launching single socket SKUs but not 2S and above.

There have been reports on UPI link issues as far as QS samples, it would seem they are a hit and miss. But there are 2S systems being tested so perhaps it's the Above 2S(4S-8S and beyond) is what might not be working as expected.

 

[Exist50]

There have been reports on UPI link issues as far as QS samples, it would seem they are a hit and miss. But there are 2S systems being tested so perhaps it's the Above 2S(4S-8S and beyond) is what might not be working as expected.

I'm not that optimistic. As AMD pointed out a while ago, with modern 8+ channel, ~60+ core systems, volume is increasingly concentrated in 1-2S systems. Hell, Ice Lake only supports 2S. Intel could have shipped tons of units if everything but ≥4S support worked.

 

[nicalandia]

I'm not that optimistic. As AMD pointed out a while ago, with modern 8+ channel, ~60+ core systems, volume is increasingly concentrated in 1-2S systems. Hell, Ice Lake only supports 2S. Intel could have shipped tons of units if everything but ≥4S support worked.

True.

 

[IntelUser2000]

This drop isn't an Intel-only issue. Both Meta and Apple are showing considerable revenue declines. Also Intel's client is affected more. Why is that if competitiveness and product was the only factor? This is indeed a macroeconomic issue.

Of course with PC's it's expected as the increase was due to artificial lockdowns.

Intel has spent the last 15 years or so making a lot of really bad decisions. I'm just a little surprised it took this long to catch up with them. And why the chips act thing is a bad idea. Make taxpayers pay for their bad behavior? Reward being selfish and short sighted, with no consequences? Ugh.

There's always a delay between action and consequences. That's why in the short term stock prices are no indication of the health of the company.

Also they were revenue stagnant until 2009 when they brought the Core ix branding. The revenue shot up 20% that year. For reaching the average consumer that marketing was very effective. Telling all the technical details may make sense to us, but not for selling. The average people basically have no time or interest and want the decisions to be made easy. The Core 2 that we thought were amazing did almost nothing for the revenue.

I bet after this the foundation of the company will be much more stable. Again they probably won't be the investor's choice as before but there definitely is a tradeoff since things like dividends and buybacks directly benefit share prices but hinder the company from investing for the future.

 

[Markfw]

In less than a week I bet (based on May 3rd last quarter) we will know if this is partly due to a decrease in demand, or an Intel problem when AMD has their Q2 results.
I think its mostly Intel not delivering what they promised, in addition to a poor product.

 

[Saylick]

In less than a week I bet (based on May 3rd last quarter) we will know if this is partly due to a decrease in demand, or an Intel problem when AMD has their Q2 results.
I think its mostly Intel not delivering what they promised, in addition to a poor product.

AMD's Q2 earnings report is on August 2nd (next Tuesday).

 

[IntelUser2000]

In less than a week I bet (based on May 3rd last quarter) we will know if this is partly due to a decrease in demand, or an Intel problem when AMD has their Q2 results.
I think its mostly Intel not delivering what they promised, in addition to a poor product.

AMD is far less affected since even taking 1% marketshare is much bigger for them. But while few will show gains it is a macroeconomic issue.

 

[maddie]

This drop isn't an Intel-only issue. Both Meta and Apple are showing considerable revenue declines. Also Intel's client is affected more. Why is that if competitiveness and product was the only factor? This is indeed a macroeconomic issue.

Of course with PC's it's expected as the increase was due to artificial lockdowns.



There's always a delay between action and consequences. That's why in the short term stock prices are no indication of the health of the company.

Also they were revenue stagnant until 2009 when they brought the Core ix branding. The revenue shot up 20% that year. For reaching the average consumer that marketing was very effective. Telling all the technical details may make sense to us, but not for selling. The average people basically have no time or interest and want the decisions to be made easy.

I bet after this the foundation of the company will be much more stable. Again they probably won't be the investor's choice as before but there definitely is a tradeoff since things like dividends and buybacks directly benefit share prices but hinder the company from investing for the future.

This is true. I wrote about this recently. We're entering a very, very difficult period.

 

[jpiniero]

This drop isn't an Intel-only issue. Both Meta and Apple are showing considerable revenue declines. Also Intel's client is affected more. Why is that if competitiveness and product was the only factor? This is indeed a macroeconomic issue.

Apple mostly blamed currency issues but Tim Cook specifically claimed that Mac and iPad were hampered by supply issues brought on by lockdowns in Shanghai.

 

[maddie]

Apple mostly blamed currency issues but Tim Cook specifically claimed that Mac and iPad were hampered by supply issues brought on by lockdowns in Shanghai.

Before today, did you in any way expect these results from Intel? Keep dreaming.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Apple mostly blamed currency issues but Tim Cook specifically claimed that Mac and iPad were hampered by supply issues brought on by lockdowns in Shanghai.

Of course it is. Braindead and short sighted decisions coupled with malice on top is what got there in the first place. It's looking similar to 2008 but this is likely going to be far worse.

The leak in Shanghai is a forebringer for things to come. Your computers will be garbage if you are running out of food.

 

[Karnak]

It's not just about the drop in revenue. It's about Intel's datacenter/cloud business. Microsoft +20%, Amazon +36%. And then look at Intel. That just doesn't fit. Datacenter and especially cloud are still rapidly growing despite other not so great numbers even from Amazon and/or Microsoft. But despite that Intel's numbers are still trash. And if you're just looking at the GM drop you know exactly why Intel is in trouble despite the DC/Cloud market as a whole growing.

 

[Exist50]

This drop isn't an Intel-only issue. Both Meta and Apple are showing considerable revenue declines. Also Intel's client is affected more. Why is that if competitiveness and product was the only factor? This is indeed a macroeconomic issue.

Of course with PC's it's expected as the increase was due to artificial lockdowns.



There's always a delay between action and consequences. That's why in the short term stock prices are no indication of the health of the company.

Also they were revenue stagnant until 2009 when they brought the Core ix branding. The revenue shot up 20% that year. For reaching the average consumer that marketing was very effective. Telling all the technical details may make sense to us, but not for selling. The average people basically have no time or interest and want the decisions to be made easy. The Core 2 that we thought were amazing did almost nothing for the revenue.

I bet after this the foundation of the company will be much more stable. Again they probably won't be the investor's choice as before but there definitely is a tradeoff since things like dividends and buybacks directly benefit share prices but hinder the company from investing for the future.

I mean, let's not sugar coat it. Intel's stock is being hit uniquely because of its unique failures. "Macroeconomic conditions" or otherwise, the bleeding won't stop until Intel can convince investors it's capable of a predictable cadence of competitive products. Oh, and that has to happen before their customers abandon them.

 

[jpiniero]

Before today, did you in any way expect these results from Intel? Keep dreaming.

I expected it to be bad but "cashflow negative" bad.

 

[maddie]

Of course it is. Braindead and short sighted decisions coupled with malice on top is what got there in the first place. It's looking similar to 2008 but this is likely going to be far worse.

The leak in Shanghai is a forebringer for things to come. Your computers will be garbage if you are running out of food.

It will be.

The Fed will continue hiking. Think about what that means for demand, etc.
Those in the EU should consider bank bail-in regulations and how it could affect you..

 

[jpiniero]

It's not just about the drop in revenue. It's about Intel's datacenter/cloud business. Microsoft +20%, Amazon +36%. And then look at Intel. That just doesn't fit. Datacenter and especially cloud are still rapidly growing despite other not so great numbers even from Amazon and/or Microsoft. But despite that Intel's numbers are still trash. And if you're just looking at the GM drop you know exactly why Intel is in trouble despite the DC/Cloud market as a whole growing.

Yep. AMD probally did monster numbers with Epyc.

 

[turtile]

This drop isn't an Intel-only issue. Both Meta and Apple are showing considerable revenue declines. Also Intel's client is affected more. Why is that if competitiveness and product was the only factor? This is indeed a macroeconomic issue.

Intel's drop is much steeper than Apple. Intel's competitiveness in the server market combined with covid demand for low-end processors that only they could provide made the drop so severe.

AMD took all of the high-margin business - I assume the demand is even higher due to increased energy prices in the data center. Because Intel had massive capacity, there were able to bring in massive business from the consumer and laptop market during covid. That left them highly exposed to the cooling consumer market. And since energy efficiency is so important for the cloud, no one is going to want to use Intel if AMD has a way lower TCO when AMD can meet demand. In addition, AMD increased its substrate capacity recently, and AMD's Xilinx is also crushing Intel with high-margin products.

If Intel was competitive in the growing data center market, the drop would be nowhere near as severe.