Intel Q313 Results

[SiliconWars]

Qualcomm reports out of sync, their "real" Q3 is due at the beginning of November. That said, there's not much chance of them beating $3 billion, so I have to hand it to Intel in that regard, they really pulled one out of the bag there. Servers won't save them forever though.

 

[USER8000]

Qualcomm, as a basis of comparison:

• Qualcomm Q3: Net income: $1.58 billion

INTC:

• INTC Q3: Net income of $3.0 billion

Just to be clear here, Revenue is not profit. NET INCOME IS PROFIT. Seems as though the predictions that fans of a certain company made of qualcomm killing INTC didn't quite happen, since intel doubled Qualcomm's profit levels.

Not too shabby for a corporation that is on the brink of bankruptcy. At least, that's what i've heard on this forum.

The Qualcomm Q3 profits were published in July:

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer...percent-thanks-to-smartphone-and-tablet-chips

Profits jumped by 31% to $1.58 billion on $6.24 billion of sales.

At the same time Intel,posted profits of $2 billion on $12.8 billion of sales:

http://www.engadget.com/2013/07/17/intel-posts-q2-2013-earnings-revenue-of-12-8-billion-net-prof/

Qualcomm does not really compete in the server market.

Intel has 105000 employees and Qualcomm has only 26000.

For their size and amount of sales,they are making massive profits and the company has under $100 million in debt,and has over $30 billion in the bank.

I do not understand why PC enthusiasts get so irked by them TBH. It seem illogical.

 

[MisterMac]

Qualcomm reports out of sync, their "real" Q3 is due at the beginning of November. That said, there's not much chance of them beating $3 billion, so I have to hand it to Intel in that regard, they really pulled one out of the bag there. Servers won't save them forever though.

Oh, well how gratuitous of you to give intel that.


Your are seriously 1 clink short of becoming piesquared.
And you've gone progressively worse over the last few months.


You without doubt have agenda's and without doubt have a favorite in the different segments.


...but why bother argue so much when the majority clearly doesn't see it your way?

I don't get it.
I hope you get something out of it tho.

 

[guskline]

Intel seems pretty steady in a rocky economy. I like the emphasis on R&D. Tht pays off in the long run.

 

[MisterMac]

The Qualcomm Q3 profits were published in July:

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer...percent-thanks-to-smartphone-and-tablet-chips

Profits jumped by 31% to $1.58 billion on $6.24 billion of sales.

At the same time Intel,posted profits of $2 billion on $12.8 billion of sales:

http://www.engadget.com/2013/07/17/intel-posts-q2-2013-earnings-revenue-of-12-8-billion-net-prof/

Qualcomm does not really compete in the server market.

Intel has 105000 employees and Qualcomm has onluy 26000.

For their size and amount of sales,they are making massive profits and the company has under $100 million in debt,and have over $30 billion in the bank.

I often wonder what Qualcomms longterm gameplan is.

Can they really rely on ARM themselves - to deliver enough...lets say workspace for Qualcomm to design increasingly improving chips in their native market - but also expand to other form factors and servers?


I have trouble seeing how longterm in the server world - Qualcomm is going to be able to compete when their so dependant on ARM\TSMC?

Apple seems in a much much much stronger position because they can control as much as Intel does ( and even more! ).

Wouldn't be surprised if apple was working on some sort of server part to power their own stuff or make render farms or try to sell to the creative post pc people

 

[mrmt]

Clearly intel is in a good spot right now. I just find the doom and gloom predictions from extremist fans of a certain company to be hilarious.

A good spot is a spot where you make a lot of money *and* you still experience lots of growth, and clearly Intel lacks the second one. This is why is so keen to break into the mobile market, because all the growth is there.

But that's not to say that they are on the brink of the bankruptcy as some here would like them to be. Intel still has a lot of IP and advantages over its competitors and income streams strong enough to support their shift to new markets.

So it's not a good spot the sense that they have to move on from where they are now, but it's far from the wet dreams of the anti-Intel trolls here.

 

[SiliconWars]

A good spot is a spot where you make a lot of money *and* you still experience lots of growth, and clearly Intel lacks the second one. This is why is so keen to break into the mobile market, because all the growth is there.

This sounds a lot like Intel's closest competitors.

But that's not to say that they are on the brink of the bankruptcy as some here would like them to be. Intel still has a lot of IP and advantages over its competitors and income streams strong enough to support their shift to new markets.

Nobody said Intel was on the brink of bankruptcy. They are losing their moats however, and server is pretty much all they have left. They are winning in the market that they have no competition in, yet. You're good with numbers, tell us how much Intel stands to lose if they lose 20% of their current server market.

 

[mrmt]

You're good with numbers, tell us how much Intel stands to lose if they lose 20% of their current server market.

Oh, am I good at something? I should be flattered I guess. But I don't think I have something to add for you, because when I read this:

They are losing their moats however, and server is pretty much all they have left. They are winning in the market that they have no competition in, yet.

Among other things, it's obvious that you made a thorough, deep analysis of Intel balance sheet, current product portfolio and R&D pipeline. You also made the same with Intel main competitors and then you reached the conclusion that they are toast if they lose 20% of share in servers and that whatever Intel do they won't overtake Qualcomm, Samsung and others. Intel won't even be able to compete against AMD on traditional PC market, as AMD is poised to regain share in the next quarters.

What's left for discussion here? You want me and the others to recognize how right you are? If so, be my guest.

 

[SiliconWars]

So I guess I have to interpret that as Intel is in serious trouble if they lose 20% of their server market, which funnily enough is all I've been saying all along before you and a bunch of others warped it into claims of bankruptcy etc.

How did their current mobile market play work out btw? I see a 10%+ revenue increase in Other Intel Architecture group, but the same $600 million loss. That's going to be well over $2 billion lost this year chasing mobile.

 

[6PPC]

Intel server profits are growing, which isn't a big surprise. But mobile losses are high. Although the amount lost by the Other Intel Architecture Group had a loss of $606M, that is actually down slightly from Q2 but up a lot from last year when they lost "only" $235M. This group includes Atom, the Infineon Wireless unit they acquired (which finally seems to have an LTE modem although I gather it is manufactured by TSMC not Intel), and the set-top/gateway chip unit (which I confess I didn't know existed). At around $2.5B/year Intel is investing a lot into mobile. Even with some capital costs, that is a lot of people.

https://www.semiwiki.com/forum/content/2846-yes-intel-14nm-really-delayed-they-lost-600m-mobile.html

 

[mrmt]

So I guess I have to interpret that as Intel is in serious trouble if they lose 20% of their server market, which funnily enough is all I've been saying all along before you and a bunch of others warped it into claims of bankruptcy etc.

I'll answer this post, and only this post, to see if you have the decency to stop spreading FUD and go study something before opening that arrogant trap of yours:

If Intel loses 20% in revenues from servers, they will lose 600 million per quarter in revenues and some 400 in cash flows. Bad, but not enough to doom the company. A 20% in the PC client group, you know, the one you already wrote off, would have far more devastating effects on the company and ironically would doom the server business as well.

How did their current mobile market play work out btw? I see a 10%+ revenue increase in Other Intel Architecture group, but the same $600 million loss. That's going to be well over $2 billion lost this year chasing mobile.

That's to be expected, no? Digital radio, LTE modems, a family of chips that will be far more expensive than the previous one and they are trying to break into new markets. All that being sustained by a zombie family of obsolete products. I would be amazed if the old Atom family was able to finance that push by itself.

Maybe you could try this book:

http://www.amazon.com/Corporate-Fina.../dp/B008KPMB4K

According to reviews it's easy to read, easy to understand and should give you a grasp of some concepts you are lacking here.

 

[lopri]

I do not understand why PC enthusiasts get so irked by them TBH. It seem illogical.

Those who you refer to as "PC enthusiasts" are not PC enthusiasts. What they are.. well, that'd be an interesting question.

 

[blackened23]

I do not understand why PC enthusiasts get so irked by them [qualcomm] TBH. It seem illogical.

Personally i'm not irked by them. If they sell a lot of chips, hey great, good for them. I was merely responding to the statements made by some extremist fans of a certain company here, and i'm sure you know what i'm referring to - that Qualcomm will crush intel this year in terms of profits. It was an interesting "an enemy of your enemy is your friend, and therefore we want your enemy to crush our enemy" type of statement. Such is the mentality here on the CPU subforum. When their favorite company cannot beat intel, let's root for the other guys.

Some of the stuff I've read on this forum is rather humorous, that being one of them. It's whatever though. At least I get a daily dose of humor while reading this forum now and then. It's nothing personal and I'm certainly not "irked" by Qualcomm.

That said, I applaud Qualcomm for their work in the mobile sector but their viability has been increased almost primarily by LTE integration and patents related to that. That won't be sustainable forever. I'm not underestimating qualcomm by any means, but others will catch up to them in that area in a year or so. Their prime advantage now won't last indefinitely, others can and will come to parity if Qualcomm blinks and doesn't maintain their fast pace of R+D. Make no mistake, though, regardless of the reasons - Qualcomm is the definite company to beat in mobile right now. I'm not irked by them - they're doing great, good for them.

 

[Nothingness]

Intel server profits are growing, which isn't a big surprise. But mobile losses are high. Although the amount lost by the Other Intel Architecture Group had a loss of $606M, that is actually down slightly from Q2 but up a lot from last year when they lost "only" $235M. This group includes Atom, the Infineon Wireless unit they acquired (which finally seems to have an LTE modem although I gather it is manufactured by TSMC not Intel), and the set-top/gateway chip unit (which I confess I didn't know existed). At around $2.5B/year Intel is investing a lot into mobile. Even with some capital costs, that is a lot of people.

https://www.semiwiki.com/forum/content/2846-yes-intel-14nm-really-delayed-they-lost-600m-mobile.html

Yes the Infineon modem will be built by TSMC and contains an ARM core, ironic, isn't it?

I find it strange that Intel puts its NAND business in the "All other" category along with corporate stuff. I thought this was a rather big business for Intel and would be in its own category. Does anyone know how well it does?

 

[mrmt]

Yes the Infineon modem will be built by TSMC and contains an ARM core, ironic, isn't it?

Probably they plan to integrate Quark in the future and move to their own foundry.

I find it strange that Intel puts its NAND business in the "All other" category along with corporate stuff. I thought this was a rather big business for Intel and would be in its own category. Does anyone know how well it does?

"all others" earns less than 500MM per quarter and the only thing generating revenue there is NAND, so even if they get 30% operating margins on these, highly unlikely, they don't make too much money on that business, at least not for Intel standards.

 

[Nothingness]

Probably they plan to integrate Quark in the future and move to their own foundry.

Very likely indeed. I wonder if Quark is small enough compared to what you typically find in baseband (Cortex-R4, or Cortex-A5).

"all others" earns less than 500MM per quarter and the only thing generating revenue there is NAND, so even if they get 30% operating margins on these, highly unlikely, they don't make too much money on that business, at least not for Intel standards.

Thanks! I guess it's strategic enough for them to keep that business, right?

 

[Phynaz]

I like the emphasis on R&D. Tht pays off in the long run.

Absolutely. R&D is your future, no matter what business you are in.

 

[Arachnotronic]

So I guess I have to interpret that as Intel is in serious trouble if they lose 20% of their server market, which funnily enough is all I've been saying all along before you and a bunch of others warped it into claims of bankruptcy etc.

How did their current mobile market play work out btw? I see a 10%+ revenue increase in Other Intel Architecture group, but the same $600 million loss. That's going to be well over $2 billion lost this year chasing mobile.

You're so full of anti-Intel propaganda that it's ridiculous. You do realize that you have to invest BEFORE your products show up, right?

The massive R&D you're seeing is preparing the products that will be competitive beginning with Bay Trail and extending into next year. Until then, all other IA has to actually sell today are a bunch of OK 3G modems and some old Atoms. As the LTE/LTE-A solutions, Bay Trail-T/I, Merrifield, and the like ramp, you will see what we call "operating leverage".

Say, what happens to Intel's bottom line if that $2B operating loss just hits breakeven? Or - gasp! - what if Intel actually makes money at it?

 

[blackened23]

How did their current mobile market play work out btw? I see a 10%+ revenue increase in Other Intel Architecture group, but the same $600 million loss. That's going to be well over $2 billion lost this year chasing mobile.

I thought it was common knowledge, but apparently not to some. In the silicon business, you spend money to make money. Spending money on R+D is the only means to creating a viable product. So when I see someone characterizing 2B spend on R+D as a "poor decision" (their words), I have to wonder what the heck they're thinking.

If you're dealing in an ultra competitive field - If you don't spend money, you don't create viable products. That's just how it is in the silicon industry. Also, as intel17 stated, products aren't created overnight - the R+D invested today comes to fruition several years down the road. The R+D for Haswell began probably well over 5 years ago, it is a long term proposition, not a short one.

Sinking money into R+D is a necessary evil. It's the only way to survive and create viable products in the computing field.

 

[liahos1]

I thought an interesting comment from the call was 50 baytrail tablets and half of them are android. I havent really seen much android announced hardware yet but BK said 8-10 tablets mostly android by Black Friday.

Other than that the broadwell delay was a little annoying but the quarter itself was pretty good given the pc environment. I'd like to learn more about Intel's plans for more dynamic customized solutions for partners with a 3-4 month window ahead of delivery. he said that was 12 months out but interested in implications.

 

[Atreidin]

Oh, well how gratuitous of you to give intel that.


Your are seriously 1 clink short of becoming piesquared.
And you've gone progressively worse over the last few months.


You without doubt have agenda's and without doubt have a favorite in the different segments.


...but why bother argue so much when the majority clearly doesn't see it your way?

I don't get it.
I hope you get something out of it tho.

It's almost like somebody is trying hard to instigate wars over companies that make products using silicon. Weird.

 

[blackened23]

I thought an interesting comment from the call was 50 baytrail tablets and half of them are android. I havent really seen much android announced hardware yet but BK said 8-10 tablets mostly android by Black Friday.

Other than that the broadwell delay was a little annoying but the quarter itself was pretty good given the pc environment. I'd like to learn more about Intel's plans for more dynamic customized solutions for partners with a 3-4 month window ahead of delivery. he said that was 12 months out but interested in implications.

I'm still confused by this broadwell delay. I was under the impression that production had moved up a quarter, so if it's delayed by a quarter yet again that means it is back on the original schedule. That original schedule being mass production in Q1.

This also maintains a yearly iteration of releases, with Broadwell being released roughly 1 year after the Haswell. Am I thinking incorrectly here? Why is a big deal being made of this so called delay?

 

[liahos1]

i think its a big deal because intel is usually considered the gold standard for manufacturing. Unlike TSM and Glofo that hit delays/yield issues etc seemingly often. ultimately you're right. Broadwell was "delayed" after having been pulled into q4 from q1. now its back to where it was. who really cares though unless yield issues continue. it appears that's past us. INTC's stock is up today and inline with the broader tape and actually outperforming the SOXX semi index. at least from my perspective the quarter was fine, the guide was a little weak but investors had built in a fair share of intel pessimism prior to the earnings release.

 

[krumme]

Agree fine quarter.

A huge part of the portfolio is without any competition giving solid net. Nothing seems to change that the next at least 3 years for sure. They have some damn good cash cows working for them on the b2b side.

But the mobile section and other future sections is doing well slow. The are using a lot of money on mobile using windows 8 mobile as a way of pushing into tablets. I can not see that losing is going to change.

Sometimes change to the better or worse can come suddenly. Looks like stalemate situation imho.

 

[sm625]

Qualcomm, as a basis of comparison:

• Qualcomm Q3: Net income: $1.58 billion

INTC:

• INTC Q3: Net income of $3.0 billion

Just to be clear here, Revenue is not profit. NET INCOME IS PROFIT. Seems as though the predictions that fans of a certain company made of qualcomm killing INTC didn't quite happen, since intel doubled Qualcomm's profit levels.

Not too shabby for a corporation that is on the brink of bankruptcy. At least, that's what i've heard on this forum.

I would rather have 1.5 billion in net income not tied to microsoft than 3 billion net income that is tied to the dead albatross of microsoft. Windows 8 is an utter disaster. Windows tablets are an utter disaster. The experience is literally so bad it hurts. Using it is just....so.... bad....