• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Intel tops Q3 estimates

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Arachnotronic said:
Intel basically admitted that they're significantly scaling back their mobile efforts on the call. It's subtle but it's there.
Click to expand...
Yeah, now that you say that. I guess you mean that they said they mainly focus on their 2 partnerships. Maybe they even cancelled Broxton and are working on Core for smartphone. The ISP on SKL was probably just the beginning.
 
Arachnotronic said:
Intel basically admitted that they're significantly scaling back their mobile efforts on the call. It's subtle but it's there.
Click to expand...
It is amazing how badly Intel have done on Mobile.

When Otellini resigned, he did a Mea Culpa about not understanding how big mobile was going to be and it seemed like Intel had realised their mistake, but quite clearly they still either have had the wrong people and/or wrong ideas about what is needed to succeed in mobile for many years now.
 
witeken said:
Yeah, now that you say that. I guess you mean that they said they mainly focus on their 2 partnerships. Maybe they even cancelled Broxton and are working on Core for smartphone. The ISP on SKL was probably just the beginning.
Click to expand...

Yep, they're aiming for standalone modems + partnerships for the bulk of the market. Obviously they still need to develop IP to support those future projects, but it's far less ambitious than their prior plans.
 
witeken said:
Yeah, now that you say that. I guess you mean that they said they mainly focus on their 2 partnerships. Maybe they even cancelled Broxton and are working on Core for smartphone. The ISP on SKL was probably just the beginning.
Click to expand...

Seems unlikely that they can get Core prices in smartphones though.

That Moore's Law radio would be kind of nice now.
 
Arachnotronic said:
Yep, they're aiming for standalone modems + partnerships for the bulk of the market. Obviously they still need to develop IP to support those future projects, but it's far less ambitious than their prior plans.
Click to expand...
They're experiencing the pain everyone else has trying the enter the lucrative data center.

The difference being however that you'd rather wanna have a 15% growing data center than a mature and consolidated smartphone market (unless you're Apple, sucking endless loads of money out of your iSheeps with every generation).
 
CHADBOGA said:
It is amazing how badly Intel have done on Mobile.

When Otellini resigned, he did a Mea Culpa about not understanding how big mobile was going to be and it seemed like Intel had realised their mistake, but quite clearly they still either have had the wrong people and/or wrong ideas about what is needed to succeed in mobile for many years now.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. I look forward to seeing what Intel says at its investor meeting regarding mobile. Hopefully they cut back on the videos of their partners extolling the virtues of Intel sounding like they are reading from cue cards and talk more about their actual strategy, esp. with respect to the chip side of things, and the progress they are making with winning designs at OEMs.
 
The only way Intel can sell a Core in a phone is creating along MS an IPhone clone with FULL Windows 10 with Continuum
 
Arachnotronic said:
Yep, they're aiming for standalone modems + partnerships for the bulk of the market. Obviously they still need to develop IP to support those future projects, but it's far less ambitious than their prior plans.
Click to expand...

The writing was already on the wall since Intel decided to open their foundry to other mobile companies. That they decided to scale back their mobile efforts is shocking.
 
CHADBOGA said:
It is amazing how badly Intel have done on Mobile.

When Otellini resigned, he did a Mea Culpa about not understanding how big mobile was going to be and it seemed like Intel had realised their mistake, but quite clearly they still either have had the wrong people and/or wrong ideas about what is needed to succeed in mobile for many years now.
Click to expand...

Instead of burning money trying to push x86 on phones, they should have gone ARM, purchase nvidia and leverage their world leading fabs to offer the best all around mobile chips. Getting x86 to phones is a fool's errand, that ship sailed the moment they turned the iPhone deal down, around 10 years ago.
 
mrmt said:
The writing was already on the wall since Intel decided to open their foundry to other mobile companies. That they decided to scale back their mobile efforts is shocking.
Click to expand...

Could Intel transform into a bigger foundry than TSMC and Samsung, and end up the biggest ARM mfg, if x86 loses its grip on the market (due to a decline in the relevance of Win10 as a desktop OS - who needs Windows if you don't even need a desktop)?
 
VirtualLarry said:
Could Intel transform into a bigger foundry than TSMC and Samsung, and end up the biggest ARM mfg, if x86 loses its grip on the market (due to a decline in the relevance of Win10 as a desktop OS - who needs Windows if you don't even need a desktop)?
Click to expand...

Intel doesn't have TSMC foundry expertise, but they certainly have enough resources to develop it in the long term, but short term there's something more relevant.

By reviewing Intel financial statements it seems that 14nm is still in bad shape, there are lots of mentions of high levels of defects and higher platform costs because of 14nm chips, it seems that 14nm won't be the cost-killer node that it was meant to be, and given that 10nm is shaping up to be leveraging a lot on 14nm ideas, I doubt that it will fare much better on the mobile market (maybe this is the reason behind Intel scaling back mobile efforts). That leaves the decisive dice rolls for 7nm, and that will be a game for the end of the decade.
 
jpiniero said:
Seems unlikely that they can get Core prices in smartphones though.

That Moore's Law radio would be kind of nice now.
Click to expand...

They don't need to get Core prices on phones.

Core sales into phone won't (directly) effect the pricing on PC chips. So they can price phone versions lower. Even if they sell Phone versions at reduced margins versus PC versions, its still a net benefit.
 
Arachnotronic said:
I agree with this. I look forward to seeing what Intel says at its investor meeting regarding mobile. Hopefully they cut back on the videos of their partners extolling the virtues of Intel sounding like they are reading from cue cards and talk more about their actual strategy, esp. with respect to the chip side of things, and the progress they are making with winning designs at OEMs.
Click to expand...
Mike Bell was suppose to be the Mobile Guru who would lead Intel out of the wilderness on Mobile, yet they announced last qtr that he is "retiring".

And they don't appear to have brought in anyone else that has a proven track record in the Mobile sector. D:
 
CHADBOGA said:
Mike Bell was suppose to be the Mobile Guru who would lead Intel out of the wilderness on Mobile, yet they announced last qtr that he is "retiring".

And they don't appear to have brought in anyone else that has a proven track record in the Mobile sector. D:
Click to expand...

Both Mike Bell and Hermann Eul "retired." Before Mike Bell retired, he was moved off of mobile and put in charge of Intel's "new devices" group.
 
mrmt said:
Intel doesn't have TSMC foundry expertise, but they certainly have enough resources to develop it in the long term, but short term there's something more relevant.

By reviewing Intel financial statements it seems that 14nm is still in bad shape, there are lots of mentions of high levels of defects and higher platform costs because of 14nm chips, it seems that 14nm won't be the cost-killer node that it was meant to be, and given that 10nm is shaping up to be leveraging a lot on 14nm ideas, I doubt that it will fare much better on the mobile market (maybe this is the reason behind Intel scaling back mobile efforts). That leaves the decisive dice rolls for 7nm, and that will be a game for the end of the decade.
Click to expand...

Yea, a couple of years ago, I though Intel might be able to design such an overwhelmingly superior chip on 14nm that they could get a real foothold mobile, even though they had a late start. Unfortunately, they got delay after delay, poor yields still apparently, and underwhelming improvements in the products that did appear. What a waste.

Too bad they didnt burn all that money on improving mainstream/enthusiast performance. I know I am going to get the "average joe", "99% dont need it", etc. But tell me this, could it have turned out any worse than their mobile efforts? It might have been a limited market, but at least are good at it when they decide to put forth any effort.
 
frozentundra123456 said:
Too bad they didnt burn all that money on improving mainstream/enthusiast performance. I know I am going to get the "average joe", "99% dont need it", etc. But tell me this, could it have turned out any worse than their mobile efforts? It might have been a limited market, but at least are good at it when they decide to put forth any effort.
Click to expand...

You seem to be under this impression that these are related. Intel already spends a TON on its PC processor/CPU core development to the point where, frankly, incremental spending isn't likely to do the company's products much good.
 
frozentundra123456 said:
Yea, a couple of years ago, I though Intel might be able to design such an overwhelmingly superior chip on 14nm that they could get a real foothold mobile, even though they had a late start. Unfortunately, they got delay after delay, poor yields still apparently, and underwhelming improvements in the products that did appear. What a waste.

Too bad they didnt burn all that money on improving mainstream/enthusiast performance. I know I am going to get the "average joe", "99% dont need it", etc. But tell me this, could it have turned out any worse than their mobile efforts? It might have been a limited market, but at least are good at it when they decide to put forth any effort.
Click to expand...

To what end? What additional sales does that get them vs entering new markets?
 
You mean those new markets where they lose money on every chip they sell? I guess they hope to make up for it in volume.

And all you have to do is read these forums to know there *is* a market itching to upgrade if the improved performance warranted it. It may be small, but is probably larger than the market that wants to buy atom in a phone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top