PC Sales basically flat in Q3

[jpiniero]

http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2869019

Sales were basically flat from last year. The ominous -15% for "Others" looks bad for AMD though; since the Top 5 plus Apple are rather pro Intel. Still looks like most of the growth is Corporations buying Windows 7 replacements for the old XP machines, and that is obviously pro Intel as well.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Note: Data includes desk-based PCs and mobile PCs, including x86 tablets equipped with Windows 8, but excludes Chromebooks and other tablets.

So they are including Windows-based tablets in that number, but excluding Chromebooks. Kind of confusing. It's entirely possible that some of the unit sales have shifted from desktops and laptops to Windows' tablets, but you wouldn't know it from their numbers.

I would also like to see Chromebook numbers, because last time I looked, they were really eating market share from normal PCs.

 

[Lyfer]

That's because all tech companies know to dump all R&D resources into Kim-chi manufacturing.

That is the future.

 

[ehume]

That's because all tech companies know to dump all R&D resources into Kim-chi manufacturing.

That is the future.

At least you can eat kimchi. I wonder if Window 10 will bump sales?

 

[jpiniero]

Sure enough, Intel said their PC sales were up 15% in the quarter (albeit with lower prices). Since we know the sales overall were flat...

 

[ShintaiDK]

Sure enough, Intel said their PC sales were up 15% in the quarter (albeit with lower prices). Since we know the sales overall were flat...

That would explain Rory´s sudden exit on used toilet paper. I think its quite obvious now how the Q3 results will be.

http://techreport.com/news/27211/intel-touts-best-ever-revenue-record-shipments-for-q3

 

[Abwx]

The ominous -15% for "Others" looks bad for AMD though; since the Top 5 plus Apple are rather pro Intel.

That s poor analysis unless you have said manufacturers numbers to sustain your point, or rather lack of for the time.

That would explain Rory´s sudden exit on used toilet paper. I think its quite obvious now how the Q3 results will be.

http://techreport.com/news/27211/intel-touts-best-ever-revenue-record-shipments-for-q3

That explain nothing; besides, there was no exact infos to this day, he could had stepped down due to illness but you are prompt to speak of people with unrespectfull and hatefull terms, that tells a lot about one s mentality and lack of standards...

 

[positivedoppler]

http://wccftech.com/amd-zen-architecture-asus/ These information are conflicting. Digitime report that AMD has 30% of the desktop market share which means they gain a significant amount of desktop sales from last quarter. How is that possible if PC sales are flat and Intel increased profit?

 

[bullzz]

"sudden exit on used toilet paper"
never heard of that term before. thanks for the luagh

 

[Abwx]

http://wccftech.com/amd-zen-architecture-asus/ These information are conflicting. Digitime report that AMD has 30% of the desktop market share which means they gain a significant amount of desktop sales from last quarter. How is that possible if PC sales are flat and Intel increased profit?

That s surely the same marketshare as previous quarters, they have a much better position in DT than in mobile, in this latter market they can hardly make some progress due to Intel anti competitive practices, from the numbers published today we know that Intel s revenues in mobile are 1 million for 1043 millions losses, they are paying OEMs to use their BT chips that are given for free anyway..

http://www.intc.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=876136

 

[jpiniero]

That s poor analysis unless you have said manufacturers numbers to sustain your point, or rather lack of for the time.

That's what the Gartner numbers track. What they don't track is retail sales and non-Windows devices (eg: Chromebooks)

 

[positivedoppler]

That s surely the same marketshare as previous quarters, they have a much better position in DT than in mobile, in this latter market they can hardly make some progress due to Intel anti competitive practices, from the numbers published today we know that Intel s revenues in mobile are 1 million for 1043 millions losses, they are paying OEMs to use their BT chips that are given for free anyway..

http://www.intc.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=876136

I wonder how Intel is getting away with this. It's blatantly obvious that they're dumping all these atoms at a huge loss. It's almost as if they're saying go ahead and sue us, we'll pay your insignificant fine and keep buying our way into mobile.

 

[Abwx]

That's what the Gartner numbers track. What they don't track is retail sales and non-Windows devices (eg: Chromebooks)

Gartner s numbers dont specify Intel and AMD share in the top manufacturers numbers, no doubt that Dell is massively pro intel but it is not the case for the others, so i find that your assumption that only others manufacturers are selling AMD chips in substancial amounts quite erroneous, it s even probable that smaller manufacturers are the ones using Intel s contra revenues as a mean to boost their bottom lines.

 

[witeken]

That s surely the same marketshare as previous quarters, they have a much better position in DT than in mobile, in this latter market they can hardly make some progress due to Intel anti competitive practices, from the numbers published today we know that Intel s revenues in mobile are 1 million for 1043 millions losses, they are paying OEMs to use their BT chips that are given for free anyway..

http://www.intc.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=876136

Here are some facts.

SoFIA won't have any contra-revenue at all.
Cost optimized Bay Trail will launch in Q4.
Cherry Trail won't have contra-revenue either.

So in 2015, most of the contra-revenue will fade away as Bay Trail goes EOL, while Intel will only gain extra market share.

 

[bullzz]

@witeken - Intel CEO mentioned there will be contra revenue for sofia in earning call. any source on no contra revenue for cherry trail?

 

[Abwx]

I wonder how Intel is getting away with this. It's blatantly obvious that they're dumping all these atoms at a huge loss. It's almost as if they're saying go ahead and sue us, we'll pay your insignificant fine and keep buying our way into mobile.

1bn for 8-10 millions chips is at least 100$/chip, given that a BT cost substancialy less to produce, 10-15$ at most, it is obvious that they are not only giving the chips for free but they are giving as much as 80$ with every free chip, that s worse as during the P4 era, at the time they were doing rebate, now it s free chips and money that are distributed, i stand my point that this is not actualy directed against ARM items but against AMD as mean to keep them from benefiting from their mobile offering that is globaly better than Intel s technicaly wise.

Sure that regulatory administrations are not really aware of this illegal doing, if the EU start looking closely at the thing it will make no doubt that Intel will be fined, as they already were there, for these despicable practices.

 

[Abwx]

Here are some facts.

SoFIA won't have any contra-revenue at all.
Cost optimized Bay Trail will launch in Q4.
Cherry Trail won't have contra-revenue either.

So in 2015, most of the contra-revenue will fade away as Bay Trail goes EOL, while Intel will only gain extra market share.

The aim is to block AMD offering the times it take to realease the next gen chips, that s an aknowledgement that their current BT offering is not competitive against AMD s offerings, so they are litteraly depriving them of revenues by flooding the X86 mobile market with their worthless free chips.

As for the so called cost optimised BT, well, if they manage to sell them 1$ they could claim 100 000% better margins, if not more, compared to previous quarters, seriously, this cost optimised mantra is just marketing bla bla, the real thing is that this product is not competitive.

 

[DrMrLordX]

All of the companies, including Dell, that showed positive earnings according to Gartner offer products featuring AMD processors. Why would anyone automatically assume that "other" applies to AMD?

 

[positivedoppler]

1bn for 8-10 millions chips is at least 100$/chip, given that a BT cost substancialy less to produce, 10-15$ at most, it is obvious that they are not only giving the chips for free but they are giving as much as 80$ with every free chip, that s worse as during the P4 era, at the time they were doing rebate, now it s free chips and money that are distributed, i stand my point that this is not actualy directed against ARM items but against AMD as mean to keep them from benefiting from their mobile offering that is globaly better than Intel s technicaly wise.

Sure that regulatory administrations are not really aware of this illegal doing, if the EU start looking closely at the thing it will make no doubt that Intel will be fined, as they already were there, for these despicable practices.

I don't think they're doing this against AMD but more as force entry into the mobile market. They need enough x86 cpus out there in mobile to force developer support for their hardware and move eventually from tablet to phones. You're right, this is so blatantly obvious dumping but I don't think Intel cares. If they have to write AMD another 1.2 billion dollar check and do the same for Mediatek, Qualcomm, and Nvidia, it's a drop in the bucket for them.

 

[jpiniero]

All of the companies, including Dell, that showed positive earnings according to Gartner offer products featuring AMD processors. Why would anyone automatically assume that "other" applies to AMD?

Who do you think lost sales in a flat market when Intel was up 15%? Via?

 

[Abwx]

I don't think they're doing this against AMD but more as force entry into the mobile market. They need enough x86 cpus out there in mobile to force developer support for their hardware and move eventually from tablet to phones. You're right, this is so blatantly obvious dumping but I don't think Intel cares. If they have to write AMD another 1.2 billion dollar check and do the same for Mediatek, Qualcomm, and Nvidia, it's a drop in the bucket for them.

Their losses are mainly due to the distributed money, if it was a sane market they could sell their chips for about 20$, given that they want to ship 40 millions of such devices this would amount to a 800 millions/year market, since AMD offering is technicaly better they could get as much as 40% of this market if not more, that s about 320m/year, it doesnt take a 200 IQ to realize that almost all thoses BT chips are used in X86 items and that the subsides are used by some manufacturers to improve their profitability, if AMD sue Intel they would litteraly be in conflict with their own customers, so the situation is not that simple for AMD, their only hope is that regulatory administrations independently take the initiative to sue Intel.

 

[Phynaz]

I wonder how Intel is getting away with this. It's blatantly obvious that they're dumping all these atoms at a huge loss. It's almost as if they're saying go ahead and sue us, we'll pay your insignificant fine and keep buying our way into mobile.

It's not illegal to sell your product at a loss.

Anyway, you shouldn't believe ABWX's fantasy numbers. He pretty much has no facts to back them up.

 

[Abwx]

It's not illegal to sell your product at a loss.

Anyway, you should believe ABWX's fantasy numbers. He pretty much has no facts to back them up.

Lol, it s not even at a loss since they are giving them for free and are paying OEMs to use them..

As for facts i did provide estimations, what are yours in this respect set apart words that amount to about nothing..?.

Perhaps 1bn/quarter RD for BT and a few mobile items?.

But their total RD is 2.8bn/quarter according to the link i posted, i let you do all possible stretchings to explain us this lack of efficency, for the record AMD s yearly RD is 1.1bn...

Edit : did you notice that you made a revealing pleonasm,
your subconscient is smarter than your conscience, amazingly we can be in full agreement sometimes...

 

[Phynaz]

We've seen where AMD's lack of investment has gotten them.

 

[Abwx]

We've seen where AMD's lack of investment has gotten them.

How to invest if your competitor is using illegal methods to tackle any of your good products and is depriving you of the necessary revenues to finance your X86 RD.?..

Not that their low power cores would be enough to get them out of trouble but a few hundreds millions per year is already substancial given their total sales, they are at about break even point, each 100 millions revenues increasement will yield 35 millions net income so the 320 millions i estimated would put them at 100 millions net income, not a big amount but they could dump the totality in RD expense, 100 millions are enough to pay 1000 people.