The Intel Atom Thread

[liahos1]

I answered you indirectly in the post above.

20$ is their factory production cost , it include
the amortization of capex of course but not the
devellopement costs.

sorry but you have provided no answer. link me or show me how you get to this $20 dollar number. FDSOI Common platform white papers don't count. :\

 

[Abwx]

Its just a effort to get in the mobile segment fast at first, relax. Also in not quite sure if its allowed to sell below cost.

They can because what matters is the total production cost
of a given line of products , BT for NB and DT will compensate
for the tablet side of this offering.

 

[CHADBOGA]

I answered you indirectly in the post above.

20$ is their factory production cost , it include
the amortization of capex of course but not the
devellopement costs.

And where are you getting this figure from?

It is laughable the nonsense you are going around spewing out.

 

[Abwx]

sorry but you have provided no answer. link me or show me how you get to this $20 dollar number. FDSOI Common platform white papers don't count. :\

What can be counted then ? estimations made by bakers.?

And while we are in the (chips) baking departement,
do you think that a baker has trouble estimating the costs
of another baker , moreover if both have the same commodities
and oven suppliers.?.

 

[Abwx]

And where are you getting this figure from?

It is laughable the nonsense you are going around spewing out.

First sentence is a question and second one is a response
to your own question by the way an ad hominem attack...

What is laughable is this kind of low level rethoric
for diversion purpose.

 

[liahos1]

What can be counted then ? estimations made by bakers.?

And while we are in the (chips) baking departement,
do you think that a baker has trouble estimating the costs
of another baker , moreover if both have the same commodities
and oven suppliers.?.

don't change the subject. we're all still waiting for you to provide how you got to your estimates.

 

[Vesku]

"Intel is planning to release entry-level Bay Trail-based processors for the Android platform in the second quarter of 2014, according to sources from tablet players.

The sources expect the CPUs to be priced between US$15-20, about US$12 lower than the current models.

Although Intel has already offered subsidies for its Bay Trail-T processors including Atom Z3740 and Z3770 at US$32 and US$37 and another 10% off for bulk purchase, they are still less competitive in pricing compared to ARM-based quad-core processors."

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20131014PD216.html

Matches OEMs pushing for some cheaper Bay Trail options for the budget tablets.

 

[Abwx]

don't change the subject. we're all still waiting for you to provide how you got to your estimates.

I gave my estimation , rather than questionning it
perpetualy show us in wich way i could be wrong ,
give us your estimation and explain us how it could
be more relevant than the numbers i posted.

Edit : From the link in Vesku s post :

Intel is planning to release entry-level Bay Trail-based processors for the Android platform in the second quarter of 2014, according to sources from tablet players.
The sources expect the CPUs to be priced between US$15-20, about US$12 lower than the current models.

My earlier posts :

During Q1 2014 production cost of a 22nm Finfet chip with 100mm2
area will shrink to 20$

The same paper stipulate that Finfets will manage
to have lower cost than bulk HKMG if ever the cycle
is longer than two years , hence Intel s is likely
to extend it to three years to benefit from said
cost advantage past H1 2014.

Even intel s schedule agree with me...


As well as their current pricing :

Although Intel has already offered subsidies for its Bay Trail-T processors including Atom Z3740 and Z3770 at US$32 and US$37 and another 10% off for bulk purchase, they are still less competitive in pricing compared to ARM-based quad-core processors.

 

[liahos1]

I gave my estimation , rather than questionning it
perpetualy show us in wich way i could be wrong ,
give us your estimation and explain us how it could
be more relevant than the numbers i posted.

haha this is amazing. you come up with some bs number, provide nothing to back it up but expect others that question it to come up with a number and then back it up. again, i will keep hammering you until you give us something more meaty than "it costs 20 dollars trust me".

 

[Kallogan]

I want a bay trail powered convertible taichi/yoga like with at least 11,6" IPS screen and windows 8.1

Core i powered convertibles have awful battery life and not fanless. Yuck.

 

[Abwx]

haha this is amazing. you come up with some bs number, provide nothing to back it up but expect others that question it to come up with a number and then back it up. again, i will keep hammering you until you give us something more meaty than "it costs 20 dollars trust me".

I edited my post , alas , the edit give you some clues
that i m completely right....As said even Intel is against
you on this one.

 

[Vesku]

I'm not sure what basis was used to determine Intel's wafer costs at $20 per Baytrail-T. However it does seem that total cost, with company direct costs factored in, is probably somewhere between $15 and $20 for Intel. If you assume $27 is where Intel hits the 50% Gross Margin they focus on, below the extra discounted Z3470 ($29), then the direct costs would be $18.

 

[liahos1]

I edited my post , alas , the edit give you some clues
that i m completely right....As said even Intel is against
you on this one.

what clues? you're quoting digitimes. How about the "Clue" Renee James gave at IDF? Or the "clues" that Morgan Stanley published in their Sept note on baytrail? But you're changing the subject again. Please give us some backup to your $20 dollar claim. Or maybe you have no clue what intel's costs really are.

 

[Abwx]

Please give us some backup to your $20 dollar claim. Or maybe you have no clue what intel's costs really are.

This is aknowledged by intel s current and future pricings ,
but then it s you who has either no clue or are deliberately
trolling the thread for some purpose.

If you dont have the slightest estimation to post then
it means that you are ignorant of theses matters and
as such you are not competent to say if i m wrong or
right , watching from a safe side is one thing , playing
the game is much harder and still up to you apparently.

 

[liahos1]

This is aknowledged by intel s current and future pricings ,
but then it s you who has either no clue or are deliberately
trolling the thread for some purpose.

If you dont have the slightest estimation to post then
it means that you are ignorant of theses matters and
as such you are not competent to say if i m wrong or
right , watching from a safe side is one thing , playing
the game is much harder and still up to you apparently.

how do you know intel's current pricing? Its interesting you're latching onto this digitimes article as the truth but prior to it coming out have no backup of your claim. Again I will repost this for posterity

"Intel has clearly signaled more aggressive pricing in
tablets and low end notebooks, and channel checks
are validating that, with Bay Trail pricing as low as
$10 for tablets and $20 for notebooks, vs. roughly
$25-30 for prior Atom chips. We explore the
ramifications for our global coverage"

Sept 3rd - Morgan Stanley Semiconductor team note.

You see I've also verified these numbers. I've talked to hardware directors at Lenovo and Asus. The numbers are also verified by Renee James and a friend of mine who recently came back from Taiwan.

So then you say they are selling it at a loss but can provide no backup to that claim. So please provide the backup and stop trying to change the subject.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Abwx never proves anything in his posts. So why would he start now....

Facts is not exactly something he is familiar with.

 

[SiliconWars]

Jesus Liahos which part of this is hard for you to understand?

Intel's Other Intel Architecture (Atom) lost $608 million last quarter. If the old Atoms were selling for $25-$30, and the new Atoms are selling for $10....

 

[Vesku]

how do you know intel's current pricing? Its interesting you're latching onto this digitimes article as the truth but prior to it coming out have no backup of your claim. Again I will repost this for posterity

"Intel has clearly signaled more aggressive pricing in
tablets and low end notebooks, and channel checks
are validating that, with Bay Trail pricing as low as
$10 for tablets and $20 for notebooks, vs. roughly
$25-30 for prior Atom chips. We explore the
ramifications for our global coverage"

Sept 3rd - Morgan Stanley Semiconductor team note.

You see I've also verified these numbers. I've talked to hardware directors at Lenovo and Asus. The numbers are also verified by Renee James and a friend of mine who recently came back from Taiwan.

So then you say they are selling it at a loss but can provide no backup to that claim. So please provide the backup and stop trying to change the subject.

I'd find the $10 pricing very hard to believe unless it was to get into a very particular device. I'll believe it is more than a possible single product limited price if we see actual Bay Trail tablets (more than 1 model) at or below $120 before years end. It's currently assumed those very low cost designs will be sporting old and slow previous Atoms.

 

[Abwx]

how do you know intel's current pricing? Its interesting you're latching onto this digitimes article as the truth but prior to it coming out have no backup of your claim. Again I will repost this for posterity

"Intel has clearly signaled more aggressive pricing in
tablets and low end notebooks, and channel checks
are validating that, with Bay Trail pricing as low as
$10 for tablets and $20 for notebooks, vs. roughly
$25-30 for prior Atom chips. We explore the
ramifications for our global coverage"

Sept 3rd - Morgan Stanley Semiconductor team note.

You see I've also verified these numbers. I've talked to hardware directors at Lenovo and Asus. The numbers are also verified by Renee James and a friend of mine who recently came back from Taiwan.

So then you say they are selling it at a loss but can provide no backup to that claim. So please provide the backup and stop trying to change the subject.

For the posterity ?..Are you kidding ?

Keep on boasting on selling prices numbers given to the financial
community where nothing is said about actual costs.

Where is it said that the cost will be lower than thoses numbers.?.
Do your friend know intel s production costs ?..

No , all they know eventualy are the prices at wich they will be sold.

They will sell them at a loss that s for sure , if their production
cost was in the sub 10$ zone and considering their ASP they
should have at least 80% gross margin even with all other
activities included.

 

[liahos1]

Jesus Liahos which part of this is hard for you to understand?

Intel's Other Intel Architecture (Atom) lost $608 million last quarter. If the old Atoms were selling for $25-$30, and the new Atoms are selling for $10....

Let me break it down for you. Other IA is expected to do about 3.8bln of revenue this year. about 15.5% of that revenue is ATOM which is mostly legacy netbook business. Most of the actual revenue is legacy infineon baseband.

Intel lumps into this category development costs for random projects (embedded, quark, LTE certification, Intels TV strategy and MDF funding etc) along with development of platforms for tablets and smartphones. IN short a lot of projects in here that aren't generating revenue (yet) for intel. So not really telling you anything about the incremental profits they generate from ATOM. i hope that clears things up.

 

[SiliconWars]

Let me break it down for you. Other IA is expected to do about 3.8bln of revenue this year. about 15.5% of that revenue is ATOM which is mostly legacy netbook business. Most of the actual revenue is legacy infineon baseband.

Intel lumps into this category development costs for random projects (embedded, quark, LTE certification, Intels TV strategy and MDF funding etc) along with development of platforms for tablets and smartphones. IN short a lot of projects in here that aren't generating revenue (yet) for intel. So not really telling you anything about the incremental profits they generate from ATOM. i hope that clears things up.

The division was making a profit on high Atom sales a few years ago, and now it's worsening losses on lower Atom sales. Revenue is clearly falling so it's not about projects that aren't generating revenue, it's about Atom losses.

 

[Vesku]

Thought, even if Intel's average oem price is mid to high $20s and that is taking a bit of a gross margin hit, that's still low enough to explain the lack of AMD Jaguar wins in large tablets and entry level notebooks. Without even having to examine technical merits, if they are close to the same price why would you throw away that Intel branding and marketing value.

 

[Abwx]

Thought, even if Intel's average oem price is mid to high $20s and that is taking a bit of a gross margin hit, that's still low enough to explain the lack of AMD Jaguar wins in large tablets and entry level notebooks. Without even having to examine technical merits, if they are close to the same price why would you throw away that Intel branding and marketing value.

It s likely that they are even cheaper than Temash
by a sizeable margin wich point us to the purpose ,
that is that Intel see ARM as an existencial threat
that must be countered.

In short better selling thoses at a loss now than
risking to sell nothing later and worse,see the ARM
brigade starting to dent elsewhere than in their usual
bottom of the barrel market.

 

[Arachnotronic]

The division was making a profit on high Atom sales a few years ago, and now it's worsening losses on lower Atom sales. Revenue is clearly falling so it's not about projects that aren't generating revenue, it's about Atom losses.

Netbooks sales are gone and R&D costs have well over doubled from 2009 levels. That's what happens when you throw a bunch of money at building a pipeline of CPU cores to be refreshed every year, 3 generations of cellular modems, likely other connectivity, and so on.

 

[Sweepr]

Yes i meant 4 and 2 Threads. Also Core i5 has lower CPU frequency than Core i7. If the highest model (Core i7 + HD5100) is only on par with Trinity A10-4600M then it looses to Rithland.




Core i5 is nothing more than a Dual core with HT. Im sure it will win some, loose in others to the Quad core A10-5757M. But it will definately loose in Graphics since even Core i7 with HD5100 only manages to be on par with Last Year Trinity A10-4600M.

Wrong again. Core i5 4288U is a 2C/4T Haswell CPU, at 2.6-3.1GHz it will beat any 35W Trinity/Richland in MT taks and smash it in ST tasks. Poor 35W Richland has yet to match last-year's 17W Ivy Bridge ULV MT CPU performance according to Anand. Also, this Core i5 has the same GPU frequency as a Core i7.

Quick CB11.5 comparison using slightly a higher-clocked 2.8-3.3GHz Core i7
A10-5750M: 2.32 Multi / 0.85 Single.
Core i7 4558U: 3.48 Multi / 1.45 Single.

You make it sound like there is a big difference between Trinity and Richland, but in fact Richland is nothing more than a slightly higher-clocked Trinity (performance-wise).
If 28W ULT Haswell manages to match AMD's best 2012 mobile APU's GPU performance (and smash it in CPU tasks), then a hypothetical 35W Haswell with GT3 + more clock headroom would probably do fine (if not beat) factory OCed Trinity (oops, Richland).