News Intel's Back in the Black, Says Arrow Lake Already in the Fab

[Admin]

Intel reports profit for the first time in several quarters and announces that the first stepping of its Arrow Lake chips are in the fab.

Intel's Back in the Black, Says Arrow Lake Already in the Fab : Read more

 

[brandonjclark]

A strong Intel is good for America. I support their success!

 

[jasonf2]

The last time I looked at the numbers Intel's red ink was heavily related to internal reinvestment in R&D, not lack of sales. I have long contested that rumors of their demise have been greatly exaggerated.

 

[TerryLaze]

signaling that the end of the consumer CPU oversupply looms.

Looms is something you would say for something bad, CPU oversupply ending would be a good thing for intel because it would get new CPU sales going again, unless you are showing bias here it should be 'is on the horizon' and not 'looms'

Intel was never not on top, having some bad quarters after years of a huge bubble due to the pandemic is normal, and also it's not like this is some super good quarter for intel.

 

[Lucky_SLS]

Competition is always welcome! looking forward to Intel Battlemage GPUs...

 

[bit_user]

I wonder how much of this profitability comes from income generated by selling off various businesses and assets vs. actual increase in volumes or margins.

The reason I'm wondering is that I actually do care about Intel recovering. I'm just not sure they really have, yet.

 

[jasonf2]

I wonder how much of this profitability comes from income generated by selling off various businesses and assets vs. actual increase in volumes or margins.

The reason I'm wondering is that I actually do care about Intel recovering. I'm just not sure they really have, yet.

I briefly looked at the Q2 financial statement. It looks like gross revenue was up about a billion (12.9 b) for the quarter (still down from 15.3b YOY). But in addition to the Q1Q2 revenue increase YOY R&D and MG&A (grouped together) was down to 5.5 billion from 6.2 Q2 22. The net income was at 1.5 billion so it looks like a combination of reduced spending and increased revenue created the net 1.5b profit. Because they group MG&A and R&D together it is difficult to say if they are actually slowing down R&D or simply didn't have loss charges from bad acquisitions that they were trying to get off of the books though so some of that is like playing poker.

 

[watzupken]

I wonder how much of this profitability comes from income generated by selling off various businesses and assets vs. actual increase in volumes or margins.

The reason I'm wondering is that I actually do care about Intel recovering. I'm just not sure they really have, yet.

It is likely because of cost cutting. Intel's cash cow is business from data center, which I don't see recovering. I also don't believe that retail chips sale revenue is improving when demand for PC is slumping and Intel have likely been offering their retail chips at thinner margins to compete.

 

[JamesJones44]

I wonder how much of this profitability comes from income generated by selling off various businesses and assets vs. actual increase in volumes or margins.

The reason I'm wondering is that I actually do care about Intel recovering. I'm just not sure they really have, yet.

They factored those out for the non-GAAP earnings which was .13 cents overall. I did find it odd that the booked revenue from MobileEye since they spun them out a while ago. However, I've not looked into whether the spinout entitles Intel to some kind of parent dividend while they own a certain percentage of the company (not completely uncommon).

 

[TerryLaze]

I briefly looked at the Q2 financial statement. It looks like gross revenue was up about a billion (12.9 b) for the quarter (still down from 15.3b YOY). But in addition to the Q1Q2 revenue increase YOY R&D and MG&A (grouped together) was down to 5.5 billion from 6.2 Q2 22. The net income was at 1.5 billion so it looks like a combination of reduced spending and increased revenue created the net 1.5b profit. Because they group MG&A and R&D together it is difficult to say if they are actually slowing down R&D or simply didn't have loss charges from bad acquisitions that they were trying to get off of the books though so some of that is like playing poker.

They lost 0.8 bil and only made 1.5 because they got 2.2 from taxes, but I have no idea about how this works and if they plan for this or what, I see this all the time in AMD statements as well,

Income (loss) before taxes		(816)​		(909)​
Provision for (benefit from) taxes		(2,289)​		(455)​

You also benefited from that, probably way more than me, if intel didn't do that then AMD wouldn't have existed for you to build that AM4 system, they would have closed down years ago.

But AMD does a lot of shady stuff was the point I was making, they lied and keep lying about the power draw by hiding ppt as much as possible and by separating cores from io draw, they lied about the max clock speed of pretty much every single generation, they dropped the low end CPUs to force people like you to build bigger systems then they normally would, they made a gen with low quality control that started melting and blowing up, and so on.

 

[jasonf2]

While I would definitely question Intel's ethics when it comes to fair trade practices over the years I would have to say that when it comes to raping customers Intel is middle of the pack at most. If you want to talk about Nvidia, Apple, AMDs GPU branch (or any GPU partner or reseller thru the pandemic) then we can talk about being taken advantage of. The fact is that Intel got behind on nodes because accountants were running the company (rather than engineers). The recent spat of red ink is heavily tied to turning their R&D back on and having to play catch up with TSMC, AMD and in many ways ARM. That R&D will be reflected in strong product performance increases for years to come. In this game the only way for Intel to truly get on top is for their hardware to hands down out perform their competition. So for me personally Stockholm syndrome would be grossly inaccurate. I just want performance to continue to improve at a fair price. That means that both Intel and AMD need to be making money and competing for the performance crown. Intel failing is not good for consumers or the industry in general.

 

[JamesJones44]

Do your really think AMD is not capable of going Intel or Nvidia if they become a dominate player? AMD used to sell their processors at a cheap rate compared to Intel, now the typically charge the same or more. I'm not saying they shouldn't, but that simple fact should easily demonstrates that AMD would likely succumb to the same pressures Intel and Nvidia have due to shareholder.

I personally don't care which company is "on top" so long as there is a competitor that is staying relatively close so you don't end up with one player holding all of the cards and charging whatever they feel like for their products.

 

[Ogotai]

you also benefited from that, probably way more than me, if intel didn't do that then AMD wouldn't have existed for you to build that AM4 system, they would have closed down years ago.

yea ok sure, easy to say that now, mainly cause it cant be proven, but if you can prove it with a source, by all means.

AMD used to sell their processors at a cheap rate compared to Intel, now the typically charge the same or more.

yea, when the performance wasnt comparable to intel. but now that they are comparable, amd should still charge less ?? yea that will work....

 

[DSzymborski]

We don't do platform warring here. Nor do we have chidish debates about what kinds of sexual assault to analogize to Intel's or AMD's customer relations. By hook or by crook, these tangents will stop here.