Market Currents
Mentioned during Intel's Q3 earnings call (webcast): Q4 gross margin weakness has much to do...
-
Tuesday, October 16, 2012, 5:31 PM ETMentioned during Intel's Q3 earnings call (webcast): Q4 gross margin weakness has much to do with capacity adjustments rather than price cuts or mix shifts. But the company is taking "aggressive tactical actions" to lower inventory, as PC demand stays soft and OEMs prove cautious about placing orders. Also, enterprise server demand has softened, though cloud sales are strong. Intel's inventory and capex guidance suggest it isn't counting on PC demand rebounding strongly anytime soon. INTC -3.3% AH.
Other date
TECH ETFs IN FOCUS
Latest Tech Articles
This news story has 40 comments:
sounds like they don't even expect christmas and black friday to boost anything.
I expect AMD will report and guide down just like Intel, and dip another 5-10%.
AMD was already low, then it said revenue would be down 10%, so stock falls another 10%, and after this earnings report, any more semi-bad news will cause it fall yet another 10%. Just sit back and laugh.
Intel was dumb to spend 300m promoting slim laptops when people want iPads. They should have invested the money in lowering costs.
2nd the msft pricing implies the arm surface will sell more.
This is aweful
Still long term it should rebound.
My net position is +1k intel. Arm doesnt need ridiculous marketing when they compete on price performance.
Like I said - these guys don't need ARM. Now, take heed - this is a 5 year old, budget micro-architecture. With Intel's fabs and design aggressiveness, I really, really don't see any reason why it won't dominate.
Long INTC. A company that has the technological lead and the manufacturing prowess to win.
You also have no grasp of the facts. Intel's server sales were up 6% within a global economy that's clearly in a downtrend.
The big picture here is that nothing in Intel's report indicates anything other than a global downturn. That's confirmed by IBM's report today as IBM isn't dependent on either x86 or the PC market.
http://bit.ly/RR4KT3
The performance that matters is not for native applications (Web browsers are compiled to native x86). Whats the Java Android app performance? What is the phone reception like? (high frequency CPUs can interfere with Mobile reception).
http://engt.co/OGD9qW
There's no doubt about it - Intel's here to win. Period.
http://engt.co/U5ZvTQ
Also, the MSM8960 isn't Qualcomm's most powerful chip anymore. That honor belongs to the APQ8064, which is found in the LG Optimus G. AnandTech's Optimus G benchmarks were pretty impressive:
http://bit.ly/ODZK7j
Intel has a quality product in Medfield, but it's just one of many good options out there.
"So what do all these numbers mean? Well, Intel's 2GHz processor is pretty capable. Although the RAZR i only bests the RAZR M on SunSpider browser performance (something that Intel's been focusing on with its mobile hardware), it's a substantial score difference. Otherwise, the Europe-bound RAZR skates pretty close, if behind the RAZR M's benchmarks. There's a hiccup on the CF-Bench score, something that we also noted on the Grand X IN. While both the ZTE and Motorola devices are running Android 4.0, there's still a tangible difference in these early benchmarks -- perhaps testament to both Motorola and Google's proximity and the debut of Intel's faster 2GHz Medfield processor. We'll be testing out those power-saving promises from the chipmaker over the next few days."
http://engt.co/OGD9qW
====
When we benchmarked the RAZR i recently, we ran it through the same battery of tests, in case any firmware updates brought any performance improvements. Motorola claims the Intel Atom Z2480 processor inside is capable of "up to 2GHz," but it should at least be able to reach that impressive clockspeed at full tilt.
The results remain largely unchanged, but after spending a week with the device, we'd like to add that the web browser still gives a superb performance . The phone made a decent effort on more processor-intensive tasks, including a brief game of Max Payne. Due to that Intel chip, however, the RAZR i doesn't support all the apps on Google Play. Two notable examples are Adobe AIR, which underpins several media streaming apps, and Adobe Flash. Having said that, compatibility has improved since six months ago, with the likes of Netflix and Temple Run now installable. Just days ago, too, Google updated its Chrome app, which now works on Intel-powered devices running Android 4.0.
We also had the chance to pit the RAZR i against the Droid RAZR M. Aside from the benchmark results outlined above, the Medfield entry offered a marginally faster response to most actions. Powering up both phones, the RAZR i landed at its home screen around 12 seconds ahead of the Snapdragon sibling. Loading into the Chrome browser was around the same speed on both, likewise the camera app -- both launching and capture -- was equally swift on both. It's interesting to note that the color balance appeared more natural on the screen of the Verizon version, which matches up with our results in the camera test.
In addition to this admirable performance, we were interested to see how Intel's mobile chip fared in terms of battery life -- with the Motorola RAZR M sharing screen similarities and more, we can make a better judgement on whether those promises stand up. On our battery rundown -- video playback, 50 percent brightness, WiFi and 3G on, social networks and email on sync -- Intel's iteration lasted nine hours, compared with eight hours for the RAZR M. That's a marginal victory, but as with the LTE version, we were more impressed with how the phone managed to go the distance on typical or mildly intensive use. Ultimately, we never felt the need to seek out a charging port during a day's work.
It's still a good chip, especially for a first try. But it doesn't blow away the competition either.
To get back to the original point, if you combine the Engadget results with the Anandtech results Medfield has a solid overall lead. And as far as blowing away the competition, that's the job for the Haswell SoC arriving in 2013.
For that matter ARM isn't compatible with ARM. Unlike x86, ARM is not a single architecture. It's actually a set of incompatible architectures.
http://bit.ly/QqXGwR