Intel Gross Margin At 64.5% — World, You’re Paying Too Much For IT

Intel had a good quarter. Sales were up. Margins were up. That means the world had a poor quarter, paying way to much for CPUs. Moore’s Law should increase margins somewhat, but what is the cause for rising revenues, then, when legacy PC shipments are down? Too high prices. Buy AMD or ARM, folks. Buy small cheap computers. Let the market fix this.

Earnings Release Q2 2014.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

43 Responses to Intel Gross Margin At 64.5% — World, You’re Paying Too Much For IT

  1. Deaf Spy says:

    But of course. Suddenly our retired physics teachers becomes an expert in HR and accounting.

    One can do both with a simple pocket calculator only. But at the greatly increased costs of hours. You can also saw with a pocket knife. Strangely though, people prefer motor saws.

  2. Deaf Spy wrote, “it is sad to see you trying to extrapolate your personal, limited needs over the entire population”.

    Everyone has their limits. Mine are much larger than any other individual I know personally. The little woman is in real estate but her industry has finally switched to web applications and she has no need of that other OS. Deaf Spy’s wife, doing accounting and HR stuff may be said to use “certain” applications but accounting and HR stuff antedates the computer by ages and any general purpose computer and commodity software can do those things just fine. Doing accounting does not require that other OS. Doing HR stuff does not require that other OS. Accounting and HR stuff don’t require “certain” applications.

  3. oiaohm says:

    Deaf Spy The damage to the market due to anti-trust actions in fact take years to decades to fully correct. This is the problem Intel and Microsoft current position is part based on actions they should have never done and actions they cannot afford to ever do again.

  4. oiaohm says:

    http://www.sitepronews.com/2014/06/13/intel-loses-appeal-antitrust-laws/
    Deaf Spy this is the end result of that 2005 stuff. Yes prosecution in the EU and Intel losing its appeal. None of the reasons Intel could come up with disproved the breach of anti-trust laws. A court did rule Intel did commit a offense.

    Courts also rule after the fact of the offense. Just because it takes a long time for a prosecutor to catch up with you does not mean its not an offense. There are two types of offences that the statute of limitations does not apply to. 1 is Murder the other is Anti-trust actions.

    Please stop calling stuff my option when its not. Microsoft and Intel have both been done for Anti-trust actions.

    Deaf Spy being x86 compatible does not help you when you are attempt to run Android applications. Why most native parts for android applications are arm instructions.

    Big enterprises use server based ERP software for HR and Accounting that happen to run on Linux. Yes oracle makes a lot of profit from HR and ERP solutions they provide. So its not that there are not options. The options are most likely outside her price range.

  5. Deaf Spy says:

    Mr. Pogson, it is sad to see you trying to extrapolate your personal, limited needs over the entire population. In my example, my wife uses certain accounting and HR software, which is available only for Windows and x86. In another similar example, the user needs Finale, and no, the GNU options in this regard are not good enough for her. And I can continue on, just by looking at my acquaintances.

    But it is even sadder to see you try to back your claims by using a dictionary. As a teacher, you should have known better. Or, do you think that court is redundant? Perhaps you do. After all, you are a communist, even if you don’t know it.

  6. Deaf Spy wrote, “in the civilized world, only the court can rule whether an action is a crime”.

    Strange my dictionary defines crime perfectly: “1. Any violation of law, either divine or human; an omission of a duty commanded, or the commission of an act forbidden by law.
    [1913 Webster]
    2. Gross violation of human law, in distinction from a misdemeanor or trespass, or other slight offense. Hence, also, any aggravated offense against morality or the public welfare; any outrage or great wrong. “To part error from crime.” –Tennyson.
    [1913 Webster]

  7. Deaf Spy wrote, “they have the benefit of all the x86 software in the world. Applications, Pogson, applications.”

    Oh, you mean my GPS-stuff? LibreOffice? Gnumeric? I can get those with */Linux no problem and I don’t have M$ in the loop anywhere. I’ve seen some pretty useless stuff sold for x86. In more than one case, no one actually knew what the application did but the salesman was fantastic. I was once pressured to install an .exe which would convert my HTML into data for an application my supervisor could run to view the result. I kid you not. I asked if I could set up a web-server and have the supervisor examine it with his browser. It took just a few e-mails to make that happen. I didn’t have to buy any software. GNU/Linux did it all. So much for x86 being essential. I can run my stuff on x86 or ARM or other platforms transparently. Wintel is not essential to me or anyone else.

  8. Deaf Spy says:

    Ohio, how exactly does your latest rumble prove your previous statement about “documented illegal deals”? Please cite a court’s ruling.

  9. Deaf Spy says:

    Sorry for the double post, a reckless press of “Tab + Enter”.

    If you do not approve the leading role of the court, I might advise you to take a look forward countries like North Korea and Russia, where the court is nothing but a puppet in the hands of the dictator.

    Now, back to Atoms. The fact is that today Atoms are potent little chips, which consume little power. In everyday use, atom-powered tablets fare just as well as atom-based ones in terms of battery life and performance. For certain tasks, they fare much better. And, they have the benefit of all the x86 software in the world. Applications, Pogson, applications.

  10. Deaf Spy says:

    Mr. Pogson, in the civilized world, only the court can rule whether an action is a crime. You cannot. I cannot. Ohio cannot.

  11. oiaohm says:

    Deaf Spy “wind river”. Do look this up. The reality Intel is backing the race both ways. Wind river that is a sub company of intel makes Arm processor chips that happen to make their way into Tablets.

    So the arm tablet from Intel sub company Wind River will run at 100 percent load for 24 hours from same size battery that an atom tablet runs for 8-10 hours from.

    Deaf Spy sorry your story that Intel has disregarded the phone and tablet market is wrong. The x86 chips in the phone in tablet market results in Intel core company competing with one of their own sub companies. Arm in the server room has required Intel to release x86 for the phone and tablet market.

    Wind river specialists in Mil grade stuff.

  12. Deaf Spy wrote, “it doesn’t change the fact that Intel rules the server, desktop, and laptop spaces”

    That’s not a fact at all. Even when Intel was paying OEMs to use Intel only, AMD was getting ~20% of desktop. Also, such bribery and corruption is not “ruling”. It’s a crime.

    Deaf Spy also wrote, “Atoms are Intel, Mr. Pogson”.

    I knew that.
    cat /proc/cpuinfo
    processor : 0
    vendor_id : GenuineIntel
    cpu family : 6
    model : 28
    model name : Intel(R) Atom(TM) CPU 330 @ 1.60GHz

    but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s the most sluggish PC in the house, bar the old thin clients.

    Deaf Spy wrote, “Z-series are quad-core. Even older models are more powerful than ARMs on pure computations. Coupled with recent HD4000 Intel videos, Atoms are quite potent nowadays.”

    Yes, Intel had to get one step of Moore’s Law ahead just to be competitive thanks to x86 architecture. Those chips are still more expensive than ARM. No thanks and I still don’t want to give Intel any business because of their history of anti-competitive action.

  13. Deaf Spy says:

    Everyone has the right to their own opinion and it should be valued. Further, it is a principle of democracy that a government of laws rules by the consent of the governed. You bet everyone’s opinion matters.
    He is free to express his opinion. He is not free to lie and present his fantasies as true facts.

  14. Deaf Spy says:

    Mr. Pogson wrote:
    The market is clearly unhappy with Intel’s prices or they would not buy ARMed CPUs.
    Indeed there is market for ARMs, but it doesn’t change the fact that Intel rules the server, desktop, and laptop spaces. This is a fact, period. There is no trend changing that.

    My understanding is that if you count all the smartphones and tablets, Intel is way behind.
    This is a market Intel just starts treading into. And, seeing tablets and convertibles with Atoms, future is not that gloom. Until a couple of years ago, tablet and phone market was totally ignored by Intel. Now they are just stepping on it.

    I have a couple of Atoms in the house but Hell will freeze over before I will replace them with Intel.
    Atoms are Intel, Mr. Pogson. Didn’t you miss this important piece of info?

    They are slow, noisy and certainly can be replaced with ARM.
    No, they are not. Z-series are quad-core. Even older models are more powerful than ARMs on pure computations. Coupled with recent HD4000 Intel videos, Atoms are quite potent nowadays.

    Real-life devices demonstrate that Atom-powered tablets and laptops give the same, sometimes even better battery life than ARM-based devices.

    You know, Mr. Pogson, last Christmas I bought my wife Asus T-book. Quad-core Atom, 2GB RAM, 64GB storage, Windows 8, Office 2013 home edition included in the price. It lasts about 8-10 hours while surfing. And it runs all the x86 applications she still needs sometimes to do her work at home.

    Now, show me an ARM device that can do all these. No x86 support? Battery life again in the same range? I though so.

  15. Deaf Spy wrote, “If the market is happy with Intel’s prices, then the prices are just right. Seeing the sales of Intel, they obviously are. Your personal notion has no meaning.”

    Obvious to one is not obvious to another. The market is clearly unhappy with Intel’s prices or they would not buy ARMed CPUs. My understanding is that if you count all the smartphones and tablets, Intel is way behind. What is it, a billion Android/Linux smartphones selling per annum and just a few hundred million Intel CPUs? I for one have not bought an Intel CPU for more than a decade. I may eventually buy another AMD CPU but even that is in doubt. ARM is the way to go. I am comfortable that a chip costing a few dollars designed by ARM and partners and running FLOSS is superior to whatever running on an Intel heater. I have a couple of Atoms in the house but Hell will freeze over before I will replace them with Intel. They are slow, noisy and certainly can be replaced with ARM. 4-8 cores of ARM can easily give me the performance I need around here at a much smaller cost of ownership, cooling, weight, price, … considered.

  16. Deaf Spy wrote, “Your opinion which is illegal is irrelevant, and worthless.”

    Everyone has the right to their own opinion and it should be valued. Further, it is a principle of democracy that a government of laws rules by the consent of the governed. You bet everyone’s opinion matters.

  17. Deaf Spy says:

    Ohio, three things.
    1. You are not a judge. Your opinion which is illegal is irrelevant, and worthless.
    2. You are entitled to your own imagination, but not on your own facts.
    3. Which server room would that be, Ohio? Isn’t it the one with the IBM SAN Volume controller you managed to convince yourself you had been operating?

  18. Deaf Spy says:

    Exactly, Mr. Pogson. Repeating my words, you just confirm that it is the market which determines the price (in a free market, not in state-controlled one).

    Back to our original discussion. If the market is happy with Intel’s prices, then the prices are just right. Seeing the sales of Intel, they obviously are. Your personal notion has no meaning.

  19. oiaohm says:

    Deaf Spy you do find VIA in the server room.

    Inferior performance per core performance is correct for VIA. But when you getting watts to performance VIA chips beat all the Intel chips. It is not always black and white. Exclusive deals have limited the client base VIA has been able to sell to. The damage from these things cannot be calculated.

  20. oiaohm says:

    http://www.cnet.com/au/news/amd-says-intel-only-deal-struck-at-apple-in-2005/

    Deaf Spy every country has anti monopoly laws that restrict how company are allowed to protect themselves. Striking a deal forbidding a party from ordering parts from other parties is in fact almost always a breach of anti monopoly laws.

    Deaf Spy I am not saying Intel did not catch different makers off guard. But part of Intel market placement at moment is due to documented illegal deals. That were breached of known anti monopoly laws when Intel penned them and hidden them under NDA agreements.

    Deaf Spy there have been many proto type x86 compatible chips that were x86 compatible that have been blocked from entering market.

  21. Deaf Spy, never having made/produced anything, I suspect, wrote, ” In a free market, it is the equilibrium between supply and demand that determines the price. Costs do not matter.”

    If the cost of anything exceeds its selling price or the revenue that can result, a product soon leaves the market. That matters.

  22. oiaohm wrote, “Only three x86 vendors. VIA, AMD and Intel. Result of artificially limited supply is higher price.”

    IBM actually did something right in this case, insisting on alternative suppliers to Intel. Imagine what the Wintel tax would have been without other suppliers. Intel and M$ did everything they could to drive these others out of business. Intel paid OEMs not to ship AMD and M$ kept adding bloat which means Via CPUs were running in the fringes or as thin clients. Thank Goodness for ARM and */Linux.

  23. Deaf Spy says:

    Ohio, and you have artificial intelligence. Check out the definition for a free market on Wikipedia, it is simple enough even for you to understand.

    Any sensible company will try to safeguard themselves against competitions with any means possible. Legal or not, there is court to tell. Unless the court says so, all actions are legal.

    Which has nothing to do with the fact that Intel blew all competition out of the water with Core. During the Pentium 4 era, AMD was making laugh of Intel. AMD, however, failed to turn their success into a successful trend. Intel spent some years to refine the design of PentiumM, and the result caught AMD totally off guard. Until today, AMD never managed to get close to beating Core. They even tried to beat them on the core-per-die basis, which also proved futile. Many cores cannot compensate lack of sheer power. I really wonder how you still want to mention VIA. Their chips have always, always offered inferior performance.

    There is little legal problem for a company to enter the x86 market. The barriers before the market are purely natural – no one has the know-how to produce a chip to compete with Core at the same level of instruction compatibility. Well, that may translate to a high barrier, but it is not imposed by a legal body. Again, it is a natural barrier, created of many-year r&d investements and knowledge.

    Now I give you three guesses to tell us why Samsung produces high quality components for other companies, which Samsung cannot afford to put in its own consumer products.

  24. oiaohm says:

    Deaf Spy x86 has artificially limited supply. Only three x86 vendors. VIA, AMD and Intel. Result of artificially limited supply is higher price. Remember Nvidia wanted to make x86 chips they cannot because they cannot get a license to x86 techs.

    x86 chips are not truly free market.

    Cost of production maths done properly include the costs of R&D to make the product. Cost of production really sets the min price you can sell at without making a loss.

    Deaf Spy there have been documented cases of illegal deals by intel to prevent AMD having market share. So the x86 chip market is distorted. Even worse this interference forced VIA x86 chips out of Major OEM vendors. x86 should be a three horse race. Due to it not being intervention is required to correct the damage Intel illegal deals with OEM’s to only provide Intel chips.

  25. Deaf Spy says:

    Mr. Pogson wrote: “In a free market the price of anything should be determined by the cost of production and supply/demand”

    Absolutely not, Mr. Pogson. In a free market, it is the equilibrium between supply and demand that determines the price. Costs do not matter. If your production is inefficient cost-wise, and consumers refuse to pay your price, you go out of business.
    Currently, consumers choose to pay Intel what they ask. Consumers may choose AMD, but AMD obviously do not satisfy their requirements.

    When you say that production costs should determine the price, you follow loosely Marx’s theories (which he failed to prove, btw). There, he puts the labour costs as top price-making factor. He, just like you, happily ignores investments, R&D, time value of money, etc.

  26. dougman says:

    Eh??

    You speak, as if I wanted your worthless loser opinion.

    See M$ is rather irrelevant these days, but of course you would disagree and go off on some irrelevant trivial fact in some vain hopes of proving otherwise, when in fact M$ is pink slipping ~10% of it’s workforce proves it to be true.

    Honestly, I could care less if MonkeyBoy is worth $20B. See, success is not about the money you make, but the difference you make in someones life or even the world.

  27. DrLoser says:

    Well, you might not have a High School Equivalency, Dougie, but you’re obviously on top of your “Ladybird does Ancient History” stuff.
    Quoting a marketing guy from 2000?
    Are you doing this because you admire Ballmer for making more money than you? (I’m guessing he’s worth $2 billion or so, and you? Maybe $2 by the end of the month.)
    Or are you doing it because you can’t trawl up anything relevant?
    Say, from 2001 onwards?

  28. dougman says:

    Communists?

    Ballmer and BIlly tried passing that line and look where it got them, nowhere!

    If you want Americans to hate something just claim it’s ‘communist’. They fall for that old chestnut far more often than they should.

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2000/07/31/ms_ballmer_linux_is_communism/

    “to emphasise the competitive threat, and in some senses the competitive opportunity, that Linux represents. Linux is a tough competitor. There’s no company called Linux, there’s barely a Linux road map. Yet Linux sort of springs organically from the earth. And it had, you know, the characteristics of communism that people love so very, very much about it. That is, it’s free. And I’m not trying to make fun of it, because it’s a real competitive issue. Today, I would say, we still don’t see a lot of Linux competition in most quarters on the desktop, and we see a lot of Linux competition in some server markets. And we could either say, hey, Linux is going to roll over the world, but I don’t see that happening. That’s not what’s going on right now.”

    In little under fourteen years, Linux has surpassed M$ in the majority of markets and will continue to “organically” grow.

  29. Deaf Spy wrote, “Now, the market is flawed. Not the market should determine the prices, but Mr. Pogson should.”

    In a free market the price of anything should be determined by the cost of production and supply/demand, not what some salesman decides. Intel’s chips cost far more than the equivalent ARMed or AMD chip because Intel tipped the scales years ago by paying OEMs not to use AMD’s chips.

    Intel may have agreed to desist from such practices and to pay a fine but that does not undo the damage to AMD’s brand. Even today, ordinary folks are convinced that a computer with “Intel inside” is better and worth more money than one with AMD’s chips for no good reason. That denies consumers choice.

  30. Deaf Spy says:

    Sigh. All open-source proponents are communists, and Pogson is no exception.
    Now, the market is flawed. Not the market should determine the prices, but Mr. Pogson should. Because Mr. Pogson knows better. Chuckle. 🙂

  31. Mats Hagglund says:

    Investing some 500 – 600 € for pc (desktop) and using Linux/FLOSS means annual cost of just about 50-70 € for Ordinary Joe. Staying in Wintel world means investing 3-4 times more money and still poorer computing. 10th year of my Linux PC is about to beginning and friends of mine are still wondering how decent that old war horse still is. No need to come back to wonderful world of Bill Gates.

  32. oiaohm says:

    DrLoser Dec Alpha workstation the “DECpc AXP 150” made it on to the desktop for a while before it died out. SPARCstation or the SPARC version of a desktop computer also made it on to the desktop for a while before it died out. HP ZX6000 Itanium Workstation also ends up on the desktop and dies out. The interesting point is most of these die out when the popularity in the server room falls.

    Even that those chip fail in desktop market some of their tech still remains.

    Sorry every one of those server chips end up on the desktop for a while. So tradition is basically appear in high end server appear on desktop for a while and die out or dig in with fate linked from the server room to the desktop. 8086 appears in high end servers before it appears in any desktops. Most people forget the 8086 was a server chip.

    This is history same pattern repeating over and over again. So arm servers in volume will equal arm workstations on desktop at least for a while. The flow from server to desktop is a practical one. If I am designing for a particular processor chip it simpler to have it on my desk with direct keyboard and mouse control to debug.

    This is the horrible reality. The server market in fact effects desktop market CPU selection.

    Why do servers have such a huge drive. Simply where else are you going to find cases of a single party that will take a complete batch run of chips. R&D for servers can be recovered. Then those wanting to make/use desktops are looking for the cheapest and most compatible.

    Maybe the moonshot will result in us having PC’s that are part x86 part arm. The changes in the server rooms do effect the desktop.

  33. oiaohm says:

    kurkosdr http://www.viaembedded.com/en/products/arm/ http://www.google.com/patents/US20120260067
    Early report on moonshot http://blog.myvirtualvision.com/2014/06/03/take-hps-moonshot/

    Yes VIA makes ARM devices. VIA sells quite a few of them. You try to find another Arm solution maker that provides 7 years warranty. Arm chip maker VIA has been working with is Freescale.

    kurkosdr the issue getting up VIA nose is they sell more Arm than x86. So VIA idea of a x86/ARM hybrid chip is that they can make one chip service both markets. Yes VIA patented the prototype of x86/ARM hybrid. The question is what VIA chip will be this? And the question after that is how will Intel and AMD react to a x86/ARM hybrid? If all 3 of the major x86 chip makes end up making x86/ARM hybrids things could get very interesting.

    ARM licenses the instruction set independent to the silicon designs.

    The APM is 64 bit arm the TI is still 32 bit arm. The interesting fun of moonshot is everything is glue together with fairly much standard networking. So a moonshot box can be filled with a mix of everything.

    Notice in the earlier report the AMD Opteron card. 4 sockets per card that are 4 in-pendant nodes. This is socket compatible with the up coming 64 bit arm from AMD. So we have 2 arm 64 bit solutions so far for Moonshot.

    Also a few big guys have pointed out the in the face fact. You want uptime you will be forced to buy 2 moonshot boxes as a HP management software update will most likely be horrible.

    Fun part moonshot box can host 180 desktop environments with each have their own decanted quad core x86 cpu and in cpu gpu. We don’t know what the upper limit will be for ARM yet. HP recommendation is only to run the box to 100 Users. Yes 80 can have more than 1 cpu.

    If you want what kinda sux about the moonshot. It is it size. 4.3U. How can I say installation fun. You cannot just stack and bolt them. Ok this is nothing new for HP.

    One of the biggest pushes for VDI is buy your own device. A device you own the company really cannot put their software on if it contains trade secrets.

    kurkosdr I guess it did not cross your mind that each card could run 4 instances of like Windows 7 or Windows 9. 4.3 U box holding 180 PCs is possible.

    “HP ConvergedSystem 100 for Hosted Desktops”

    This is one of the odd items out of moonshot. The contain OS is not running in a software hyper-visor. 6000W for 100 users is not bad.

    Specs of a AMD x86 Node Moonshot is not bad. AMD Opteronâ„¢ X2150 APU, 1.5GHz, (4) x86 cores, and Integrated GPU with AMD Radeonâ„¢ HD 8000 Series Graphics
    8GB
    32 or 64 GB of integrated Solid State Storage (iSSD). Quite a decent Office PC. Remember this is only first generation.

    Moonshot box is basically an old school Linux cluster in a box. Difference is more than 1 PC per card. This is also a difference from a blade server as well. Most blades in a blade server are a single system per card. Replacing a dead node in a Moonshot is going to be fun. 1 dead node and 3 working ones you have to move.

  34. DrLoser, bordering on irrelevancy, wrote, “there are no ARM chips out there “designed for high end servers”.

    Define high-end. Calxeda ran out of money designing massively parallel units for servers for big data and multiple users. HP and others are bringing such things to market now.

    See an interview with HP (Moonshot, shipping this year) at Texas LinuxFest :

    So 64-bit ARMed servers are shipping this year and they are designed for a massive scale of computing and serving.

  35. kurkosdr says:

    “One of the third players the edges you missed is VIA with a hybrid arm/x86 chip own internal design and GPU. Of course AMD is in arm with its own GPU.”

    VIA makes ARM SoCs? How many do they sell?

    As regards AMD, let’s see what they deliver. It might end up like Nvidia’s Project Denver aka Tegra K1 (64-bit variant), missing power draw and thermal targets and being retargeted towards automotive or ARM servers (assuming the ARM server market exists).

    Designing phone and tablet SoCs is a tricky business, with the thermal and power constraints. Unless AMD beats their habit of under-delivering, it’s a two-horse race (Qualcomm vs ARM Holdings)

  36. oiaohm says:

    DrLoser you are missing that Intel is also the biggest force behind android-x86. So one of the forces behind Chrome OS/Android hybrid is Intel.

    Something to be aware Intel does have the highest profit margin out of any CPU designer.

    Intel investment in a lot of ways has been limited. Intel has over the years invested way more in Windows than Linux.

    Chromebooks are in fact not a Intel idea. You are aware that x86 chromebooks don’t use intel chipset completely. The hardware startup chip its Googles alone. So every x86 chromebook sold contains at least 1 arm processor being the google chip that preps the x86 cpu and busses. That intel is profiting from chrome is nothing more than Intel providing enough Linux support.

  37. DrLoser wrote, “Not content with refusing to buy your better half the Chromebook she so obviously needs, Robert, you are attacking a major manufacturer who is prepared to invest their own R&D into generating these wonderful Gnu/Linux Small Cheap Capable Thingies at $148 a pop”

    My latest update seems to have fixed her freezing issues.

    Granted, Intel does cater to Linux, but they still charge too much for their chips in terms of price/performance. Even their Atom sells higher than most competitive ARMed chips. How do you explain a gross margin of 64%? I read that God was content with 10%.

    Theoretically, AMD is supposed to be Intel’s competition but you know Intel paid people to shun AMD and then paid a fine to make that right except that it never could fix the damage done in the retail pipeline. So, Intel is a mixed bag. They, like everyone else in IT were strong-armed by M$ but that’s gone. If the world has to buy ARM to escape the Intel monopoly, so be it. I’ve used ARM, Intel and AMD. I always got CPUs I bought ~$100 cheaper from AMD (except when AMD64 was new and shiny). ARM is a good buy but there are few motherboards out there so far. I am content to buy Android/Linux gadgets and install GNU/Linux on them. That will likely be my next PC purchase. ARM wasn’t ready when Beast’s last motherboard died. This year, I think ARM will be a good replacement. Why should I or anyone pay Intel $100-$200 for a CPU that one of ARM’s partners will supply for less than $25?

  38. DrLoser says:

    Traditionally what is designed at high end server ends up in desktop.

    Um, no it doesn’t, oiaohm.

    DEC Alpha? SPARC? Itanium?

    Not to mention that there are no ARM chips out there “designed for high end servers.”

    I await your hilarious cascade of irrelevant links.

  39. oiaohm says:

    The other thing for us that watch the Linux kernel. We are seeing more and more GPU for arm that support running without a PCI bus. Nvidia, AMD, Qualcomm and ARM added this in the last cycle. Mali is 1 of 4 existing GPU for arm.

    AMD focus on high end arm also equal bonding ARM cpu to quite a decent GPU.

  40. DrLoser says:

    With the ramp of our Baytrail SoC family, we have expanded into new segments such as Chrome-based systems, and we are on track to meet our 40 million unit tablet goal.

    Not content with refusing to buy your better half the Chromebook she so obviously needs, Robert, you are attacking a major manufacturer who is prepared to invest their own R&D into generating these wonderful Gnu/Linux Small Cheap Capable Thingies at $148 a pop?

    How very short-sighted of you. Never mind. I’m sure Intel and partners will continue to crank out Chromebooks by the tens of millions, aimed at the IT-deficient in the sink-holes of the world such as Ethiopia, Guadeloupe, the French Gendarmerie and the Munich City Council.

    Just a guess, but the Chromebook is such a successful product at this point that it really doesn’t need your support. Or Dougie’s, for that matter.

  41. oiaohm says:

    kurkosdr not correct arm market is little more alive. One of the third players the edges you missed is VIA with a hybrid arm/x86 chip own internal design and GPU. Of course AMD is in arm with its own GPU.

    kurkosdr the important thing to be aware with VIA is they are using the same socket in their C7 as their latest processor. This explains why AMD is doing what they are doing. Traditionally what is designed at high end server ends up in desktop.

    You are wrong on Nvidia as well Tegra K1 from them is still targeted at the Tablet market. Phonemarket yes they pulled out of.

    So arm design is a multi horse race with 2 leading. Will the others be able to ever challenge the lead 2 in arm who knows. x86/arm hybrid is a really odd card.

  42. kurkosdr says:

    Put big money in, gain big money.

    Something AMD don’t understand when planning their R&D recently.

    Look, I understand, AMD is the David vs the Goliath, nobody wants an Intel-dominated x86 market etc, but AMD has to show customers they are trying. What they are showing the world is putting just the minimum effort needed to appeal to the low-end/value market.

    BTW, the ARM market has it’s own version of Intel, and it’s Qualcomm. Ever since Nvidia exited the smartphone and tablet market, Qualcomm is the only ARM manufacturer designing it’s own cpu and gpu cores. Everyone else (Samsung with it’s exynos and Mediatek) is dependent on the Cortex and Mali cores that ARM Holdings is designing.

    So, ARM design became a two-horse race. Will ARM Holdings fall behind Qualcomm or not? Who knows. But if they do, it will be a replay of the x86 situation.

    The good news is Qualcomm got caught asleep with the move to 64-bit (deja vu), but something tells me that in 2 years from now, they will come back even stronger with a 64-bit core that blows cortex out of the water, because, like Intel, they understand the value on spending big on R&D.

    PS: Also, Qualcomm knows the market better (like Intel does for x86). For example they release new drivers fast, unlike MediaTek, and have good long-term support for old chips, unlike Samsung.

  43. wolfgang says:

    …poor quarter for world…

    Nein! you must be Obama loving liberal who want to give away store rather than teach people how to fish. when big guys make lots of money then they spread it around so that poor guy eventually get his share. Rich guy buy new bmw so salesman get tidy commission and give big tip to waitress at hooters restaurant. maybe waitress buy linux computer with low cost intel cpu with extra money. so good for linux, nicht wahr?

Leave a Reply