Intel 2Q Earnings Fall

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Intel's second quarter net income was down 4.3 percent compared to the same quarter last year.

Intel's second-quarter net income was $2.83 billion, or 54 cents per share. That was down 4.3 percent from $2.95 billion, or 54 cents per share, a year earlier, as operating expenses rose faster than revenue. Intel has been buying back shares, accounting for the flat earnings per share.
 
I predict in a year Intel will bankrupt and go out of business.










What? Some of you guys say the same of AMD all the time! :-P
 
I predict in a year Intel will bankrupt and go out of business.










What? Some of you guys say the same of AMD all the time! :-P

Difference is that Intel has so much money they dont know what to do with it....AMD only wishes they did.
 
Sandy Bridge has been out over a year. It's peaked. Ivy Bridge underperformed. No surprises here. Users with 1366 have stuck around.
 
Yup. Sandy Bridge was probably too good of a seller, Ivy Bridge was a disappointment with the heat issues, and the X79 platform does not seem to be very popular either. Falling earnings doesn't seem that surprising honestly. Now bring on Haswell!
 
Sandy Bridge has been out over a year. It's peaked. Ivy Bridge underperformed. No surprises here. Users with 1366 have stuck around.

One of my friends with a Core i7 920 decided to skip Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge, and will wait for Haswell. He's very picky though. He's looking for not a marginal increase in performance over his i7 920, but a significant increase in the range of 10% to 25% increased performance between CPU generations. For him to upgrade, three things would have to happen:
  1. The next Intel processor must be four to five times faster between his i7 920 and the next Core i7 Haswell clock-for-clock.
  2. The gap between "tick-tock" performance has to be between 10% to 25% faster than the previous generation. That's something he did not see happen between SB and IB, so he saved his money.
  3. Games have to be demanding enough and take advantage of the processors raw performance for him that a 2.66GHz Core i7 920 would not be enough to maintain a relatively high framerate (more than 50 FPS) at 1920x1080 resolution.
I think my friend is being unrealistic. But, he is stubborn.

(Just do not get into a political debate with him... that's when his stubbornness gets worse.)
 
Back
Top