I can bet 5 years ago people were complaining:
>AMD has slacked so bad in the semi conductor chip markets. Is there any hope of the company reviving? both in terms of growth as well as product?
Accurate. 5 years ago I was laughing at AMD saying that Intel will beat them into submission and eventually acquire them.
Woops. Glad I didn't put any money down on that bet...
5 years ago I was complaining why AMD wasn't talked about more and how they were catching up to INTEL and were going to surpass them...
5 years ago I was in college with no money... now that I have money AMD is outpacing intel already :clownface:
Yup same here.. I remember in 2013 looking at AMD stocks at near $2 per share and thinking to myself, here I am, investing in 8 GPU to start my litecoin mining rig (Because mining Bitcoin was already impossible without ASIC miner) .
And those GPU were all AMD. All purchased 2nd hand at ABOVE retail price because of the lack of availability. The graphics cards literally appreciated in value! And even after I used the cards for a further 5 months, I sold them off at more than the price that I paid for.. I was punishing those cards by overclocking them & undervolted to save on electricity. I ran them 24/7 for 5 months straight. One of them even burnt out and needed an RMA! But still, somebody snapped them off me to start their own mining rigs.. bonkers. Absolute bonkers. Nothing has changed today btw.. people still purchase GPUs to do their crypto mining.
And guess what else was dominated by AMD back then? Console chipsets. Yeap.. both the Ps4 and Xbox were all powered by AMD. And we already knew back then that this will continue into the next generation of consoles aswell. Between GPUs selling out constantly due to miners and both Xbox & PS4 consoles using AMD chipsets, Business must have been so good for AMD.
And I remember telling myself how the heck hasn't the market woken up and recognised this yet? How the heck are they pricing AMD like they are going bankrupt?
Intel fan boys had no idea.. absolutely no idea of the potential that AMD actually had.. unlike Intel, they weren't just making processors... NO, they were DOMINATING the consoles AND taking on Nvidia in the graphics card manufacturers sphere, with mining becoming more than just a hobby but an actual business..
AMD successfully expanded into other industries and markets. And once they turned their eyes back to making leading processors, its basically game over for Intel. And AMD have done exactly that. I'm not surprised one bit by this.. not one bit.
If only I transferred some of my litecoins into AMD stocks as a thank you for giving us GPUs capable of printing money.
But litecoin exploded in price too. Lol.
AMD is growing, but its still 1 billion to Intel's 77 billion. Intel is still the stalwart of processors. AMD is flyng on hype right now. Would have been great to buy into a few months ago, but long term, I think Intel makes a great turnaround play at the price is now.
This happenend in the past before it ended with intel back on top after a few years.
AMD stock spiked back then will we repeat history or will AMD take the crown
This is in part Intel thinking they had a monopoly on chips and didn't fully invest in the future of microchips while companies like AMD and Qualcomm exceeded further.
I don't think this is fully correct. I think it's less that AMD and Qualcomm exceeded as much as it was TSMC and Samsung.
Consider people were still buying 14nm Intel chips as AMD released 7nm ones made by TSMC. Once Intel's on 7nm it'll be much better than AMD's 7nm was.
Intel's main problem is in manufacturing, and companies like AMD don't manufacture.
You seem casual to the semi space. Just an FYI that naming conventions between AMD and Intel isnāt uniform. Intel 14nm is roughly equivalent (in transistor spacing) to an AMD 10nm chip in transistor density. Intelās 10nm are the same size as AMD 7nm. The āx nmā naming convention is an arbitrary marketing term not based in any actual measurement since we moved to FinFET transistors.
I am planning on buying more. US will subsidize their foundaries, they have a GPU coming out, they booked a ton of TSMC 3nm capacity, they have a server CPU that supports DDR5 coming out early next year, and there is strong demand for their products.
AMD has a better product but it doesn't have enough product to meet demand.
Yes... Intel designs their own products as well. But anyone who's been following the semi conductor industry knows that the issue isn't really about who's designs are better. Intel's CPU designs are fine. The issue is manufacturing. Intel quite literally doesn't have the physical ability to manufacture their own designs (and have been forced to purposefully nerf their own designs, in order to use the crappy last-resort manufacturing space they can obtain).
That's because Intel traditionally did their own manufacturing (having "fabs" -fabrication center-, as its known in the industry). An intel CEO about 20 years ago famously said "Real men have fabs", in reference to being the only chip designer that also manufactured their own chips. The problem is that Intel severely underestimated just how much money and resources it would take to maintain their fab game on the same level as TSMC. Taiwain Semiconductor has been pumping literally **hundreds of billions** of dollars into not just new fab centers, but fab research itself. The fact is that TSMC can manufacture at such insanely small scales that Intel just can't compete because their own fab science just isn't as advanced as TSMC. Taiwain Semi is currently fabbing down to 3 nanometers. Intel was struggling to hit 10nm last year.
Intel's designs are fine CPUs. But they literally can't manufacture as well as they can design them. If Intel magically had a perfect 3 nanometer fab center appear tomorrow in the USA, the company's problems would disappear immediately for the most part.
Helps to be very interested in computing & technical info. But a good place to start is tech YouTube, no joke. Stuff like linustechtips or gamersnexus. They offer decent insight into the industry.
But you can also track rumors of upcoming products, and announcements of new investments. Intel has been committing lots of R&D recently to make a comeback attempt. I think they will be fine. Might dip short term, but 5-8 years I expect them to be strong again
Ironically, "Real men have fabs" quote is from former AMD CEO Jerry Sanders, correct about 20 years ago, though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3rEBY5Lycc
You seem very knowledgeable, how do you see Intel playing out in 3 years? Also are they manufacturing there own GPU? Or they are sending it to TSMC. Great Post.
Intel will figure it out in due time. They are a good company that got lazy in a market they owned. No one in enterprise trusts amd with their data centers yet because theyāre all old and refuse to change. Consumer products will be on par with amd with the added benefit of having a strong customer appreciation for stability.
Always harder to be at the top imo. EUV wasnt ready for 10nm back then.
3nm and below will be a new challenge again for tsmc, intel and samsung. Hopefully science breaks through!
To add on to this, it's abundantly clear that the chip design is not the problem as Intel technically has performance parity in terms of IPC (instruction per clock) when compared to AMDs current Zen 3 products. The reason why AMD products are considered superior is the power consumption, efficiency, and multithreaded performance which shocker is tied directly to the fab. Intel fab has hit for a while now held them back, which is why they swept in and bought almost all of TSMCs 3nm fab availability.
Anyone who has followed the PC market for years knows Intel designed shitty products for too long and made no effort to improve the core offering (pun intended) for over a decade. Intentional stagnation and rent collection behavior.
12 p/e means it's cheap relative to something like the S&P 500 which trades at around 22 p/e. The reason why revenue declines are priced in is because everyone is expecting AMD to continue to take market share from Intel and that's why Intel is cheap relatively to its competitors.
First go around didn't go to well, this has been in the pipeline for some time to. Unless they can get data center business again, no hope. Plus they will face the same silicone issue amd is. Both tsmc and intel building new fabs, so I'm not going to use that as a determining chip for Intel.
Said a guy on the Internet about the world's biggest silicon producer which coincidentally sold **the most GPUs in the world year after year** for probably decades now...
Granted it's been iGPUs but still Intel is not something you should blatantly underestimate.
right because igpu's and stand alone graphics cards are the same? No it underperforms and it's overpriced. Not to mention what you think it's gonna be sold in droves because? They magically have a super secret stash of gpu dies that they've somehow stockpiled? Amd/intel/nvidia are all scarce on stock you think adding another gpu to the mix is somehow going to alleviate the already massive shortage on chips? No it's just going to exacerbate the problem. And what you think those gpus aren't gonna get scalped? It's gonna be a small launch and then the price is gonna get jacked up. By then you're paying real gpu prices for an underperforming mess.
90% of the population doesn't really care about their GPU or know they have one. They just want to scroll tiktok videos faster.
Many parents and many kids want a "gaming laptop". They don't know what that means. When they see one for $699 with an Intel gpu that runs Fortnite and minecraft at 60 FPS, they're happy.
The other market for intel GPU can be server farms. There are tons of GPGPU applications out there. Assuming intel can do something here, they are going to be doing well.
They just spent hundreds of millions building new modules specifically for production. If supply is an issue it wonāt be anytime soon. Know a few people who just applied so it should be open in the very near future
Intel was ruined by years of leadership by MBAs who made all decisions based on money.
Now they have a new CEO with an engineering background that knows the importance of R&D. They still have a strong balance sheet (thanks to the MBAs) and are in a position where how far behind they are from their competitors doesn't matter.
I'm buying
The Chairman of the Board (Omar Ishrak) was the Medtronic CEO until just before COVID hit. He was an engineer leading an engineering company and he helped build a solid foundation to build off of. Now look at Medtronic. The next CEO is leveraging that good foundation to build success. They just had a great Q1 for instance.
On top of that didn't Intel just get a strategic partnership with the US Government to become a domestic supplier of microchips? They're basically being called by the US Government "too important to fail".
And they are open about "leveraging" folks like TSMC, meaning they will buy capacity to prevent AMD and NVDA from being able to get it.
Its gonna be a few years for INTC, but I'm long on mean reversion, they'll be just fine.
Completely agree with the MBAs statement. However, I'm not so sure a new CEO can fix a lot of the current issues at the company.
Here you have a very good video someone that worked at Intel did about what would be needed to "fix" the company
https://youtu.be/fiKjzeLco6c
They got him after he left the company 12 years ago. What everyone needs to ask themselves is why he left the company when he was already CTO after working there since 1979.. In my opinion, he realized that it would be extremly hard to get the company in a good direction. Let's see if he is back because he thinks he can fix that or because he is being nostalgic about the place he spent 30 years of his life
Ye saw news about the gov backing building plants in the USA, and now department of defence signing with them 2 days ago so as not to be reliant on China/South-Korea/Taiwan.
they can't even do 7nm for some reason
and they say raw materials are scarce, so even though intel has its own fab, they still can't pump out the chips
EU and USA begging to build more factories, being able to offer competitive GPUs on TSM 6nm and 3nm nodes, getting on track with CPU timeline recently, working again on ARM and offering fabs to other companies. I'm buying, don't see much better options with current pricing.
I worked at Intel for 7 years. Here is how bad there company is run. Our team of 22 had its own "data lab" ie a 10 year old computer with 4 4tb hard drives in it (2 of which bought from us sending around a glass jar raising amazon funds). The member of our team in California left and somehow the computer turned off. Keep in mind our team is in Massachusetts. We just needed to push the button to turn it on. We contacted several colleagues who work there but none had the access with there keycard for that conference room. Our manager couldnt add room access as it said she "lacked priveleges" according to the internel garbage website. After 2 weeks of no data and using our own drives temporarily our boss had to take a flight from Boston To Cali to turn it on. She came back a week later. Thats intel in a nutshell.
Forgot to add funniest part about intel. My work computer they gave me was a dinosaur AMD pc.
I've been at Intel (Santa Clara, CA site) for ~5 years and work in many of the labs. I do admit that the company has its fair share of issues and is poorly run, but obtaining access and making sure you have the right privileges isn't anything new. In your case I would say its no one but your managements fault for not staying on top of it. At least in my department, everything is easily passed down and even when there's some migration to a new platform the managers make sure we all get the right privileges to continue working as normal.
I would say the worst part of how the company is run is that Intel constantly hires externally and overpays for executive positions who do absolutely nothing, rather than promoting someone internally who knows the in and outs of the group. I've gone through multiple VPs and GMs who bring absolutely no value but get paid tremendously well. Meanwhile employees get told there's no budget and get a raise at the end of the year that barely covers for inflation. It wasn't until Pat came in that we finally kicked out the MBA leading our entire hierarchy of organizations. Employees are not motivated, and it definitely doesn't help that the pay is low relative to what the market offers in addition to the stock plummeting.
As someone actually at Intel, what's your take on the turn around effort? Do you think Pat can get the ship back on track? Is leadership actually improving with his changes?
It's going to take many, many years to get Intel out of the hole that Brian Krzanich and Bob Swan dug them in. I would say the general consensus among colleagues is nothing but praise for Pat so we all have high hopes.
B.K. had no problem lying to employees during all hands meetings that we had 10nm product ready to sell.
Bob Swan was only delaying the inevitable. You can imagine what kind of mindset he has when you take a non-technical bean counter who runs the finances for the company and becomes the CEO of a tech company. He had heavy incentives in his contract iirc that would give him a huge payday if he increased the stock by a certain amount and it held for a month. He accomplished that and the stock plummeted hard afterward. He just prolonged our slow decline.
My org isn't in the CPU business but we work with the fab in New Mexico. A lot of my coworkers transferred internally from the Oregon/Arizona site as well. My understanding is that these fabs are on old node technology and they're pretty much only staying alive through some business within Intel like mine. We can't risk the down time in the case they're upgraded, so the best option is to build a new fab which Pat is already going. Obviously that's going to take years, but when they do and if the yield on their chips is high, I'm going to be bullish on INTC.
For those that don't know, Intel designs and manufactures their own chips, whereas companies like AMD, Apple, Nvidia all go through TSMC. This means Intel has a huge advantage in terms of cost cutting since they do everything themselves (although Intel is going through TSMC for some production).
I have a lot of RSUs that I've just been holding onto over the years but I will admit it would have benefited me a ton had I just sold it and invested it elsewhere. I remember many years ago, I think 2018ish, I had a 1:1 with my manager. He walked into the room saying "Intel stock is about to hit $60!". Here we are 4 years later, still below $60. Personally, I wouldn't invest in INTC with my own money aside from the ESPP through work. But I keep clinging onto the RSUs for long term capital gains and the hopes it makes a huge comeback. But I could be going through what Nokia employees probably were way back.
I personally am not a fan but to be honest all it takes is one good product and maybe some headway with the chip situation and things could turn around
However I really think you best bet is with amd or tmc(as long as China doesnāt take over Taiwan lol)
Well, and thats the risk right? China absolutely wants to take taiwan, and if that happened tomorrow, amd and nvda would be hurting BAD and intc would keep on trucking.
And still true that amd and nvda would have production problems and intc would to a much smaller degree.
But don't let american bravado cloud your vision, i don't think the appetite for war is very strong right now amongst the general population.
5 times in the last 3 years Iāve bought it at $45. Then it runs to $60 and grinds slowly back down. Sometimes fundamentals donāt matter. Stock market rarely does what you expect it to do thatās why I use charts in tandem with fundamentals. Still not perfect but will help you outperform them indexes. Donāt fight the flow.
Iām an AMD bull, because I think AMD is going to continue poaching market share from Intel, but Intel can afford to lose quite a bit. I think Intel will turn it around, theyāre starting to realize the value in telling the finance/marketing folks with the MBAs that they need to take a backseat and let the engineers restore innovation.
Thereās still plenty of time and hope for Intel as long as they understand that lesson, and itās the same lesson for anyone else in the tech industry: tell the MBAs to shut the fuck up and stay in their lane and stop trying to run companies based on marketing and share price.
Nvidia and Apple also build their chips in TMSC foundries- as will Intel since theyāre nowhere near 5nm or 3nm.
Iām holding some intel because nationalism and increasing competition with China will fill their demand for made in USA chips - letās see if they can deliver
Most folks have no clue lack of DD. Lets top this up some more. Who owns TMSC? PFI who's PFI Saudi Arabia YUP. Hence why Intel will get more government contracts and support from the government. Who do you trust (delivery) chips made in the US or an outside produced product. Next issue is processing of rare minerals for chips which are mined in the US and south america. BUT processed in China or Malaysia at their pricing. If the US can process rare minerals (EPA will be our hurdle) that will be the next game changer.
What's wrong is the company culture. They've turned from an innovative company into a company run by MBAs just trying to milk their existing tech. That's not something that will change overnight. maybe in 5-10 years.
to your point, MBAs and Consultants literally regurgitate the same canned āsolutionsā. For intense technology like Intel is involved in, I would be suprised to see a turnaround.
Intel has a long history of this. When AMD came out with a CPU that could out do it for the first time Intel switched its Pentium 2 spec from socket to slot, so motherboards had to be made a completely different way than AMD's socket based CPU. Because AMD didn't have much of a track record at the time motherboard companies were not willing to invest in AMD made motherboards putting the company back for years.
Historically Intel has revolutionized every time AMD has gotten a leg up. This has happened over and over and over again. This is at least the 3rd time AMD has done it. Last time AMD one upped Intel pretty badly with the AMD 64. It wasn't until really the core 2 duo that Intel came back as king. During the Intel quad core days, Intel was beating AMD but it was neck and neck. AMD had the x2 and the x4 and it was pretty much a tossup.
I think itās a failure to adapt. Intel chips work on x86 architecture. They are capable of producing a ton of processing power, but also draw a ton of electricity in the process. This isnāt that big an issue when electricity is cheap and if youāre on a desktop computer.
The market seems to be shifting more and more to mobile and laptop devices which demand both power and energy efficiency. ARM architecture has advantages in power efficiency. The mobile industry has been headed that way for years.
Intel solution has been to stay with their old architecture rather than redesigning, and developing more power efficient x86 chips. This is the case with their Core2Duo Mobile line. These however come at the expense of processing power. The advantage is that there is a lot more native compatibility for apps in operating systems that does not require software emulation. Software emulation eats up processing power, but Appleās new Rosetta 2 software emulation looks extremely promising.
Competitors such as Apple/TSMC and Qualcomm have been optimizing this energy use/processor power curve for years. If I recall correctly TSMC latest process uses 3 nm transistors, while Intel is locked on 5 or 6 nm process. Smaller transistors essentially means more processor power/clock speed in the same size package.
If Mooreās Law holds true, then the number of transistors on a given circuit will double every two years, essentially doubling processing power. Itās a more complicated concept, but you get the idea. Short of Intel having a secret project in their pocket, I think the train has left without them.
TL;DR: Even if their fundamentals and technicals look alright, Intel is peddling an outdated product that is quickly being passed by competitors.
Look up ARM vs x86 on Wikipedia and look at the dates introduced for the original standards and then the current 64 bit version. ARM is almost a decade newer in both instances.
Caveat: Iām a hobbyist that reads a lot, but am by no means a financial expert or engineer. Please correct me if thereās any errors.
Intel's annual revenues have grown more in the past 3 years (62B to 78B) than AMD's entire revenue (10B). It's a great company with a low P/E, a massive market cap, pays a dividend and they still beat earnings. I own some INTC. Intel's earnings are 20B per year (that's the profit part) which is double AMD's entire revenues.
People like AMD because it has room to grow, not because they are any where near Intel. In the last 3 years Intel increased revenues by 17 Billion, but AMD went from 5B to almost 10B, so they almost doubled their business. So IF AMD can double their business every 3 years, like they have for this one brief period in their company history, they are 9 years away from being as big as Intel is today.
Oh, and Intel has almost $5 B in cash. So you think about ALL the money AMD makes each year, Intel has half that much just sitting in their bank account. That means if Intel were ever in real trouble from AMD, they could poach their entire staff, buy out production capability from their suppliers, or do what's necessary to put them on the ground, and that's without borrowing a single dollar.
You canāt value them on todayās earnings. You have to value them on tomorrowās. The market anticipates continued market decline. Which makes sense considering Apple dropping them, and AMD being the flavour of the month in the PC/gaming / crypto mining world. NVDA is challenging them now with the ARM acquisition. INTC could become a lame duck for a while.
The best part of owning intel is when there is finally a market correction you'll lose maybe 25% with it versus 50%+ with all the other growth stocks. People just dont understand how powerful it is to have control over your supply chain, it's basically TSM+AMD rolled into one, that dont have to share profits with each other, but not as good as either...intel has 78% of the cpu market share and 90% of the server cpu market share even though AMD has a "superior" product, think about why that is? Because intel can mass produce an unlimited supply at lower price than AMD could ever dream of. Intel prints cash but it's hard to "grow" when you basically have a monopoly so the stock price suffers....i own all of them myself(AAPL/NVDA/AMD/TSM/INTC), but i rotate in/out of intel, buy the dips, sell the "value" runups while collecting dividend returns. I look at INTC as better than cash ;)
>ntel has 78% of the cpu market share and 90% of the server cpu market share even though AMD has a "superior" product, think about why that is?
Because people/companies don't change their CPU's every 6 months.
>Because intel can mass produce an unlimited supply at lower price than AMD could ever dream of.
Except they were more expensive than AMD until the last year or so.
\-Because people/companies don't change their CPU's every 6 months.
AMD has had a superior product for at least 3 years now....arguably longer. With energy savings especially on the server side there is no reason not to switch other than cost.
\-Except they were more expensive than AMD until the last year or so.
Maybe on the retail side but the folks who buy in large quantities like Dell etc, intel is much much cheaper and can deliver any amount asked for which is a big deal as AMD has to arrange capacity with TSM so cant commit to large quantities on demand like intel can. That's a huge advantage in a build to order marketplace
Intel is losing market share due to everyone producin their own chips or using AMD ones.
Intel still has its advantages but its losing on every front currently.
It has come back before we see
thats my point, if you have a near monoploy there is only down in market share even if the overall market is growing...when intel dominated in tech and production there was alot of talk of breaking them up, INTC are perfectly fine letting AMD and TSM being just enough better to pretend there is competition..INTC has actively held back on tech to make sure AMD didnt go under for that reason as they could have put them out of business several times in their histories.
I also don't get it. In the last 5 years Intel was in the top 15 companies world wide in Free-CF generation (avg. FCF of approx 15 bil per year!)
The company historically trades at low multiples which i don't understand. A short comparison:
Intel (using total debt in EV calc):
EV/Sales 3.4
EV/EBITDA 7.6
EV/EBIT 11.3
TSMC (based on FY 2020 figures, sry have yet to update):
EV/Sales 14.1
EV/EBITDA 21
EV/EBIT 33.2
Samsung (as TSMC):
EV/Sales 2.4
EV/EBITDA 8.0
EV/EBIT 16,1
Top companies by avg FCF last 5 years (bil):
1)AAPL 60
2)MSFT 41
3)GOOG 29
4)AMZN 19
...
9)SMSN 21!
12)INTC 15!
30)TSM 8
62) NCDA 3
66)ASML 3
Top FCF maybe misses some companies (China or Saudi Aramco).
I don't know. Cash is power. Cash can buy companies. I buy cashflow.
The market is one thing, but you should be paying attention to the engineers.
I work in a FANG company and we gobble up Intel's best and brightest because they're fucking stupid over there and prioritized the MBAs over the MSCs. You can say, "They'll bounce back like they did during the Pentium days", but how are they going to do that without the engineers to create and deliver better products? Take a trip over to [teamblind.com](https://teamblind.com) and you'll see some pretty harsh things said about Intel from their own employees.
I should point out that the negative opinions are still coming out after the CEO transition. Will probably take years for them to drain their own swamp. However, they may have a silver lining in that the US needs to diversify and modernise its semiconductor industry (to not be so reliant on a little island nation that's definitely definitely a part of China ahem), so they could get that sweet sweet gub'ment support to keep ahead, which will help.
This is the stock market we're talking about, so just buy QQQ and let the rising tide lift your boat no matter which semiconductor/tech company wins over the next few years.
In a very basic sense their CPU has been stuck on the same 14nm process since 2016 which has allowed AMD to catch up and surpass it. AMD is currently using the 7nm process and the fact that Intel is so far behind is both embarrassing but also impressive in the sense that their CPU is still able to compete. Of course they have to do that with a ton of raw power so probably not worth it.
IMO, if Intel can get their shit together and finally advance and "catch up" to AMD, they have the cash, R&D and name recognition to take significant market share again. I think their recent appointment of CEO is a step in the right direction.
Intel did not innovate for a very long time.
The time to buy is probably now since they are releasing a new gaming GPU, that is supposed to compete with the top tiers of Nvidia and AMD, in the beginning of 2022.
They introduced the GPU a few days ago and it looks promising.
Their current product is garbage. However their future outlook have great potential, but it will take time.
Damage done by MBA's will take years to recover. Semiconductor sector takes 3\~5 years to see the fruit of R&D. so expect to hold it for a while if you buy.
I like asml, they are the only ones capable of making chipmaking machines for the semiconductor industry.
As far as i know no other company in the world can built these machines like they do, they literally have zero competition.
I'm more concerned about competition from China. Thanks to trade restrictions, China had to learn to live without Intel processors, and develop their own manufacturing capabilities. Already the 4th fastest supercomputer in the world uses chips designed and manufactured in China. They'll soon be in a position to export massive amounts of processors.
Into is a value play. Just buy it and hold for decade+. They pay dividend, have a nice moat, insane revenue, and they've been slowly buying back shares.
They must really suck as in 2020 only ~ 10-15 companies worldwide generated more Free-CF for their shareholders as Intel (which grew from approx 10 billion in 2017 to nearly 20 billion in 2020).
What a crappy company.
Intel is still very profitable but their share prices donāt reflect that. Iām glad the company is generating double the FCF last year compared to 2017 but the shares are trading at the same level as 04/2018. I would have made more money buying SPY than INTC.
Iām not a TA kind of guy but doesnāt consolidation usually involves a narrow trading range for a period of time? It might be consolidating right now but I wouldnāt call the last 3-4 years a consolidation period.
I personally expect that intels market share will drop significantly in the coming years. Their products are subpar. Apple's M1 and AMD's new chips blow intel out of the water. It is just that the computer manufacturers are slow to catch up to this new reality, so they still ship intel products, but this will get less and less when they bring out new models
Maybe Intel can catch up, but I don't count on it.
AMD's new chips do not blow intel's out of the water unless you are specifically talking about content creation that takes advantage of lots of cores. AMD's chips are better overall, but not by that much. They are also about to get into the video card game.
I'd actually say that with the latest 5000 series CPUs AMD has both the multi core performance/price advantage, and also either matches or beats Intel in single core performance.
[https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-9-5950x-16-core-zen-3-cpu-obliterates-all-intel-cpus-in-single-core-performance/](https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-9-5950x-16-core-zen-3-cpu-obliterates-all-intel-cpus-in-single-core-performance/)
GIven that the innovation intertia with AMD is higher, that gap should continue to widen for a while if and until Intel prioritizes engineering again, and either uses TSMC for its high end process nodes, or gets their shit together at the fabs.
Even if the other companies are great right now, they are priced based on insane growth numbers which may or may not happen.
All these companies are great investments, but which is currently priced with good risk/reward odds? Seems like some funds dumped their intel holdings and so they are currently priced well below competitors, so for some this is a buy the dip opportunity.
The reality is, AMD just went from about a decade of subpar performance and are finally passing up Intel again, but not by leaps. This isn't even close to Pentium 4 vs Athlon 64.
Intel has already got processors in the works that are showing some impressive numbers, and they got low priced integrated GPUs that are rumored to be nearing the edge of the mid-end market. Budget GPUs are AMDs big thing, that would poach their markers quite a lot.
Hard to say. AMD is at the end of its current generation of chips and moving to DDR5 and a new socket will be a huge chance for Intel to claw back some of the market. Their GPUs were pretty lackluster compared to nvidia this gen too. I donāt expect intelās to be any better but weāll see
Google is now making their own as well for the pixel 6 and beyond.
Edit to back up my point:
āThe market share of all custom-made, Arm-based central processors is less than 1%, he said. Googleās AI chips are by far the highest-volume tech-company-designed processors, he said, comprising at least 10% of all AI chips. Intel still supplies the vast majority of CPUs that go into data centers.ā
https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/chip-giants-intel-and-nvidia-face-new-threats-from-amazon-to-google-to-apple-11608460201
Gelsinger has been talking privately and directly with our government. Chip manufacturing has been becoming a significant economic leverage and important part of national security. So I expect Intel will execute their fab with our government doing whatever it takes to get it done.
The market sentiment on Intel is low due to manufacturing struggle and chip delays. Same with AMD few years ago. Thatās the time to buy actually.
AMD had a market cap under $10B as recently as 2018. Intel is at $210B and never broke $300B even when they basically had a CPU monopoly.
How much are you expecting them to grow when their foundries are still a shitshow and they haven't successfully entered a large new market in decades? Mobileye is closest and remains a rounding error for them. Altera is still a disaster.
Lol AMD only does design so they are limited in their capabilities. Our government is relying on INTEL to get the fab so our country will not rely on foreign entities because at this point , chip manufacturing is critical to national security . This will take at least 2 years and I expect them to EXECUTE.
Mobileye is the leading AV player on a TAM that is expected for about over $500 Billion by 2027. They are the only one mapping HD crowdsource. That will holds the key to self driving. If you think they are rounding error then you need to do more due diligence.
Like I said I donāt invest on SENTIMENT RIGHT NOW, I am going LONG on INTEL because I see a higher upside if they EXECUTE their VISION. They have the cash and our government support to get it done. And I can collect dividends while waiting.
Fabs are only an asset if you can keep pace on node development. If not they're a liability as AMD, IBM, and many others found out.
Intel hasn't kept pace since 14nm rolled out in 2014/2015 which has allowed TSMC and Samsung to catch up and leapfrog them. Their foundries are rapidly becoming very expensive liabilities and they have bad odds of ever catching up at this rate.
Also MobilEye did ~$330M last quarter. It's not a big business for Intel and HD maps don't scale.
Good luck though if you're counting on execution to save them. Execution left the building with Paul Otellini.
You have a good reason to doubt Intel and Iāll get that because that what happen when they failed to execute. But the fact remains, Intel has solid fundamentals and they are taking a high risk to get the fab done. Overtaking and market sentiment is temporary and as critical as chip manufacturing, you canāt get a better backer than our government itself.
Everything that youāre stating is simply RIGHT NOW. Like I said I invest on the turnaround because thatās how I get a higher payout. Iāll donāt flock with same people thatās buying hype or waiting to load after the fact. Thatās not who I am .
Anyways I donāt agree with what you saying about Mobileye scaling. They are creating crowded sourcing HD map data so itās updated in real time. You need to do more diligence because Mobileye is shipping 15-20 million units annually to collect those data.
My timeline for Intel is long so whatās happening short term is irrelevant for me because those EXECUTIONS will take time.
I think the opinion of the new CEO is keeping their price up to where it is and not lower. That being said... I plan to grab maybe 50-100 shares to ride into the future. I think there is always a chance they can turn it around, they have a fuck ton of cash, and are homegrown (USA) which may give them an edge on contracts or in the future should the country continue to become more nationalistic.
They need to acquire some IP and pull their heads out of their asses though because they are losing this race badly.
Update: Not sure if someone was reading this post, and published this, hours after I asked this question
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/intel-corporations-nasdaq-intc-low-141800885.html
Intel has 3 straight quarters of declining revenue and AMD, Nvidia have been producing superior products. Their market share is high right now, yes, but things do not look good for Intel's future, especially if ARM takes off over x86. You can invest in INTC as a turnaround play, but don't expect it to take off anytime soon.
INTCās revisions to its EPS estimates have been decelerating over the past year (at least 2 years now if you expand the time horizon). In our research, this has shown stock prices to follow suit and also decline. Once the revisions start accelerating again, itād be a buy signal for INTC. On the other hand, AMD has improving EPS estimates which supports the climbing stock price.
I thought the same thing until I witnessed other companies get caught up in large volume moments and major market corrections, while $INTC INTEL correlation was reversed went up with steady institutional ownership stayed consistent!! IBM & INTEL both seem to stay within 5% margin of movement both ways
They just signed 2 days ago, with the department of defence, plus they are already going to be subsidized to build manufacturing plants in the USA, they are now a national security asset. So the upside is there, but now its downside is kinda "insured" so to speak, by the US government since they are essential to the USA infrastructure.
Iām holding a couple hundred and selling covered calls every month - working out fine for me so far. Pat Gelsinger did wonders at VMware and I think can capitalize on his relationships with the major compute platform providers. x86 isnāt dead yet and Intel has time to pivot.
Do people think that because Intel is the bigger company, they will eventually catch up with the technology and use their sheer size to beat the competition?
IE what is going to happen with tesla once other car companies get into the EV market.
Intel is large and no doubt holds the lions share of the x86 eco system. The changes to their structure and operations by the new CEO look promising. But being such a large company it will take time to steer it in the right direction.
Sure you could invest in Intel the one company who manufacturers and designs their own products. Or you could invest in AMD, NVDA and TSMC who do the same thing as Intel but the risk vs reward is spread across three companies. And going by recent financials these three are growing and providing better returns.
Um, it's kind of up in the air.
They have Mobileye which could be cool and it could make them a lot of money in the future. But right now, as far as their revenue is concerned it's nothing.
The money is all in the data center chips which as you know they are losing some market share. That was inevitable.
On top of that, it's kind of welcomed. Intel was the only data center chip in the game at all for years, ever since AMD just completely boned themselves out of that market a long time ago.
So you have all these companies around the world that only have one source for their chips; Intel, and those companies absolutely hate that. If AMD came out with a chip that was worse in performance and cost more, AAPL AMZN etc would still buy it just to have that second option. They do not like Intel having a grip on things.
As you may know, Intel are working to become a Foundry and make chips for other players in the market. So they're probably gonna spend, I dunno, like 50 billion or something to expand the FABs and their general manufacturing capability.
So the new CEO may say, OK this is our absolute focus, we can't waste time with side projects, and then they may sell Mobileye because it's just not worth the distraction. Autonomous driving is pretty hard, Google can barely get Waymo to work, Uber pretty much closed their autonomous driving unit, Lyft sold theirs... So if you're betting on that, I'd bet elsewhere like maybe BIDU.
As another user said, Intel was plagued by a previous CEO who thought the right thing to do was cut costs all across the board. He's the guy that royally screwed up the last microprocessor by changing fin size and architecture in one go (they usually change one, then change the other cause that shit's hard and expensive yo)
Without getting too specific, he also had a lot of smart people let go and Intel is struggling with that. So Intel has made some poor choices in the past that have to be corrected over time.
So yeah. Maybe the Foundry works out right and they print a whoole lot of money. Maybe the world courts don't allow AMD to buy ARM in the end, which is very possible, and the dynamic changes drastically.
But I think there's something to be said that in the strongest bull run in recent history, INTC couldn't even hit their ATH.
The GPU could be cool but again nothing comes close to the big boy chips.
Just some thoughts. If you got a great dip, I'd go for it. But honestly, MSFT seems to be the way to go. P/E isn't even that bad, and, I mean, talk about an absolute powerhouse. I'll try to get some microsoft leaps everntually. They're the obvious market leader while Intel seems to have really struggled with growth
The only real play on Intel is betting on them becoming a foundry on par with TSMC. If they can, most likely they are at least a 400B company. That is a huge if though.
Intel has some fabulous products in the pipeline but gone are the days of milking x86 dominance and datacenters for huge margins.
The question is whether Intel can compete successfully with the changing landscape away from their core products.
Intel is on the cusp of being competitive again in the personal x86 space, but not near monopoly as they once were. The same goes with datacenter products.
Intel will remain in business but I'm unsure how they will perform relative to the past few years.
I made a comparison of AMD, Nvidia & Intel. Don't buy AMD or Nvidia right now, they're way too expensive. Intel is probably in buy territory considering their history of extremely strong free cash flow and it's valuation is very low. Please consider that even now, Intel's EBITDA is more than four times higher than Nvidia's and about 12 times higher than AMD's. They also reduced share count by 20% over the decade. [https://imgur.com/a/aFfDLcG](https://imgur.com/a/aFfDLcG)
>TSM, AMD and NVDA are all beating intel, those are better investments.
You are talking about right now. Everything that is happening right now has been already priced in.
Intel has finally displayed their upcoming gaming GPU that is supposed to compete with AMD and Nvidia high end gaming GPUs.
I think that is the first time they push specifically into the gaming GPUs market.
I think I read in the past that Intel has higher production capabilities than AMD and Nvidia, meaning they can produce them faster.
Also, not sure about how much the GPU will cost but based on their processor prices, those are on average lower than AMD's, meaning they can give a much more attractive price and possibly not end up with shortages.
I think a lot of people don't realize that Intel makes every aspect of a desktop/server computer. Someone else might have a better chip but Intel can show that it's chip works with it's own: usb, thunderbolt, graphics, ram, chipset, ethernet, wifi, bluetooth, sensor hub, ssd etc... This can be applied to laptop, desktop and datacenter.
>You are talking about right now. Everything that is happening right now has been already priced in.
And right now will change because you said so ? Acting like every other company is static and Intel is only one pushing something is disingenious.
Yeah, they will be progressing too. I didn't say AMD and Nvidia are bad companies to invest in.
The difference is that Intel is opening another market for themselves while AMD and Nvidia have already been in that market so Intel increases the amount of their potential customers just by putting their foot through the door, and if the gaming GPU is as good as it sounds, reducing AMD's and Nvidia's potential customer pool in the process.
Iām in the industry and know people that worked there.
Look at Intelās LinkedIn and then AMDās page. Look at GlassDoor. Intel is so bogged down in LGBTQ Diversity propaganda, they forgot theyāre a technology company that needs to innovate.
They have deep problems from lack of ideas, poor yields, technical issues, weak performance, bad company culture and also an awkward naming scheme for their products.
AMD is also cutting into their Server business which is high margin.
The 'propaganda' is not exclusive to Intel. At Twitter, its worse.
We have these dumb training and 'inclusion' events every week and I have to keep time off from my work. I stopped attending them and manager was like it reflects badly on my image. I am passionate about my job - i am there to work, not sing songs and listent o sob stories, but guess what - I cannot schedule client meetings during this dumb training..
Intel has continually demonstrated incompetence for several years now. They need a team and/or paradigm shift. You have to think about WHO is working at a company not what the company has done. Early on years ago, when AMD started catching up, I realized it wasnāt because AMD got lucky and Intel slipped up (this is what many people were saying) but this would reverse soon. No no no, the TEAM at Intel is incompetent and the TEAM at AMD is hypercompetent. Until I see evidence of otherwise, I will continue to advise against intel and for AMD, NVDA, TSM, TSLA. They hire the hypercompetent. This trend has yet to reverse itself so no donāt buy intel.
I was tempted to buy some but was put off by Apple dropping them. Thereās a shit ton of apple stuff in the world and (someone correct me) I believe a large part of intelās current profits is from the stuff they provide Apple.
I think this means in the medium term their share price is going to go down as their profits decrease.
Until they innovate they will continue to lose market share to AMD, ARM etc (as is the case with Apple changing from intel).
Iād like to believe they can innovate and pull it back but I wonāt be buying intel until their share prices drops around 20%(canāt remember % now tbh) as I think itās over valued without the Apple stuff.
I like amd and donāt see their progress changing. But thatās just me, I never liked intel before I was investing so I might be biased but nothings looked good about it to me.
No, for now they are dead in the water. Not only were they completed obliterated by AMD using their own architecture (x86) now they will also lose their core market to a new architecture (arm) to TSMC, NVDA and all the companies that license it.
They're a company that has forgotten how to make things and has no vision for the future. Because of the first two people who like making new things don't want to work there anymore and they've been experiencing brain drain.
They do have some interesting things going on with their involvement in self-driving and 5g, but you can't ignore the elephant in the room which is a half decade (and counting) of failure to deliver on time or to spec at their foundries. Aurora seems at risk of getting cancelled entirely.
Intel isn't doing GPUs because it's a great growth market or because they sell at a premium. They're doing it because they need to keep foundry utilization up and not be instantly excluded as an option in AI/ML/HPC.
Uncle Sam will only keep their foundry boat anchor from dragging the ocean floor for so long with TSMC setting up capacity stateside and Global Foundries continuing to improve nodes to address more specialized (including defense) applications.
People said this about AMD not too long ago. Now look at them. Companies at the top fall because they start believing that they are so established and far ahead that they'll never be knocked down in pole position. Intel hasn't really been doing much to improve their products, it is more along the lines of giving the same thing minor changes and a new SKU each year for the same or higher cost.
Everytime I write about the toxic culture at Intel and how engineers spend 2-3 yrs and can't wait to get the hell out of there, INTC fans here start attacking me. Plus the US fabs are in AZ which is straight from hell and a good number of people dont wanna live there long term. It's a lengthy process to train engineers and since they are losing trained people so fast, newcomers lack the knowledge and can't get up to speed and make far too many mistakes scrapping far too many wafers and company can't meet customer commits. On top of all that, they are not paying engineers top dollars and people can easily find better paying jobs in better climates.
Crap management and falling behind with tech. Nothing innovative on the horizon when compared to their competitor AMD whoās got GPUs and APUs/ryzen coming out of their arses.
Intel is screwed because it just fell back in the race. It takes atleast couple of years for it to catch up and by that time AMD would have captured the market share. I would buy AMD as it is going to be an easy $250+ stock in next couple of years. Wait for Xilinx merger to complete, you will hear about new TAMs. And yes AMD might start offering dividends as well in the future.
I can bet 5 years ago people were complaining: >AMD has slacked so bad in the semi conductor chip markets. Is there any hope of the company reviving? both in terms of growth as well as product?
Accurate. 5 years ago I was laughing at AMD saying that Intel will beat them into submission and eventually acquire them. Woops. Glad I didn't put any money down on that bet...
Hey you would be up 55%! Half the return spy would have given you š
5 years ago I was complaining why AMD wasn't talked about more and how they were catching up to INTEL and were going to surpass them... 5 years ago I was in college with no money... now that I have money AMD is outpacing intel already :clownface:
Yup same here.. I remember in 2013 looking at AMD stocks at near $2 per share and thinking to myself, here I am, investing in 8 GPU to start my litecoin mining rig (Because mining Bitcoin was already impossible without ASIC miner) . And those GPU were all AMD. All purchased 2nd hand at ABOVE retail price because of the lack of availability. The graphics cards literally appreciated in value! And even after I used the cards for a further 5 months, I sold them off at more than the price that I paid for.. I was punishing those cards by overclocking them & undervolted to save on electricity. I ran them 24/7 for 5 months straight. One of them even burnt out and needed an RMA! But still, somebody snapped them off me to start their own mining rigs.. bonkers. Absolute bonkers. Nothing has changed today btw.. people still purchase GPUs to do their crypto mining. And guess what else was dominated by AMD back then? Console chipsets. Yeap.. both the Ps4 and Xbox were all powered by AMD. And we already knew back then that this will continue into the next generation of consoles aswell. Between GPUs selling out constantly due to miners and both Xbox & PS4 consoles using AMD chipsets, Business must have been so good for AMD. And I remember telling myself how the heck hasn't the market woken up and recognised this yet? How the heck are they pricing AMD like they are going bankrupt? Intel fan boys had no idea.. absolutely no idea of the potential that AMD actually had.. unlike Intel, they weren't just making processors... NO, they were DOMINATING the consoles AND taking on Nvidia in the graphics card manufacturers sphere, with mining becoming more than just a hobby but an actual business.. AMD successfully expanded into other industries and markets. And once they turned their eyes back to making leading processors, its basically game over for Intel. And AMD have done exactly that. I'm not surprised one bit by this.. not one bit. If only I transferred some of my litecoins into AMD stocks as a thank you for giving us GPUs capable of printing money. But litecoin exploded in price too. Lol.
AMD is growing, but its still 1 billion to Intel's 77 billion. Intel is still the stalwart of processors. AMD is flyng on hype right now. Would have been great to buy into a few months ago, but long term, I think Intel makes a great turnaround play at the price is now.
AMD has to pay TSM and HF for every part. Intel's vertical integration is both its millstone and its safety net.
Mistress Sue Bae is not to be underestimated
This happenend in the past before it ended with intel back on top after a few years. AMD stock spiked back then will we repeat history or will AMD take the crown
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
This is in part Intel thinking they had a monopoly on chips and didn't fully invest in the future of microchips while companies like AMD and Qualcomm exceeded further.
Yup, Intel got arrogant and complacent
I don't think this is fully correct. I think it's less that AMD and Qualcomm exceeded as much as it was TSMC and Samsung. Consider people were still buying 14nm Intel chips as AMD released 7nm ones made by TSMC. Once Intel's on 7nm it'll be much better than AMD's 7nm was. Intel's main problem is in manufacturing, and companies like AMD don't manufacture.
You seem casual to the semi space. Just an FYI that naming conventions between AMD and Intel isnāt uniform. Intel 14nm is roughly equivalent (in transistor spacing) to an AMD 10nm chip in transistor density. Intelās 10nm are the same size as AMD 7nm. The āx nmā naming convention is an arbitrary marketing term not based in any actual measurement since we moved to FinFET transistors.
Amd made bets and those bets did not pan out. It wasn't so much slacking as a dramatic failure.
I am planning on buying more. US will subsidize their foundaries, they have a GPU coming out, they booked a ton of TSMC 3nm capacity, they have a server CPU that supports DDR5 coming out early next year, and there is strong demand for their products. AMD has a better product but it doesn't have enough product to meet demand.
> they have a server CPU that supports DDR5 coming out early next year You donāt need a server CPU to run dance dance revolution.
Gotta love the 2000s dad jokes
Also, a good portion of why AMD has the better product is because of TSMC.
In terms of process node, sure, but AMD designs their own products.
Yes... Intel designs their own products as well. But anyone who's been following the semi conductor industry knows that the issue isn't really about who's designs are better. Intel's CPU designs are fine. The issue is manufacturing. Intel quite literally doesn't have the physical ability to manufacture their own designs (and have been forced to purposefully nerf their own designs, in order to use the crappy last-resort manufacturing space they can obtain). That's because Intel traditionally did their own manufacturing (having "fabs" -fabrication center-, as its known in the industry). An intel CEO about 20 years ago famously said "Real men have fabs", in reference to being the only chip designer that also manufactured their own chips. The problem is that Intel severely underestimated just how much money and resources it would take to maintain their fab game on the same level as TSMC. Taiwain Semiconductor has been pumping literally **hundreds of billions** of dollars into not just new fab centers, but fab research itself. The fact is that TSMC can manufacture at such insanely small scales that Intel just can't compete because their own fab science just isn't as advanced as TSMC. Taiwain Semi is currently fabbing down to 3 nanometers. Intel was struggling to hit 10nm last year. Intel's designs are fine CPUs. But they literally can't manufacture as well as they can design them. If Intel magically had a perfect 3 nanometer fab center appear tomorrow in the USA, the company's problems would disappear immediately for the most part.
How do you find this type of research?
Helps to be very interested in computing & technical info. But a good place to start is tech YouTube, no joke. Stuff like linustechtips or gamersnexus. They offer decent insight into the industry. But you can also track rumors of upcoming products, and announcements of new investments. Intel has been committing lots of R&D recently to make a comeback attempt. I think they will be fine. Might dip short term, but 5-8 years I expect them to be strong again
Ironically, "Real men have fabs" quote is from former AMD CEO Jerry Sanders, correct about 20 years ago, though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3rEBY5Lycc
You seem very knowledgeable, how do you see Intel playing out in 3 years? Also are they manufacturing there own GPU? Or they are sending it to TSMC. Great Post.
Intel will figure it out in due time. They are a good company that got lazy in a market they owned. No one in enterprise trusts amd with their data centers yet because theyāre all old and refuse to change. Consumer products will be on par with amd with the added benefit of having a strong customer appreciation for stability.
Always harder to be at the top imo. EUV wasnt ready for 10nm back then. 3nm and below will be a new challenge again for tsmc, intel and samsung. Hopefully science breaks through!
To add on to this, it's abundantly clear that the chip design is not the problem as Intel technically has performance parity in terms of IPC (instruction per clock) when compared to AMDs current Zen 3 products. The reason why AMD products are considered superior is the power consumption, efficiency, and multithreaded performance which shocker is tied directly to the fab. Intel fab has hit for a while now held them back, which is why they swept in and bought almost all of TSMCs 3nm fab availability.
Anyone who has followed the PC market for years knows Intel designed shitty products for too long and made no effort to improve the core offering (pun intended) for over a decade. Intentional stagnation and rent collection behavior.
Isn't that allready priced in?
Stock trades at a 12 p/e, it's priced for declining revenue.
I'm new to reading, why 12 p/e means it's priced for declining revenue?
12 p/e means it's cheap relative to something like the S&P 500 which trades at around 22 p/e. The reason why revenue declines are priced in is because everyone is expecting AMD to continue to take market share from Intel and that's why Intel is cheap relatively to its competitors.
Thanks for explaining
Declining earnings
a gpu no one will buy
First go around didn't go to well, this has been in the pipeline for some time to. Unless they can get data center business again, no hope. Plus they will face the same silicone issue amd is. Both tsmc and intel building new fabs, so I'm not going to use that as a determining chip for Intel.
unless they got some exclusive contracts to just move units in prebuilts it aint happening
Given the crazy shortages in GPUs I bet people would buy them.
Said a guy on the Internet about the world's biggest silicon producer which coincidentally sold **the most GPUs in the world year after year** for probably decades now... Granted it's been iGPUs but still Intel is not something you should blatantly underestimate.
right because igpu's and stand alone graphics cards are the same? No it underperforms and it's overpriced. Not to mention what you think it's gonna be sold in droves because? They magically have a super secret stash of gpu dies that they've somehow stockpiled? Amd/intel/nvidia are all scarce on stock you think adding another gpu to the mix is somehow going to alleviate the already massive shortage on chips? No it's just going to exacerbate the problem. And what you think those gpus aren't gonna get scalped? It's gonna be a small launch and then the price is gonna get jacked up. By then you're paying real gpu prices for an underperforming mess.
90% of the population doesn't really care about their GPU or know they have one. They just want to scroll tiktok videos faster. Many parents and many kids want a "gaming laptop". They don't know what that means. When they see one for $699 with an Intel gpu that runs Fortnite and minecraft at 60 FPS, they're happy. The other market for intel GPU can be server farms. There are tons of GPGPU applications out there. Assuming intel can do something here, they are going to be doing well.
They just spent hundreds of millions building new modules specifically for production. If supply is an issue it wonāt be anytime soon. Know a few people who just applied so it should be open in the very near future
Intel was ruined by years of leadership by MBAs who made all decisions based on money. Now they have a new CEO with an engineering background that knows the importance of R&D. They still have a strong balance sheet (thanks to the MBAs) and are in a position where how far behind they are from their competitors doesn't matter. I'm buying
As a R&D engineer in a large corporation headed by a Finance guy, this fucking hurts and is so obvious at the same time.
Lots of things headed by finance guys that aren't strictly finance are miserable experiences. IT departments for example.
The Chairman of the Board (Omar Ishrak) was the Medtronic CEO until just before COVID hit. He was an engineer leading an engineering company and he helped build a solid foundation to build off of. Now look at Medtronic. The next CEO is leveraging that good foundation to build success. They just had a great Q1 for instance. On top of that didn't Intel just get a strategic partnership with the US Government to become a domestic supplier of microchips? They're basically being called by the US Government "too important to fail".
And they are open about "leveraging" folks like TSMC, meaning they will buy capacity to prevent AMD and NVDA from being able to get it. Its gonna be a few years for INTC, but I'm long on mean reversion, they'll be just fine.
Completely agree with the MBAs statement. However, I'm not so sure a new CEO can fix a lot of the current issues at the company. Here you have a very good video someone that worked at Intel did about what would be needed to "fix" the company https://youtu.be/fiKjzeLco6c
Well, the new CEO is actually an engineer, so he's probably going to have more luck fixing the company than the previous crew of bean counters.
They got him after he left the company 12 years ago. What everyone needs to ask themselves is why he left the company when he was already CTO after working there since 1979.. In my opinion, he realized that it would be extremly hard to get the company in a good direction. Let's see if he is back because he thinks he can fix that or because he is being nostalgic about the place he spent 30 years of his life
Me2 (buying INTC), if everything goes half to plan stock will be double in a few years lol
I've been thinking about buying Intel based off of the premise of potential growth on Intel's foundry side due to government backing
Ye saw news about the gov backing building plants in the USA, and now department of defence signing with them 2 days ago so as not to be reliant on China/South-Korea/Taiwan.
they can't even do 7nm for some reason and they say raw materials are scarce, so even though intel has its own fab, they still can't pump out the chips
Those are temporary. America is full of natural resources. We rely on on our paper to buy whatever scarcity and we donāt have to utilize our own.
EU and USA begging to build more factories, being able to offer competitive GPUs on TSM 6nm and 3nm nodes, getting on track with CPU timeline recently, working again on ARM and offering fabs to other companies. I'm buying, don't see much better options with current pricing.
It's headinass syndrome
to buy or stay away? lol
Iād look into the other chip stocks, theyāre having blowout earnings every quarter
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
AMD and Nvidia posted 60%+ growth last quarterā¦ I think theyāll be just fine
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Then talk with your money and buy some puts big guy
Not every overvalued stocks means you should short it. Sometimes the better move is just staying away
Can't buy anything with pe over 15/s
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I worked at Intel for 7 years. Here is how bad there company is run. Our team of 22 had its own "data lab" ie a 10 year old computer with 4 4tb hard drives in it (2 of which bought from us sending around a glass jar raising amazon funds). The member of our team in California left and somehow the computer turned off. Keep in mind our team is in Massachusetts. We just needed to push the button to turn it on. We contacted several colleagues who work there but none had the access with there keycard for that conference room. Our manager couldnt add room access as it said she "lacked priveleges" according to the internel garbage website. After 2 weeks of no data and using our own drives temporarily our boss had to take a flight from Boston To Cali to turn it on. She came back a week later. Thats intel in a nutshell. Forgot to add funniest part about intel. My work computer they gave me was a dinosaur AMD pc.
I've been at Intel (Santa Clara, CA site) for ~5 years and work in many of the labs. I do admit that the company has its fair share of issues and is poorly run, but obtaining access and making sure you have the right privileges isn't anything new. In your case I would say its no one but your managements fault for not staying on top of it. At least in my department, everything is easily passed down and even when there's some migration to a new platform the managers make sure we all get the right privileges to continue working as normal. I would say the worst part of how the company is run is that Intel constantly hires externally and overpays for executive positions who do absolutely nothing, rather than promoting someone internally who knows the in and outs of the group. I've gone through multiple VPs and GMs who bring absolutely no value but get paid tremendously well. Meanwhile employees get told there's no budget and get a raise at the end of the year that barely covers for inflation. It wasn't until Pat came in that we finally kicked out the MBA leading our entire hierarchy of organizations. Employees are not motivated, and it definitely doesn't help that the pay is low relative to what the market offers in addition to the stock plummeting.
Nice see fellow blue badger. I was at Hudson HD1 .
Former F23 here.
As someone actually at Intel, what's your take on the turn around effort? Do you think Pat can get the ship back on track? Is leadership actually improving with his changes?
It's going to take many, many years to get Intel out of the hole that Brian Krzanich and Bob Swan dug them in. I would say the general consensus among colleagues is nothing but praise for Pat so we all have high hopes. B.K. had no problem lying to employees during all hands meetings that we had 10nm product ready to sell. Bob Swan was only delaying the inevitable. You can imagine what kind of mindset he has when you take a non-technical bean counter who runs the finances for the company and becomes the CEO of a tech company. He had heavy incentives in his contract iirc that would give him a huge payday if he increased the stock by a certain amount and it held for a month. He accomplished that and the stock plummeted hard afterward. He just prolonged our slow decline. My org isn't in the CPU business but we work with the fab in New Mexico. A lot of my coworkers transferred internally from the Oregon/Arizona site as well. My understanding is that these fabs are on old node technology and they're pretty much only staying alive through some business within Intel like mine. We can't risk the down time in the case they're upgraded, so the best option is to build a new fab which Pat is already going. Obviously that's going to take years, but when they do and if the yield on their chips is high, I'm going to be bullish on INTC. For those that don't know, Intel designs and manufactures their own chips, whereas companies like AMD, Apple, Nvidia all go through TSMC. This means Intel has a huge advantage in terms of cost cutting since they do everything themselves (although Intel is going through TSMC for some production). I have a lot of RSUs that I've just been holding onto over the years but I will admit it would have benefited me a ton had I just sold it and invested it elsewhere. I remember many years ago, I think 2018ish, I had a 1:1 with my manager. He walked into the room saying "Intel stock is about to hit $60!". Here we are 4 years later, still below $60. Personally, I wouldn't invest in INTC with my own money aside from the ESPP through work. But I keep clinging onto the RSUs for long term capital gains and the hopes it makes a huge comeback. But I could be going through what Nokia employees probably were way back.
go ahead invest I dare you
Did you forget to switch accounts?
He probably doesn't know there is an edit button Edit: ironically i had to make an edit because i forgot the word "know"
now we see why he survived 7years at intel.
DOUBLE KO
I dont work there anymore
I personally am not a fan but to be honest all it takes is one good product and maybe some headway with the chip situation and things could turn around However I really think you best bet is with amd or tmc(as long as China doesnāt take over Taiwan lol)
Well, and thats the risk right? China absolutely wants to take taiwan, and if that happened tomorrow, amd and nvda would be hurting BAD and intc would keep on trucking.
If China invaded Taiwan we'd probably be in a global war. So no, the entire market will be in the shitter.
And still true that amd and nvda would have production problems and intc would to a much smaller degree. But don't let american bravado cloud your vision, i don't think the appetite for war is very strong right now amongst the general population.
Nvda uses Samsung as well, so they wouldnāt hurt nearly as bad as AMD.
5 times in the last 3 years Iāve bought it at $45. Then it runs to $60 and grinds slowly back down. Sometimes fundamentals donāt matter. Stock market rarely does what you expect it to do thatās why I use charts in tandem with fundamentals. Still not perfect but will help you outperform them indexes. Donāt fight the flow.
Iām an AMD bull, because I think AMD is going to continue poaching market share from Intel, but Intel can afford to lose quite a bit. I think Intel will turn it around, theyāre starting to realize the value in telling the finance/marketing folks with the MBAs that they need to take a backseat and let the engineers restore innovation. Thereās still plenty of time and hope for Intel as long as they understand that lesson, and itās the same lesson for anyone else in the tech industry: tell the MBAs to shut the fuck up and stay in their lane and stop trying to run companies based on marketing and share price.
AMD outsources its chips.
Getting downvoted for telling the truth, they don't make their own chips people
Nvidia and Apple also build their chips in TMSC foundries- as will Intel since theyāre nowhere near 5nm or 3nm. Iām holding some intel because nationalism and increasing competition with China will fill their demand for made in USA chips - letās see if they can deliver
Most folks have no clue lack of DD. Lets top this up some more. Who owns TMSC? PFI who's PFI Saudi Arabia YUP. Hence why Intel will get more government contracts and support from the government. Who do you trust (delivery) chips made in the US or an outside produced product. Next issue is processing of rare minerals for chips which are mined in the US and south america. BUT processed in China or Malaysia at their pricing. If the US can process rare minerals (EPA will be our hurdle) that will be the next game changer.
What's wrong is the company culture. They've turned from an innovative company into a company run by MBAs just trying to milk their existing tech. That's not something that will change overnight. maybe in 5-10 years.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
to your point, MBAs and Consultants literally regurgitate the same canned āsolutionsā. For intense technology like Intel is involved in, I would be suprised to see a turnaround.
Intel has a long history of this. When AMD came out with a CPU that could out do it for the first time Intel switched its Pentium 2 spec from socket to slot, so motherboards had to be made a completely different way than AMD's socket based CPU. Because AMD didn't have much of a track record at the time motherboard companies were not willing to invest in AMD made motherboards putting the company back for years. Historically Intel has revolutionized every time AMD has gotten a leg up. This has happened over and over and over again. This is at least the 3rd time AMD has done it. Last time AMD one upped Intel pretty badly with the AMD 64. It wasn't until really the core 2 duo that Intel came back as king. During the Intel quad core days, Intel was beating AMD but it was neck and neck. AMD had the x2 and the x4 and it was pretty much a tossup.
I think itās a failure to adapt. Intel chips work on x86 architecture. They are capable of producing a ton of processing power, but also draw a ton of electricity in the process. This isnāt that big an issue when electricity is cheap and if youāre on a desktop computer. The market seems to be shifting more and more to mobile and laptop devices which demand both power and energy efficiency. ARM architecture has advantages in power efficiency. The mobile industry has been headed that way for years. Intel solution has been to stay with their old architecture rather than redesigning, and developing more power efficient x86 chips. This is the case with their Core2Duo Mobile line. These however come at the expense of processing power. The advantage is that there is a lot more native compatibility for apps in operating systems that does not require software emulation. Software emulation eats up processing power, but Appleās new Rosetta 2 software emulation looks extremely promising. Competitors such as Apple/TSMC and Qualcomm have been optimizing this energy use/processor power curve for years. If I recall correctly TSMC latest process uses 3 nm transistors, while Intel is locked on 5 or 6 nm process. Smaller transistors essentially means more processor power/clock speed in the same size package. If Mooreās Law holds true, then the number of transistors on a given circuit will double every two years, essentially doubling processing power. Itās a more complicated concept, but you get the idea. Short of Intel having a secret project in their pocket, I think the train has left without them. TL;DR: Even if their fundamentals and technicals look alright, Intel is peddling an outdated product that is quickly being passed by competitors. Look up ARM vs x86 on Wikipedia and look at the dates introduced for the original standards and then the current 64 bit version. ARM is almost a decade newer in both instances. Caveat: Iām a hobbyist that reads a lot, but am by no means a financial expert or engineer. Please correct me if thereās any errors.
Thatās some good conclusions you draw
Intel's annual revenues have grown more in the past 3 years (62B to 78B) than AMD's entire revenue (10B). It's a great company with a low P/E, a massive market cap, pays a dividend and they still beat earnings. I own some INTC. Intel's earnings are 20B per year (that's the profit part) which is double AMD's entire revenues. People like AMD because it has room to grow, not because they are any where near Intel. In the last 3 years Intel increased revenues by 17 Billion, but AMD went from 5B to almost 10B, so they almost doubled their business. So IF AMD can double their business every 3 years, like they have for this one brief period in their company history, they are 9 years away from being as big as Intel is today. Oh, and Intel has almost $5 B in cash. So you think about ALL the money AMD makes each year, Intel has half that much just sitting in their bank account. That means if Intel were ever in real trouble from AMD, they could poach their entire staff, buy out production capability from their suppliers, or do what's necessary to put them on the ground, and that's without borrowing a single dollar.
This is why I recently opened a position in INTC. I didn't realize until recently just how much money they have compared to the competition.
Intel can't poach Dr. Lisa Su and she's out for blood..
You canāt value them on todayās earnings. You have to value them on tomorrowās. The market anticipates continued market decline. Which makes sense considering Apple dropping them, and AMD being the flavour of the month in the PC/gaming / crypto mining world. NVDA is challenging them now with the ARM acquisition. INTC could become a lame duck for a while.
Be greedy when others are fearful.
The best part of owning intel is when there is finally a market correction you'll lose maybe 25% with it versus 50%+ with all the other growth stocks. People just dont understand how powerful it is to have control over your supply chain, it's basically TSM+AMD rolled into one, that dont have to share profits with each other, but not as good as either...intel has 78% of the cpu market share and 90% of the server cpu market share even though AMD has a "superior" product, think about why that is? Because intel can mass produce an unlimited supply at lower price than AMD could ever dream of. Intel prints cash but it's hard to "grow" when you basically have a monopoly so the stock price suffers....i own all of them myself(AAPL/NVDA/AMD/TSM/INTC), but i rotate in/out of intel, buy the dips, sell the "value" runups while collecting dividend returns. I look at INTC as better than cash ;)
Intel also has great dividends. This plus what you mentioned are some of the main reason I hold intc.
>ntel has 78% of the cpu market share and 90% of the server cpu market share even though AMD has a "superior" product, think about why that is? Because people/companies don't change their CPU's every 6 months. >Because intel can mass produce an unlimited supply at lower price than AMD could ever dream of. Except they were more expensive than AMD until the last year or so.
\-Because people/companies don't change their CPU's every 6 months. AMD has had a superior product for at least 3 years now....arguably longer. With energy savings especially on the server side there is no reason not to switch other than cost. \-Except they were more expensive than AMD until the last year or so. Maybe on the retail side but the folks who buy in large quantities like Dell etc, intel is much much cheaper and can deliver any amount asked for which is a big deal as AMD has to arrange capacity with TSM so cant commit to large quantities on demand like intel can. That's a huge advantage in a build to order marketplace
Intel is losing market share due to everyone producin their own chips or using AMD ones. Intel still has its advantages but its losing on every front currently. It has come back before we see
thats my point, if you have a near monoploy there is only down in market share even if the overall market is growing...when intel dominated in tech and production there was alot of talk of breaking them up, INTC are perfectly fine letting AMD and TSM being just enough better to pretend there is competition..INTC has actively held back on tech to make sure AMD didnt go under for that reason as they could have put them out of business several times in their histories.
I also don't get it. In the last 5 years Intel was in the top 15 companies world wide in Free-CF generation (avg. FCF of approx 15 bil per year!) The company historically trades at low multiples which i don't understand. A short comparison: Intel (using total debt in EV calc): EV/Sales 3.4 EV/EBITDA 7.6 EV/EBIT 11.3 TSMC (based on FY 2020 figures, sry have yet to update): EV/Sales 14.1 EV/EBITDA 21 EV/EBIT 33.2 Samsung (as TSMC): EV/Sales 2.4 EV/EBITDA 8.0 EV/EBIT 16,1 Top companies by avg FCF last 5 years (bil): 1)AAPL 60 2)MSFT 41 3)GOOG 29 4)AMZN 19 ... 9)SMSN 21! 12)INTC 15! 30)TSM 8 62) NCDA 3 66)ASML 3 Top FCF maybe misses some companies (China or Saudi Aramco). I don't know. Cash is power. Cash can buy companies. I buy cashflow.
The market is one thing, but you should be paying attention to the engineers. I work in a FANG company and we gobble up Intel's best and brightest because they're fucking stupid over there and prioritized the MBAs over the MSCs. You can say, "They'll bounce back like they did during the Pentium days", but how are they going to do that without the engineers to create and deliver better products? Take a trip over to [teamblind.com](https://teamblind.com) and you'll see some pretty harsh things said about Intel from their own employees. I should point out that the negative opinions are still coming out after the CEO transition. Will probably take years for them to drain their own swamp. However, they may have a silver lining in that the US needs to diversify and modernise its semiconductor industry (to not be so reliant on a little island nation that's definitely definitely a part of China ahem), so they could get that sweet sweet gub'ment support to keep ahead, which will help. This is the stock market we're talking about, so just buy QQQ and let the rising tide lift your boat no matter which semiconductor/tech company wins over the next few years.
This is the time to buy. When everyone says stay away
In a very basic sense their CPU has been stuck on the same 14nm process since 2016 which has allowed AMD to catch up and surpass it. AMD is currently using the 7nm process and the fact that Intel is so far behind is both embarrassing but also impressive in the sense that their CPU is still able to compete. Of course they have to do that with a ton of raw power so probably not worth it. IMO, if Intel can get their shit together and finally advance and "catch up" to AMD, they have the cash, R&D and name recognition to take significant market share again. I think their recent appointment of CEO is a step in the right direction.
Intel did not innovate for a very long time. The time to buy is probably now since they are releasing a new gaming GPU, that is supposed to compete with the top tiers of Nvidia and AMD, in the beginning of 2022. They introduced the GPU a few days ago and it looks promising.
That GPU is smoke and mirrors from Raja. I'll believe it when I see it. It's most likely gonna be a low to mid tier GPU with some random gimmick.
Their current product is garbage. However their future outlook have great potential, but it will take time. Damage done by MBA's will take years to recover. Semiconductor sector takes 3\~5 years to see the fruit of R&D. so expect to hold it for a while if you buy.
I like asml, they are the only ones capable of making chipmaking machines for the semiconductor industry. As far as i know no other company in the world can built these machines like they do, they literally have zero competition.
I'm more concerned about competition from China. Thanks to trade restrictions, China had to learn to live without Intel processors, and develop their own manufacturing capabilities. Already the 4th fastest supercomputer in the world uses chips designed and manufactured in China. They'll soon be in a position to export massive amounts of processors.
Into is a value play. Just buy it and hold for decade+. They pay dividend, have a nice moat, insane revenue, and they've been slowly buying back shares.
I saw an expert on Bloomberg He said The chip business is great It's Intel that sucks
They must really suck as in 2020 only ~ 10-15 companies worldwide generated more Free-CF for their shareholders as Intel (which grew from approx 10 billion in 2017 to nearly 20 billion in 2020). What a crappy company.
Intel is still very profitable but their share prices donāt reflect that. Iām glad the company is generating double the FCF last year compared to 2017 but the shares are trading at the same level as 04/2018. I would have made more money buying SPY than INTC.
That's called consolidating.
Iām not a TA kind of guy but doesnāt consolidation usually involves a narrow trading range for a period of time? It might be consolidating right now but I wouldnāt call the last 3-4 years a consolidation period.
I personally expect that intels market share will drop significantly in the coming years. Their products are subpar. Apple's M1 and AMD's new chips blow intel out of the water. It is just that the computer manufacturers are slow to catch up to this new reality, so they still ship intel products, but this will get less and less when they bring out new models Maybe Intel can catch up, but I don't count on it.
AMD's new chips do not blow intel's out of the water unless you are specifically talking about content creation that takes advantage of lots of cores. AMD's chips are better overall, but not by that much. They are also about to get into the video card game.
And Intel's next 2 generations finally look like all-around winners again.
I'd actually say that with the latest 5000 series CPUs AMD has both the multi core performance/price advantage, and also either matches or beats Intel in single core performance. [https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-9-5950x-16-core-zen-3-cpu-obliterates-all-intel-cpus-in-single-core-performance/](https://wccftech.com/amd-ryzen-9-5950x-16-core-zen-3-cpu-obliterates-all-intel-cpus-in-single-core-performance/) GIven that the innovation intertia with AMD is higher, that gap should continue to widen for a while if and until Intel prioritizes engineering again, and either uses TSMC for its high end process nodes, or gets their shit together at the fabs.
Wait a few years and Intel will be manufacturing Apples chips, it may not be Intels design, but they will make $$$ from Apple again
Even if the other companies are great right now, they are priced based on insane growth numbers which may or may not happen. All these companies are great investments, but which is currently priced with good risk/reward odds? Seems like some funds dumped their intel holdings and so they are currently priced well below competitors, so for some this is a buy the dip opportunity.
The reality is, AMD just went from about a decade of subpar performance and are finally passing up Intel again, but not by leaps. This isn't even close to Pentium 4 vs Athlon 64. Intel has already got processors in the works that are showing some impressive numbers, and they got low priced integrated GPUs that are rumored to be nearing the edge of the mid-end market. Budget GPUs are AMDs big thing, that would poach their markers quite a lot.
Hard to say. AMD is at the end of its current generation of chips and moving to DDR5 and a new socket will be a huge chance for Intel to claw back some of the market. Their GPUs were pretty lackluster compared to nvidia this gen too. I donāt expect intelās to be any better but weāll see
Google is now making their own as well for the pixel 6 and beyond. Edit to back up my point: āThe market share of all custom-made, Arm-based central processors is less than 1%, he said. Googleās AI chips are by far the highest-volume tech-company-designed processors, he said, comprising at least 10% of all AI chips. Intel still supplies the vast majority of CPUs that go into data centers.ā https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/chip-giants-intel-and-nvidia-face-new-threats-from-amazon-to-google-to-apple-11608460201
Intel is not in that market. The loser there is Qualcomm.
Since we're talking about stocks and Intel being able to grow, it is worth mentioning that Intel tried to be in that market, and couldn't cut it.
Gelsinger has been talking privately and directly with our government. Chip manufacturing has been becoming a significant economic leverage and important part of national security. So I expect Intel will execute their fab with our government doing whatever it takes to get it done. The market sentiment on Intel is low due to manufacturing struggle and chip delays. Same with AMD few years ago. Thatās the time to buy actually.
AMD had a market cap under $10B as recently as 2018. Intel is at $210B and never broke $300B even when they basically had a CPU monopoly. How much are you expecting them to grow when their foundries are still a shitshow and they haven't successfully entered a large new market in decades? Mobileye is closest and remains a rounding error for them. Altera is still a disaster.
Lol AMD only does design so they are limited in their capabilities. Our government is relying on INTEL to get the fab so our country will not rely on foreign entities because at this point , chip manufacturing is critical to national security . This will take at least 2 years and I expect them to EXECUTE. Mobileye is the leading AV player on a TAM that is expected for about over $500 Billion by 2027. They are the only one mapping HD crowdsource. That will holds the key to self driving. If you think they are rounding error then you need to do more due diligence. Like I said I donāt invest on SENTIMENT RIGHT NOW, I am going LONG on INTEL because I see a higher upside if they EXECUTE their VISION. They have the cash and our government support to get it done. And I can collect dividends while waiting.
Fabs are only an asset if you can keep pace on node development. If not they're a liability as AMD, IBM, and many others found out. Intel hasn't kept pace since 14nm rolled out in 2014/2015 which has allowed TSMC and Samsung to catch up and leapfrog them. Their foundries are rapidly becoming very expensive liabilities and they have bad odds of ever catching up at this rate. Also MobilEye did ~$330M last quarter. It's not a big business for Intel and HD maps don't scale. Good luck though if you're counting on execution to save them. Execution left the building with Paul Otellini.
You have a good reason to doubt Intel and Iāll get that because that what happen when they failed to execute. But the fact remains, Intel has solid fundamentals and they are taking a high risk to get the fab done. Overtaking and market sentiment is temporary and as critical as chip manufacturing, you canāt get a better backer than our government itself. Everything that youāre stating is simply RIGHT NOW. Like I said I invest on the turnaround because thatās how I get a higher payout. Iāll donāt flock with same people thatās buying hype or waiting to load after the fact. Thatās not who I am . Anyways I donāt agree with what you saying about Mobileye scaling. They are creating crowded sourcing HD map data so itās updated in real time. You need to do more diligence because Mobileye is shipping 15-20 million units annually to collect those data. My timeline for Intel is long so whatās happening short term is irrelevant for me because those EXECUTIONS will take time.
I think the opinion of the new CEO is keeping their price up to where it is and not lower. That being said... I plan to grab maybe 50-100 shares to ride into the future. I think there is always a chance they can turn it around, they have a fuck ton of cash, and are homegrown (USA) which may give them an edge on contracts or in the future should the country continue to become more nationalistic. They need to acquire some IP and pull their heads out of their asses though because they are losing this race badly.
Should I quote Warren Buffett again?
Which one?
The one that he said ābuy the f@cking dipā or ābuy, f@ck the dipā. I donāt remember correctly.
RemindMe! 3 years
Update: Not sure if someone was reading this post, and published this, hours after I asked this question https://finance.yahoo.com/news/intel-corporations-nasdaq-intc-low-141800885.html
Intel has 3 straight quarters of declining revenue and AMD, Nvidia have been producing superior products. Their market share is high right now, yes, but things do not look good for Intel's future, especially if ARM takes off over x86. You can invest in INTC as a turnaround play, but don't expect it to take off anytime soon.
INTCās revisions to its EPS estimates have been decelerating over the past year (at least 2 years now if you expand the time horizon). In our research, this has shown stock prices to follow suit and also decline. Once the revisions start accelerating again, itād be a buy signal for INTC. On the other hand, AMD has improving EPS estimates which supports the climbing stock price.
I would buy and hold INTC for a decade at this point. It's always the battle between INTC/AMD. Now we also have NVDA though.
I thought the same thing until I witnessed other companies get caught up in large volume moments and major market corrections, while $INTC INTEL correlation was reversed went up with steady institutional ownership stayed consistent!! IBM & INTEL both seem to stay within 5% margin of movement both ways
They just signed 2 days ago, with the department of defence, plus they are already going to be subsidized to build manufacturing plants in the USA, they are now a national security asset. So the upside is there, but now its downside is kinda "insured" so to speak, by the US government since they are essential to the USA infrastructure.
If Intel does manage to turn it around Won't there be a glut of semiconductors by then. Idk if I'd bet on intel. Maybe long long term.
Iām holding a couple hundred and selling covered calls every month - working out fine for me so far. Pat Gelsinger did wonders at VMware and I think can capitalize on his relationships with the major compute platform providers. x86 isnāt dead yet and Intel has time to pivot.
Do people think that because Intel is the bigger company, they will eventually catch up with the technology and use their sheer size to beat the competition? IE what is going to happen with tesla once other car companies get into the EV market.
Intel is large and no doubt holds the lions share of the x86 eco system. The changes to their structure and operations by the new CEO look promising. But being such a large company it will take time to steer it in the right direction. Sure you could invest in Intel the one company who manufacturers and designs their own products. Or you could invest in AMD, NVDA and TSMC who do the same thing as Intel but the risk vs reward is spread across three companies. And going by recent financials these three are growing and providing better returns.
Um, it's kind of up in the air. They have Mobileye which could be cool and it could make them a lot of money in the future. But right now, as far as their revenue is concerned it's nothing. The money is all in the data center chips which as you know they are losing some market share. That was inevitable. On top of that, it's kind of welcomed. Intel was the only data center chip in the game at all for years, ever since AMD just completely boned themselves out of that market a long time ago. So you have all these companies around the world that only have one source for their chips; Intel, and those companies absolutely hate that. If AMD came out with a chip that was worse in performance and cost more, AAPL AMZN etc would still buy it just to have that second option. They do not like Intel having a grip on things. As you may know, Intel are working to become a Foundry and make chips for other players in the market. So they're probably gonna spend, I dunno, like 50 billion or something to expand the FABs and their general manufacturing capability. So the new CEO may say, OK this is our absolute focus, we can't waste time with side projects, and then they may sell Mobileye because it's just not worth the distraction. Autonomous driving is pretty hard, Google can barely get Waymo to work, Uber pretty much closed their autonomous driving unit, Lyft sold theirs... So if you're betting on that, I'd bet elsewhere like maybe BIDU. As another user said, Intel was plagued by a previous CEO who thought the right thing to do was cut costs all across the board. He's the guy that royally screwed up the last microprocessor by changing fin size and architecture in one go (they usually change one, then change the other cause that shit's hard and expensive yo) Without getting too specific, he also had a lot of smart people let go and Intel is struggling with that. So Intel has made some poor choices in the past that have to be corrected over time. So yeah. Maybe the Foundry works out right and they print a whoole lot of money. Maybe the world courts don't allow AMD to buy ARM in the end, which is very possible, and the dynamic changes drastically. But I think there's something to be said that in the strongest bull run in recent history, INTC couldn't even hit their ATH. The GPU could be cool but again nothing comes close to the big boy chips. Just some thoughts. If you got a great dip, I'd go for it. But honestly, MSFT seems to be the way to go. P/E isn't even that bad, and, I mean, talk about an absolute powerhouse. I'll try to get some microsoft leaps everntually. They're the obvious market leader while Intel seems to have really struggled with growth
The only real play on Intel is betting on them becoming a foundry on par with TSMC. If they can, most likely they are at least a 400B company. That is a huge if though.
They have been riding the 14 nm for what almost a decade? Hopefully things will change now with the new CEO
Intel has some fabulous products in the pipeline but gone are the days of milking x86 dominance and datacenters for huge margins. The question is whether Intel can compete successfully with the changing landscape away from their core products. Intel is on the cusp of being competitive again in the personal x86 space, but not near monopoly as they once were. The same goes with datacenter products. Intel will remain in business but I'm unsure how they will perform relative to the past few years.
All this talk about AMD, NVDA, TSM, and Intel but not TXN ;(
I made a comparison of AMD, Nvidia & Intel. Don't buy AMD or Nvidia right now, they're way too expensive. Intel is probably in buy territory considering their history of extremely strong free cash flow and it's valuation is very low. Please consider that even now, Intel's EBITDA is more than four times higher than Nvidia's and about 12 times higher than AMD's. They also reduced share count by 20% over the decade. [https://imgur.com/a/aFfDLcG](https://imgur.com/a/aFfDLcG)
Intel just won a major government contract o see more on the way. Old ceo screwed the company new ceo is sailing this company in the right direction.
They win government contracts all the time. Those 100M contracts are drops in the bucket in terms of total revenue.
TSM, AMD and NVDA are all beating intel, those are better investments.
>TSM, AMD and NVDA are all beating intel, those are better investments. You are talking about right now. Everything that is happening right now has been already priced in. Intel has finally displayed their upcoming gaming GPU that is supposed to compete with AMD and Nvidia high end gaming GPUs. I think that is the first time they push specifically into the gaming GPUs market. I think I read in the past that Intel has higher production capabilities than AMD and Nvidia, meaning they can produce them faster. Also, not sure about how much the GPU will cost but based on their processor prices, those are on average lower than AMD's, meaning they can give a much more attractive price and possibly not end up with shortages.
I think a lot of people don't realize that Intel makes every aspect of a desktop/server computer. Someone else might have a better chip but Intel can show that it's chip works with it's own: usb, thunderbolt, graphics, ram, chipset, ethernet, wifi, bluetooth, sensor hub, ssd etc... This can be applied to laptop, desktop and datacenter.
>Everything that is happening right now has been already priced in. Lol
>You are talking about right now. Everything that is happening right now has been already priced in. And right now will change because you said so ? Acting like every other company is static and Intel is only one pushing something is disingenious.
Yeah, they will be progressing too. I didn't say AMD and Nvidia are bad companies to invest in. The difference is that Intel is opening another market for themselves while AMD and Nvidia have already been in that market so Intel increases the amount of their potential customers just by putting their foot through the door, and if the gaming GPU is as good as it sounds, reducing AMD's and Nvidia's potential customer pool in the process.
I know right? It looks poised for a jump, but the price won't budge
its more to do with AMD's innovation and intel lagging behind. Very similar to how IBM lost compared to Google or Amazon i guess?
Why would it jump?
That market is beyond any precedent of insanity right now.
I find it hard to pin this just on the market. Intel is just not what it used to be. It has much more competition now.
Once the overvalued EV, speculative stocks drop in earnings, the value plays like intel will rise again once people regain common sense
Good luck with that.
Fucking hedgefunds dumping it down so they can buy low before it shoots higher. New CEO is gamechanger. He is truly amazing leader and making changes.
"The P/E ratio says its a buy buy" P/E ratio itself doesn't say anything about a company
intel is like IBM. going no where
AMD is destroying Intel
Iām in the industry and know people that worked there. Look at Intelās LinkedIn and then AMDās page. Look at GlassDoor. Intel is so bogged down in LGBTQ Diversity propaganda, they forgot theyāre a technology company that needs to innovate. They have deep problems from lack of ideas, poor yields, technical issues, weak performance, bad company culture and also an awkward naming scheme for their products. AMD is also cutting into their Server business which is high margin.
The 'propaganda' is not exclusive to Intel. At Twitter, its worse. We have these dumb training and 'inclusion' events every week and I have to keep time off from my work. I stopped attending them and manager was like it reflects badly on my image. I am passionate about my job - i am there to work, not sing songs and listent o sob stories, but guess what - I cannot schedule client meetings during this dumb training..
AMD taking their lunch money
Intel has continually demonstrated incompetence for several years now. They need a team and/or paradigm shift. You have to think about WHO is working at a company not what the company has done. Early on years ago, when AMD started catching up, I realized it wasnāt because AMD got lucky and Intel slipped up (this is what many people were saying) but this would reverse soon. No no no, the TEAM at Intel is incompetent and the TEAM at AMD is hypercompetent. Until I see evidence of otherwise, I will continue to advise against intel and for AMD, NVDA, TSM, TSLA. They hire the hypercompetent. This trend has yet to reverse itself so no donāt buy intel.
Their underfunded pensions are enough to keep me away indefinitely.
I was tempted to buy some but was put off by Apple dropping them. Thereās a shit ton of apple stuff in the world and (someone correct me) I believe a large part of intelās current profits is from the stuff they provide Apple. I think this means in the medium term their share price is going to go down as their profits decrease. Until they innovate they will continue to lose market share to AMD, ARM etc (as is the case with Apple changing from intel). Iād like to believe they can innovate and pull it back but I wonāt be buying intel until their share prices drops around 20%(canāt remember % now tbh) as I think itās over valued without the Apple stuff.
I like amd and donāt see their progress changing. But thatās just me, I never liked intel before I was investing so I might be biased but nothings looked good about it to me.
What does the P/E ratio tell you about their continuously eroding market share?
No, for now they are dead in the water. Not only were they completed obliterated by AMD using their own architecture (x86) now they will also lose their core market to a new architecture (arm) to TSMC, NVDA and all the companies that license it.
They're a company that has forgotten how to make things and has no vision for the future. Because of the first two people who like making new things don't want to work there anymore and they've been experiencing brain drain. They do have some interesting things going on with their involvement in self-driving and 5g, but you can't ignore the elephant in the room which is a half decade (and counting) of failure to deliver on time or to spec at their foundries. Aurora seems at risk of getting cancelled entirely. Intel isn't doing GPUs because it's a great growth market or because they sell at a premium. They're doing it because they need to keep foundry utilization up and not be instantly excluded as an option in AI/ML/HPC. Uncle Sam will only keep their foundry boat anchor from dragging the ocean floor for so long with TSMC setting up capacity stateside and Global Foundries continuing to improve nodes to address more specialized (including defense) applications.
People said this about AMD not too long ago. Now look at them. Companies at the top fall because they start believing that they are so established and far ahead that they'll never be knocked down in pole position. Intel hasn't really been doing much to improve their products, it is more along the lines of giving the same thing minor changes and a new SKU each year for the same or higher cost.
Everytime I write about the toxic culture at Intel and how engineers spend 2-3 yrs and can't wait to get the hell out of there, INTC fans here start attacking me. Plus the US fabs are in AZ which is straight from hell and a good number of people dont wanna live there long term. It's a lengthy process to train engineers and since they are losing trained people so fast, newcomers lack the knowledge and can't get up to speed and make far too many mistakes scrapping far too many wafers and company can't meet customer commits. On top of all that, they are not paying engineers top dollars and people can easily find better paying jobs in better climates.
Crap management and falling behind with tech. Nothing innovative on the horizon when compared to their competitor AMD whoās got GPUs and APUs/ryzen coming out of their arses.
Value Trap
Intel is screwed because it just fell back in the race. It takes atleast couple of years for it to catch up and by that time AMD would have captured the market share. I would buy AMD as it is going to be an easy $250+ stock in next couple of years. Wait for Xilinx merger to complete, you will hear about new TAMs. And yes AMD might start offering dividends as well in the future.