Razer Leviathan V2 gaming soundbar review
Guru3D NVMe Thermal Test - the heatsink vs. performance
EnGenius ECW220S 2x2 Cloud Access Point review
Alphacool Eisbaer Aurora HPE 360 LCS cooler review
Noctua NH-D12L CPU Cooler Review
Silicon Power XPOWER XS70 1TB NVMe SSD Review
Hyte Y60 chassis review
ASUS ROG Thor 1000W Platinum II (1000W PSU) review
ASUS ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 WIFI6E router review
Backforce One Plus Gaming Chair review
Intel Has a First-Quarter Revenue of $12.8 Billion
Intel Corporation today reported first-quarter revenue of $12.8 billion, operating income of $2.5 billion, net income of $1.9 billion and EPS of 38 cents. The company generated approximately $3.5 billion in cash from operations, paid dividends of $1.1 billion, and used $545 million to repurchase 22 million shares of stock.
"In the first quarter we saw solid growth in the data center, signs of improvement in the PC business, and we shipped 5 million tablet processors, making strong progress on our goal of 40 million tablets for 2014," said Intel CEO Brian Krzanich. "Additionally, we demonstrated our further commitment to grow in the enterprise with a strategic technology and business collaboration with Cloudera, we introduced our second-generation LTE platform with CAT6 and other advanced features, and we shipped our first Quark products for the Internet of Things."
Q1 Key Business Unit Trends
- PC Client Group revenue of $7.9 billion, down 8 percent sequentially and down 1 percent year-over-year.
- Data Center Group revenue of $3.1 billion, down 5 percent sequentially and up 11 percent year-over-year.
- Internet of Things Group revenue of $482 million, down 10 percent sequentially and up 32 percent year-over-year.
- Mobile and Communications Group revenue of $156 million, down 52 percent sequentially and down 61 percent year-over-year.
- Software and services operating segments revenue of $553 million, down 6 percent sequentially and up 6 percent year-over-year.
Business Outlook
Intel's Business Outlook does not include the potential impact of any business combinations, asset acquisitions, divestitures, strategic investments and other significant transactions that may be completed after April 15.
Q2 2014
- Revenue: $13.0 billion, plus or minus $500 million.
- Gross margin percentage: 63 percent, plus or minus a couple of percentage points.
- R&D plus MG&A spending: approximately $4.8 billion.
- Restructuring and asset impairment charges: approximately $100 million.
- Amortization of acquisition-related intangibles: approximately $75 million.
- Impact of equity investments and interest and other: approximately $75 million.
- Depreciation: approximately $1.9 billion.
Full-Year 2014
- Revenue: approximately flat, unchanged from prior expectations.
- Gross margin percentage: 61 percent, plus or minus a few percentage points, 1 percentage point higher than prior expectations.
- R&D plus MG&A spending: $18.9 billion, plus or minus $200 million, higher than prior expectations of $18.6 billion.
- Amortization of acquisition-related intangibles: approximately $300 million, unchanged from prior expectations.
- Depreciation: approximately $7.4 billion, unchanged from prior expectations.
- Tax rate: approximately 27 percent for each of the remaining quarters of the year.
- Full-year capital spending: $11.0 billion, plus or minus $500 million, unchanged from prior expectations.
Intel Haswell Refresh Codenamed Devil’s Canyon have Improved TIM - 03/20/2014 09:59 AM
Ever since Ivy Bridge tweakers, enthusiasts and overclockers have been complaining about the heat of the Core processors. This is related towards the thermal insulation solution that Intel provides. g...
Intel Haswell-E X99 Chipset Details And Launch Time - 03/14/2014 09:26 AM
We have talked about the Intel Haswell-E X99 Chipset quite a bit in the past already. Now more details have surfaced. Basically the X99 chipset which has codename Wellsburg will be released in the ...
Intel Haswell refresh might be pushed forwards - 02/15/2014 10:54 AM
Intel has postponed their 14nm Broadwell processors to Q4 2014 however the Haswell Refresh platform will now arrive in April, one month earlier than expected. The Haswell Refresh is expected to featur...
Intel Haswell-E Roadmap Confirms DDR4 - 8 Cores and Launch in Q3 2014 - 12/26/2013 07:43 PM
We have talked a lot about Haswell-E in the past already, as it is the next big thing in processor land to happen in 2014. A new roadmap leaked on the Haswell-E is an 8 core CPU series. Conformed now...
Intel Haswell-E has 8-cores, X99 chipset, DDR4 memory - 06/16/2013 06:57 AM
Intel is going to launch an 8 core CPU series for desktops in 2014 for the enthusiast grade Haswell-E platform. all eyes turn to the 2014 Haswell-E enthusiast grade platform. The world semiconductor...
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 13752
Joined: 2004-05-16
Senior Member
Posts: 13752
Joined: 2004-05-16
#4802051 Posted on: 04/16/2014 10:30 PM
Based on the progress since 2006 I'm going to guess a bag of chips, $1.25 and some pocket lint. I shouldn't be able to still use the same CPU that I've had since the paleolithic era, but here it is, barely surpassed when OCs are taken into consideration.
They passed AMD with the Core 2 series then just seemingly stopped trying. The performance increase with the last generation over the previous is non existent.
Yeah because the power savings and GPU enhancements that have quadrupled since then mean nothing, right?
Intel doesn't need to compete for performance anymore, current gen processors satisfy the needs of 90% of the market. They have no competition there and even if they did, what would it be for? Take a Haswell and shove two 780Ti/290x's in SLI and it's still scaling properly in nearly all major titles. A 20-50% faster CPU isn't going to do anything in the majority of cases. You should be happy Intel is saving you money.
Based on the progress since 2006 I'm going to guess a bag of chips, $1.25 and some pocket lint. I shouldn't be able to still use the same CPU that I've had since the paleolithic era, but here it is, barely surpassed when OCs are taken into consideration.
They passed AMD with the Core 2 series then just seemingly stopped trying. The performance increase with the last generation over the previous is non existent.
Yeah because the power savings and GPU enhancements that have quadrupled since then mean nothing, right?
Intel doesn't need to compete for performance anymore, current gen processors satisfy the needs of 90% of the market. They have no competition there and even if they did, what would it be for? Take a Haswell and shove two 780Ti/290x's in SLI and it's still scaling properly in nearly all major titles. A 20-50% faster CPU isn't going to do anything in the majority of cases. You should be happy Intel is saving you money.
FerCam™
Senior Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 2005-10-08
Senior Member
Posts: 241
Joined: 2005-10-08
#4802116 Posted on: 04/17/2014 12:15 AM
They still have the most advanced manufacturing process. TMSC is struggling to get there.
They still have the most advanced manufacturing process. TMSC is struggling to get there.
BLEH!
Senior Member
Posts: 6252
Joined: 2010-10-17
Senior Member
Posts: 6252
Joined: 2010-10-17
#4802139 Posted on: 04/17/2014 01:11 AM
Lets hope amd do well too ya know.... And give us eight cores you rich basterds.
A bit of competition would be nice. XBone and PS4 should give AMD a nice boost, however, which will help. It's good to see the Kaveri stuff is as fast (if not faster) than the Phenom II X4 at least so the "dual core with hyperthreading" isn't far off being a quad core in terms of performance, even though the new tweaks basically make it a quad core.
Based on the progress since 2006 I'm going to guess a bag of chips, $1.25 and some pocket lint. I shouldn't be able to still use the same CPU that I've had since the paleolithic era, but here it is, barely surpassed when OCs are taken into consideration.
They passed AMD with the Core 2 series then just seemingly stopped trying. The performance increase with the last generation over the previous is non existent.
Not sure about that, Nehalem was a HUGE jump over core 2. SB was a fair jump over that but nerfing OCing was a bad move.
That must be it, the hundred thousand of intel employees around the world have just ''given up'' at once. It came from upper management, sent a mass email telling them that they had won and should sit on their laurels.
Or, is it that just as usual, miniaturization process is the most relevant factor and is going on par with it's decades old self.
Let's be clear here: Intel didn't do amazing; AMD messed up.
Phenom I was fairly bad, and lack of innovation didn't help, either, and intel being anticompetitive douchebags.
We're still on old hardware because of software not being up to it. Just because software isn't using our hardware doesn't mean they're skimping on R&D.
Had my 920 been a POS at games or I expect it to be (let watch dogs release), this thing is getting replaced by a 4790k in a heartbeat.
This is also true. I'd still be on X58 if the X79 bundle hadn't come up cheap. Nothing wrong with my old "980Xeon" it ran 4.4 no probs
They still have the most advanced manufacturing process. TMSC is struggling to get there.
I think intel is struggling with 14 nm, too.
Lets hope amd do well too ya know.... And give us eight cores you rich basterds.
A bit of competition would be nice. XBone and PS4 should give AMD a nice boost, however, which will help. It's good to see the Kaveri stuff is as fast (if not faster) than the Phenom II X4 at least so the "dual core with hyperthreading" isn't far off being a quad core in terms of performance, even though the new tweaks basically make it a quad core.
Based on the progress since 2006 I'm going to guess a bag of chips, $1.25 and some pocket lint. I shouldn't be able to still use the same CPU that I've had since the paleolithic era, but here it is, barely surpassed when OCs are taken into consideration.
They passed AMD with the Core 2 series then just seemingly stopped trying. The performance increase with the last generation over the previous is non existent.
Not sure about that, Nehalem was a HUGE jump over core 2. SB was a fair jump over that but nerfing OCing was a bad move.
That must be it, the hundred thousand of intel employees around the world have just ''given up'' at once. It came from upper management, sent a mass email telling them that they had won and should sit on their laurels.
Or, is it that just as usual, miniaturization process is the most relevant factor and is going on par with it's decades old self.
Let's be clear here: Intel didn't do amazing; AMD messed up.
Phenom I was fairly bad, and lack of innovation didn't help, either, and intel being anticompetitive douchebags.
We're still on old hardware because of software not being up to it. Just because software isn't using our hardware doesn't mean they're skimping on R&D.
Had my 920 been a POS at games or I expect it to be (let watch dogs release), this thing is getting replaced by a 4790k in a heartbeat.
This is also true. I'd still be on X58 if the X79 bundle hadn't come up cheap. Nothing wrong with my old "980Xeon" it ran 4.4 no probs
They still have the most advanced manufacturing process. TMSC is struggling to get there.
I think intel is struggling with 14 nm, too.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 11835
Joined: 2011-12-31
Based on the progress since 2006 I'm going to guess a bag of chips, $1.25 and some pocket lint. I shouldn't be able to still use the same CPU that I've had since the paleolithic era, but here it is, barely surpassed when OCs are taken into consideration.
They passed AMD with the Core 2 series then just seemingly stopped trying. The performance increase with the last generation over the previous is non existent.
We're still on old hardware because of software not being up to it. Just because software isn't using our hardware doesn't mean they're skimping on R&D.
Had my 920 been a POS at games or I expect it to be (let watch dogs release), this thing is getting replaced by a 4790k in a heartbeat.