Intel wraps up 'best first quarter ever' by teasing new dual-core Atoms for Q2
By Ross Miller 
posted April 13th 2010 10:59PM
posted April 13th 2010 10:59PM
Android support for Moorestown isn't the only morsel of Intel news to come out today. In an earnings call today that kicked off with word of a 288 percent year-over-year net income increase -- its "best first [fiscal] quarter ever" reportedly -- Intel CEO Paul Otellini said, "the next innovation coming out on Atom is dual core, which comes out in the second quarter." Given dual core Atoms already exist for nettops, we're gonna guess he's referring specifically to netbooks. That jibes pretty well with what we heard about the supposed D510 remake as N500. Guess we've got something to look forward to in the netbook category over the next few months.
Q2 can't come soon enough.
@iFargle
I don't see what your looking forward to. 2010 is fairly a dull year for the your average consumers when Intel is in question.
Definitely on the desktop side, there is the i7 980-X for highlight, but I really doubt these $999 per chip pricetag would help anyone but the enthusiasts - those 6 core chip won't be made mainstream anytimes soon - things are in the 'Tock' stage, no new major architectural change until 2011, hence not much exciting technology - not something usual in such supposingly rapidly changing industry. That said, it would be nice when Intel finally reduce the TDP of the high end chips.
Not to mention Sandy Bridge chips would still be expensive unless AMD get their hands out of their arse, and deliver X6 10xxT series properly. With Intel historically releasing high end stuff first, goodness knows when they release mainstream.
That said, as for mobility - since the Tick stage, Nehalem chips are not real known to be friendly on battery - improvements generally on C2 based mobile quads, but still less than ideal. Most laptop with i7-7/8/9x0 CPU struggles to deliver decent battery, the chips won't be refreshed for a while neither. On the mobile market especially, the lack for a directly clock per clock competitors has allowed Intel to enjoy its most profitable quarter - that, for us consumers is anything but decent outlook.
If AMD is matching intel performance and price in the low to mid segement, Intel's Nehalem based high-end platform, are still in the class of its own whether desktop or mobile, hence still rather expensive to buy into. Furthermore, I just cannot remember the last time I've set my eyes on a decent AMD powered PC.
@iFargle
By the time it arrives, we'll die of old age :D
So this is how Intel will fight ARM Cortex A9 / Tegra 2 market??
Seriously, this only affects Tablet PC's soon to be and cheap netbooks.
With dual-1.8GHz & ION2, don't think it can keep up with my SU7300 & HD4330.
I think the best is to come yet = 1.2GHz i7 + Win 7 + Convertible tablet. Yes mama
@iFargle
it's been Q2 for two weeks already
@iFargle
Intel still has no answer to ARM anywhere in sight. If Intel announces an ARM competitor tomorrow, it would still take about 3 years before anyone can design a phone around it. Also, the graphics for it would suck given Intel's reputation of being totally clueless on how to make a decent graphics chip.
@Supply8
I'm just hoping they announce a Quad-core Westmere very soon.
I'm itching to upgrade and I'd really like to have a cooler-running 32nm chip and still be able to transcode video at a good speed.
For now, I have a 930 system all set to go in my newegg cart, but I just don't know how much longer I can avoid pushing the checkout button... :)
What does Intel do with the six-core chips that test with one or two defective cores?
@Kangal
THANK YOU.
I'm picking up an Acer Aspire 1410 next week, and can't think of any reason NOT to get a BGA956-powered netbook. Even the lowly Celeron M 1.3Ghz in that Acer is over twice as fast as the Atom. Hell, I had a Dell Inspiron 6000 with a 1.4Ghz Celeron M for years before I decided I cared and swapped it out for a 1.73Ghz Pent. M, and it was fine.
I love the concept of netbooks, and getting 8-9 hours battery life on an Atom is great, but I'll happily "only" get 6 hours with my Celeron M that won't be nearly as quick to choke. When you have an Asus gaming lappy as your primary system, going from "burns your balls off" to "runs warm" and "1 1/3 hours battery life if I'm lucky" to "6 plus" is ridiculously appealing... now if only I could find a vendor to SELL me a Core2Solo for my netbook. Hell, maybe I'll just up my price ceiling from $400 to $500, who knows.
Intel is greedy!
@Kwame Nkrumah Intel makes some damn good processors.
@Kwame Nkrumah
Stupid comment is stupid.
@Kwame Nkrumah
Every company is greedy. If you think otherwise then you're really susceptible to marketing.
@Broderbund I think it's that intel is greedy and can get away with it, that's what happens in a Natural Monopoly production environment.
@AppleFanboyHater
So says the Apple hater, now get out.
Crysis on a netbook anyone!
@SecretShuttle Not on integrated graphics.
Not the worst news today, they keep talking about Microsoft's fail products
@JonnyB
There are products that are much more failed, for example, you.
@writeinC
Ahaha hey dude, all I can say is your mom didn't call me a fail product at all, she actually said between the lines of, "ohh JonnyB"
@JonnyB You`re so lame you can`t even get a woman to cal out your real name. That is a FAIL.
@JonnyB haha niice
since u would know, jonnyB, how long was his moms weener? -.-
@uHorndog
Ahaha it wasn't as big as WritenC bragged about, but still bigger then his:O
Nice, now lets more about Intel's next gen SSD's.
@marcomera
*hear
@marcomera I'd prefer to hear about motherboards before delving into next generation SSDs.
@marcomera no! i just bought my G2 intel SSD, i hope next generation SSDs don't come so soon...
Come on AMD, if the best Intel innovation for the next quarter is a dual core Atom, then I weep for the future.
@Supply8 no kidding. put a dualcore Neo with ATi graphics in an EeePC and you can have my monies.
Great Job, Intel!
Way to go!
Dual core HP Slate?
Nvidia is taking way too long to get there tegras in consumer hands. Intel seems to get there products out first so im hoping for a dual atom HP Slate. I know it wont be in the first gen but the opportunity is there.
Lets get it done HP or whoever.
Now if Intel can get at a minimum upgrade their integrated Pineview graphics to perform like first gen Ions then maybe netbooks will be worth a crap
The best first quarter for chipzilla is saying a lot.
So once again they're proving that the money they had to pay AMD was chump change and they've just returned to their regularly scheduled screwing of the consumer :\
@KeegdnaB any company would gladly pay a settlement after years of getting away with anti competitive practices.
The gain is way greater then the settlement cost.
My question is.... Is AMD "too big to fail". I'd hate for them to go the way of PALM. I know the ATI division is making WIN but I'm concerned about their chip business, especially given this news.
@Eternity AMD still offers better bang for the buck. i think if they stay focused on value they should be ok. i would also hate to see them go down.
@kojo87 Here's hoping for better competition!
@Eternity
Intel won't let AMD fail. Otherwise they would become a monopoly overnight, and they'd have the feds all up in their faces.
@DrDr Unless they can find some kind of loophole in the system. Via? ARM? Marvell?
IDK, I'm no expert in these things.
@Eternity AMD had positive cash flows all of last year. Next year is supposed to contain negative earnings, in 2011 they are expected to return to profitability. Looking at 2009 I see a conflict between an earnings estimate and their year end financials, so they might have done better than expected. Their stock estimate is estimated to be flat over the next year, so the bad news is, a lack of growth, the good news is they aren't dying.
I'd actually be interested in looking at their filing to see where the revenues and profits came from, but I think as long as they can recoup their costs it's good to keep the division open. It gives them a better name, even if they are constantly losing to intel, and it might bring better economics of production to their graphics card (maybe a possibility, maybe not - think a partial subsidy to their graphics cards that would make graphics cards less profitable without their research and/or processor chip production. It's possible, though I'm not saying it's probable.)
@Eternity it seems from this filing that about 75% of their revenue and profit came from their non-graphics unit:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/2488/000119312510009806/dex991.htm
I'm not sure where the settlement fell into the mix though, as that's a one time charge that if rolled into their processor unit would mislead and distort quite a bit.
@juanvaldez on first glance it does literally look like all of it got rolled into their processor division which is a really bad sign for that unit.
why does it say on CNET that "The chipmaker's profit was $2.4 billion, or 43 cents per share, up 433 percent from the same period last year." That 433 percent is very different and even more impressive than 288 percent reported here... Anyone have an answer for me? Thanks.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-20002396-64.html
@bbaldwin I don't have an answer without more time, I have a class to teach in 3 minutes, but looking at a consolidated financial statement from Q1F09 it looks like they had net income of 629M, which affirms the 244% reported here. Use that stat as the more accurate, and either the CNET report is incorrect and/or they are comparing something different (though it appears to be the same on the surface from the words).
@Flanders
Can't talk now, I've got a class to teach!
..so in the 90's we had Celeron the Meek and now we are onto Atom the Gutless, yeah things are really looking up for Joe Six Pack when it comes to budget computing power.
@szamot I think it's also looking up for people who want a 2nd/3rd (portable) device for specific scenarios. e.g. coffee shop, class notes, next to the couch, for the netbook for the child's first laptop, etc.
@juanvaldez Yeah I am not sure I agree with that. That's like saying I am buying me a car but the rest of the family is going to get scooters. Just because you are buying a second or a third PC does not mean it should be a piece of shit. And Atoms are just that....... shite.
@szamot I think it's better to buy and use a bike or a scooter for a trip to the park, due to its size and efficiency, if you are going solo rather than just using more power. Yes, if you are trying to drive down the highway and go as fast as possible (gaming, etc) then use the motorcycle or sports car.
@szamot atoms are not bad. I got a netbook with an atom with 32 gig ssd , 2 gig ram , and windows 7 for $200 . That automatically means the atoms are not bad. I dont see any other processors allowing for $200 and sub $200 pc's
@majortom1981 not running a full OS. and thats the thing, they fill a gap (in my analogy, using his, a scooter or bike (even moped) to a motorcycle). Cheaper, more efficient, etc. etc. To say all we need is power in the processor is to go back to Intel's 1990s mindset. Save some $, put it elsewhere and move on.