Intel’s bad quarter

[dada_dave]

Intel Reports Q4 2022 and FY 2022 Earnings: 2022 Goes Out on a Low Note

www.anandtech.com

Judging by the chatter: a lot of analysts seemed to have expected a not so good quarter for Intel but were still surprised by just how bad it was. And the near future is still pretty grim even by Intel’s own forecasts.

 

[Cmaier]

Intel Reports Q4 2022 and FY 2022 Earnings: 2022 Goes Out on a Low Note

www.anandtech.com

Judging by the chatter: a lot of analysts seemed to have expected a not so good quarter for Intel but were still surprised by just how bad it was. And the near future is still pretty grim even by Intel’s own forecasts.

That makes no sense. One would think that with Gelsinger’s side gig converting the heathens to Christianity, ceiling cat or whoever is in charge would have given Intel better results this quarter.

 

[dada_dave]

That makes no sense. One would think that with Gelsinger’s side gig converting the heathens to Christianity, ceiling cat or whoever is in charge would have given Intel better results this quarter.

Hmmm judging by all the cats I’ve known in my life: “she works in mysterious ways” definitely fits.

 

[Colstan]

Judging by the chatter: a lot of analysts seemed to have expected a not so good quarter for Intel but were still surprised by just how bad it was. And the near future is still pretty grim even by Intel’s own forecasts.

I just saw this, too, and it's not going to get any better. They took a big hit with the failure of Arc, that continues to be a money pit. Meteor Lake looks to be delayed and the desktop offerings will be scaled back compared to Raptor Lake.

According to Moore's Law is Dead, all three of the big hardware vendors are having issues moving product. The only products with decent, if lackluster sales, are old 12th-gen Alder Lake and 5000-series Ryzen CPUs, and the RTX 4090 and 7900 XTX high-end GPUs. Everything else is sitting on store shelves.

However, my favorite quote from Tom is "I don't expect any tech company to have fantastic earnings this year. It's just going to be a degree of who had the worst earnings". I would note that he usually covers PC tech, occasionally consoles, but not a certain fruit company. I don't expect Apple to have gangbuster earnings, but I think they're more structurally sound to weather the storm coming this year compared to the competition.

 

[exoticspice1]

5000-series Ryzen CPUs, and the RTX 4090 and 7900 XTX high-end GPUs. Everything else is sitting on store shelves.

At least in Germany the 4070 ti is selling the most compared to any other card and that includes last gen mid range cards as well.

Nvidia's RTX 4070 Ti is Selling Better Than Traditional High-Volume GPUs in Germany

Maybe Nvidia's GPUs aren't too expensive

www.tomshardware.com

I believe Tom is mostly US focused.

 

[dada_dave]

At least in Germany the 4070 ti is selling the most compared to any other card and that includes last gen mid range cards as well.

Nvidia's RTX 4070 Ti is Selling Better Than Traditional High-Volume GPUs in Germany

Maybe Nvidia's GPUs aren't too expensive

www.tomshardware.com

I believe Tom is mostly US focused.

It’s possible the 4070 TI is doing better but that’s one data point from one seller in one country with small volume. If Nvidia doesn’t eventually release a “super” card at lower prices like they did with the 20 series maybe the 4000 series did sell okay. But so far … overall reports suggest that they aren’t selling great.

Truthfully for my purposes the 4070 TI is not a bad price. I’m mostly interested in FP32 compute and the card has a pretty sizable performance bump for that. But seemingly rasterization performance hasn’t kept up with compute performance so a lot of gamers and reviews are struggling with justifying the price increases.

 

[exoticspice1]

But seemingly rasterization performance hasn’t kept up with compute performance so a lot of gamers and reviews are struggling with justifying the price increases

Yeah honestly the 4070 ti is around or equal 3090 ti performance in 1440p in ultra gaming. The price increases are because Nvidia want higher margins and use of 5nm TSMC vs 8nm Samsung node on the 30 series.

40 series is great actually Ada is a nice arch efficiency is great, good encoders but the price could be $100-200 lower but Nvidia wants them profits.

 

[dada_dave]

The price increases are because Nvidia want higher margins and use of 5nm TSMC vs 8nm Samsung node on the 30 series.

And I think that underlies @Colstan ’s argument: basically as the other chip makers transition to newer, better, but pricier nodes, there will be increasing sticker shock for buying just the individual pieces. By virtue of being a premium brand and by selling the whole widget, Apple is better positioned to maintain healthier margins with smoother price shocks. That’s not to say Apple will or should be immune from criticism: if I remember right, the M2 SOC got criticized for effectively cutting memory bandwidth in half on some of the tiers by using one double sized module instead of two smaller ones. Nvidia did something similar this generation, more on that below.

Yeah honestly the 4070 ti is around or equal 3090 ti performance in 1440p in ultra gaming.

40 series is great actually Ada is a nice arch efficiency is great, good encoders but the price could be $100-200 lower but Nvidia wants them profits.

Also trying to position it as anitger 4080 with a even higher initial price pissed people off - yes Nvidia released 2 3080s but they had the good sense to release the lower one first and the differences were not quite so extreme. So people were primed.

The main issue with this generation is at 4K gaming, Nvidia increased the prices for their product tiers but cut memory bandwidth and apparently it shows. The 4070 Ti and 4080 have trouble stretching their legs at 4K despite their impressive compute performance. Also the triple wide cards are just awkward. And of course no reference 4070 Ti so actual prices will be higher than MSRP.

 

[exoticspice1]

And of course no reference 4070 Ti so actual prices will be higher than MSRP

Surprisingly many 4070ti cards can be found at MSRP. The Galax, Zotac, Asus without the fancy coolers are at or below MSRP.

The main issue with this generation is at 4K gaming, Nvidia increased the prices for their product tiers but cut memory bandwidth and apparently it shows. The 4070 Ti and 4080 have trouble stretching their legs at 4K despite their impressive compute performance

Yeah true, I feel like they are 1440p cards. The 4070 ti is priced okay but the at 4080 $1200 price point it should be able do 4k but Nvidia did that on purpose as they want people to the 4090.

Also trying to position it as anitger 4080 with a even higher initial price pissed people off - yes Nvidia released 2 3080s

Yeah the 4080 12gb unlaunch. That was funny. They would been destroyed by users and reviewers if they launched the 12gb 4080 naming scheme.


Also I wonder why Nvidia cut bandwidth is 5nm that expensive and it's really weird that the 7900xt has 320bit memory but it's only 10% faster than the 4070 ti 192 bit memory. I guess Ada plays a role a here not sure..


To stay on topic I will add do you guys think Intel will keep in gaming GPU division casue things are looking bad for Intel.

 

[Colstan]

And I think that underlies @Colstan ’s argument: basically as the other chip makers transition to newer, better, but pricier nodes, there will be increasing sticker shock for buying just the individual pieces. By virtue of being a premium brand and by selling the whole widget, Apple is better positioned to maintain healthier margins with smoother price shocks.

I've had a conversation about this with a friend who is very much non-tech. He refers to a screenshot as "print screen" and will get lost if I go off even slightly into the weeds. However, I appreciate his feedback, because his ignorance is the most unbiased opinion I can get. There's a lot of tribalism in tech, so I like to hear what he has to say.

When I told him about my thoughts about potentially building a gaming PC, or simply sticking with Macs only, he was most interested in price. I gave him a list of the three available 4000-series Nvidia graphics cards. (I presented the models as best/better/mid.) I then told him that the price for the M2 Pro Mac mini is about the same as an RTX 4080 alone. The pricing on PC parts has gotten out of control. (There are other factors, of course, but right now I am focusing on cost to the consumer.)

I never thought that the Mac would be the value option, but after talking it over with my friend, it's clear that the PC companies can no longer deride the "lifestyle company" for having an exorbitant price. Apple has remained reasonably steady on pricing, they even dropped the cost of the base Mac mini by $100 USD with the M2 version, yet the same cannot be said for PC components. While Nvidia is the worst offender, I don't think the others are blameless, just not as obscene as team green. We tech nerds tend to get bedazzled by the specs, but to my friend, it was a ridiculous notion to pay that much just to play Windows-only computer games.

 

[dada_dave]

Surprisingly many 4070ti cards can be found at MSRP. The Galax, Zotac, Asus without the fancy coolers are at or below MSRP.

Huh that is a surprise. I wonder if that says something meaningful about the volume of sell through or Nvidia’s decisions after the unlaunch.

Yeah true, I feel like they are 1440p cards. The 4070 ti is priced okay but the at 4080 $1200 price point it should be able do 4k but Nvidia did that on purpose as they want people to the 4090.

Yeah the 4080 12gb unlaunch. That was funny. They would been destroyed by users and reviewers if they launched the 12gb 4080 naming scheme.


Also I wonder why Nvidia cut bandwidth is 5nm that expensive and it's really weird that the 7900xt has 320bit memory but it's only 10% faster than the 4070 ti 192 bit memory. I guess Ada plays a role a here not sure..


To stay on topic I will add do you guys think Intel will keep in gaming GPU division casue things are looking bad for Intel.

Yeah dunno. Reviews weren’t awful though in a “well they tried hard” kind of way. Intel seems to be continuing some part of the GPU development but yeah there’s definitely been rumors that future client (gaming) GPUs will be cut. Edit: Or was it more than rumor? I can’t remember if there was anything official.

 

[dada_dave]

I've had a conversation about this with a friend who is very much non-tech. He refers to a screenshot as "print screen" and will get lost if I go off even slightly into the weeds. However, I appreciate his feedback, because his ignorance is the most unbiased opinion I can get. There's a lot of tribalism in tech, so I like to hear what he has to say.

When I told him about my thoughts about potentially building a gaming PC, or simply sticking with Macs only, he was most interested in price. I gave him a list of the three available 4000-series Nvidia graphics cards. (I presented the models as best/better/mid.) I then told him that the price for the M2 Pro Mac mini is about the same as an RTX 4080 alone. The pricing on PC parts has gotten out of control. (There are other factors, of course, but right now I am focusing on cost to the consumer.)

I never thought that the Mac would be the value option, but after talking it over with my friend, it's clear that the PC companies can no longer deride the "lifestyle company" for having an exorbitant price. Apple has remained reasonably steady on pricing, they even dropped the cost of the base Mac mini by $100 USD with the M2 version, yet the same cannot be said for PC components. While Nvidia is the worst offender, I don't think the others are blameless, just not as obscene as team green. We tech nerds tend to get bedazzled by the specs, but to my friend, it was a ridiculous notion to pay that much just to play Windows-only computer games.

There are aspects of the new Mac pricing I think could be improved, but I am impressed by the overall value of the base machines at each product tier. I think those are remarkably good value for performance and build quality whereas previously while build quality may have been good, I’ll admit that Apple’s performance using Intel/AMD could be a little lackluster for the price - not as terrible as PC enthusiasts would claim given the build quality, but not great either.

 

[exoticspice1]

I've had a conversation about this with a friend who is very much non-tech. He refers to a screenshot as "print screen" and will get lost if I go off even slightly into the weeds. However, I appreciate his feedback, because his ignorance is the most unbiased opinion I can get. There's a lot of tribalism in tech, so I like to hear what he has to say.

When I told him about my thoughts about potentially building a gaming PC, or simply sticking with Macs only, he was most interested in price. I gave him a list of the three available 4000-series Nvidia graphics cards. (I presented the models as best/better/mid.) I then told him that the price for the M2 Pro Mac mini is about the same as an RTX 4080 alone. The pricing on PC parts has gotten out of control. (There are other factors, of course, but right now I am focusing on cost to the consumer.)

I never thought that the Mac would be the value option, but after talking it over with my friend, it's clear that the PC companies can no longer deride the "lifestyle company" for having an exorbitant price. Apple has remained reasonably steady on pricing, they even dropped the cost of the base Mac mini by $100 USD with the M2 version, yet the same cannot be said for PC components. While Nvidia is the worst offender, I don't think the others are blameless, just not as obscene as team green. We tech nerds tend to get bedazzled by the specs, but to my friend, it was a ridiculous notion to pay that much just to play Windows-only computer games.

You forgot to mention one thing, Apple makes up the cost by charging 4x the market rate for RAM and SSD. This is how they make up their costs.

Apple charges $200 USD for 8GB of LPDRR5 for an total upgrade from the base mini 8GB to 16GB. Also $200 to go from 256GB to 512GB that means Apple is charging $200 for an 256GB SSD.

Now that base mini price of $599 will be $999.

Moving on to the M2 Pro Mac mini. Apple charges $300 more just for one thing the increase in 3 more GPU cores from 16 cores to 19 cores.
The cost to increase from 16GB to 32GB is $400. So Apple charges the customer $400 for an LPDDR5X 16GB chip.

They have been doing this since the Intel days well but you could easily upgrade the RAM your self.

Comparing the Mac mini to a just one PC part is weird that too an high end GPU one where logical pricing is less of an concern.
Apple does the same in the high end they charge a LOT. One example is the price from going to 48 core GPU to a 64 core GPU in the M1 Ultra. That alone is a $1000. Yes $1000. In the high end companies margins increase this should not be a surprise to you. Apple has always operated with high margins this they don't need to increase prices but they still do. The iPad 10th gen got price hiked.
The reason the Mac mini got a price drop is because the chassis is now peanuts to make they have using the same chassis for 10 years.

Let's not even go into the pricing for Apples monitors and their upgrade costs...
$400 to be able to lift your monitor is stupid that should be an accessiblity feature as standard.

 

[Colstan]

Or was it more than rumor? I can’t remember if there was anything official.

It's mostly from Tom.



He's got really good sources, but Intel is so feudal, it could be one fiefdom trying to sabotage another. To keep everyone in line, Intel needs a strong king, and Gelsinger ain't it. We saw the same thing happen when Gates left Microsoft. Some companies are goal oriented, such as AMD and Apple, others are internally competitive. That can be an asset with a strong hand, a detriment with weak leadership.

There are aspects of the new Mac pricing I think could be improved, but I am impressed by the overall value of the base machines at each product tier. I think those are remarkably good value for performance and build quality whereas previously while build quality may have been good, I’ll admit that Apple’s performance using Intel/AMD could be a little lackluster for the price - not as terrible as PC enthusiasts would claim given the build quality, but not great either.

As I said, Apple is a goal oriented, highly cooperative company. There were times when the Mac was neglected, a side project of the iPhone company. Then iPhone sales took a dip, and Apple realized that they needed to pivot. That's how we ended up with Apple Silicon and the company united behind that effort.

 

[exoticspice1]

I am impressed by the overall value of the base machines at each product tier.

Yep only the base machines have excellent value.

 

[dada_dave]

You forgot to mention one thing, Apple makes up the cost by charging 4x the market rate for RAM and SSD. This is how they make up their costs.

Apple charges $200 USD for 8GB of LPDRR5 for an total upgrade from the base mini 8GB to 16GB. Also $200 to go from 256GB to 512GB that means Apple is charging $200 for an 256GB SSD.

Now that base mini price of $599 will be $999.

Moving on to the M2 Pro Mac mini. Apple charges $300 more just for one thing the increase in 3 more GPU cores from 16 cores to 19 cores.
The cost to increase from 16GB to 32GB is $400. So Apple charges the customer $400 for an LPDDR5X 16GB chip.

They have been doing this since the Intel days well but you could easily upgrade the RAM your self.

Comparing the Mac mini to a just one PC part is weird that too an high end GPU one where logical pricing is less of an concern.
Apple does the same in the high end they charge a LOT. One example is the price from going to 48 core GPU to a 64 core GPU in the M1 Ultra. That alone is a $1000. Yes $1000. In the high end companies margins increase this should not be a surprise to you. Apple has always operated with high margins this they don't need to increase prices but they still do. The iPad 10th gen got price hiked.
The reason the Mac mini got a price drop is because the chassis is now peanuts to make they have using the same chassis for 10 years.

Let's not even go into the pricing for Apples monitors and their upgrade costs...
$400 to be able to lift your monitor is stupid that should be an accessiblity feature as standard.

Some of the upgrades are pretty bad I’ll admit. Those are at the heart of my caveat above. However, others are not as bad if you look at competitors in the same product tiers. When I did the price matching a year it so ago “the Apple tax” was not as bad as people made it out to be - especially on high end laptops but even some comparable desktops.

I’d also argue the problem with the 4080’s pricing is that used to be the top reasonably priced enthusiast model and now it isn’t which has people pissed off. You’re right the high end in every tech category has always had a price bump beyond its capabilities, the problem is now the PC crowd are seeing these price bumps creep down the product stack in a way it didn’t before.

 

[Colstan]

You forgot to mention one thing, Apple makes up the cost by charging 4x the market rate for RAM and SSD. This is how they make up their costs.

I didn't forget that. I just thought it wasn't necessary to mention what every Mac user already knows.

Moving on to the M2 Pro Mac mini. Apple charges $300 more just for one thing the increase in 3 more GPU cores from 16 cores to 19 cores.
The cost to increase from 16GB to 32GB is $400. So Apple charges the customer $400 for an LPDDR5X 16GB chip.

I was talking about the base model. It's a good value.

Comparing the Mac mini to a just one PC part is weird that too an high end GPU one where logical pricing is less of an concern.

I was comparing it to the 4080 because it's nearly the same price as the M2 Pro Mac mini. It's merely an analogy, nothing more.

One example is the price from going to 48 core GPU to a 64 core GPU in the M1 Ultra.

Few people are buying an Ultra, just like few people are buying a 4090. I was talking about mainstream systems, not the halo products.

Let's not even go into the pricing for Apples monitors and their upgrade costs...
$400 to be able to lift your monitor is stupid that should be an accessiblity feature as standard.

My entire point is that Apple isn't increasing prices at the same rate as their competitors. I used the Mac mini and 4080 as examples, and underscored it by equating that a quality computer is the same price as a single, overpriced GPU. Now, whether those prices are worth paying is up to the individual. I think that, generally speaking, the Mac offers better value than the PC companies.

 

[dada_dave]

Also I wonder why Nvidia cut bandwidth is 5nm that expensive and it's really weird that the 7900xt has 320bit memory but it's only 10% faster than the 4070 ti 192 bit memory. I guess Ada plays a role a here not sure..

Sorry I forgot to respond to this part: Dunno I’ve heard 5nm is indeed expensive but I have no idea if it justifies everything. As for the relative performance is that at 4K or at 1440p? Generally memory bandwidth comes in strongest at 4K. If it’s at 4K then indeed I’d say AMD has a bottleneck somewhere given the paper strength of each GPU - side note older AMD generations used to have a big one I think in the final rasterization output, but I understand that RDNA has (largely) fixed that.

 

[exoticspice1]

Sorry I forgot to respond to this part: Dunno I’ve heard 5nm is indeed expensive but I have no idea if it justifies everything. As for the relative performance is that at 4K or at 1440p? Generally memory bandwidth comes in strongest at 4K. If it’s at 4K then indeed I’d say AMD has a bottleneck somewhere given the paper strength of each GPU - side note older AMD generations used to have a big one I think in the final rasterization output, but I understand that RDNA has (largely) fixed that.

4070 ti in 4K is 10% slower than 7900xt and 8% slower in 1440p.

MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Suprim X Review

With the Suprim X, MSI offers an impressive RTX 4070 Ti custom design. Thanks to its huge quad-slot cooler, and an excellent fan profile, the card runs virtually inaudible, even under full load. Overclockers can manually increase the power limit up to 365 W, more than on any other RTX 4070 Ti.

www.techpowerup.com

This link shows the relative performance.

 

[exoticspice1]

My entire point is that Apple isn't increasing prices at the same rate as their competitors. I used the Mac mini and 4080 as examples, and underscored it by equating that a quality computer is the same price as a single, overpriced GPU. Now, whether those prices are worth paying is up to the individual. I think that, generally speaking, the Mac offers better value than the PC companies.

It's just that comparing value to an entire different product category not a good comparison.

Shouldn't the comparison be against small form factor PCs sold by Dell, HP and other PC computer manufacturers. Not individual parts that make up a PC.

Here's the problem no else is making a machine as GREAT as the Mac mini form factor with M2 Pro level of power in such a form factor. So Apple has this locked down to themselves. The base M2 Pro mini is excellent value just like the M1 Max studio is.

I do agree that PC prices have skyrocketed wells that mainly due no competition from AMD and now Intel. I would choose the RTX 4080 any day over the RX 7900 XTX because of it's efficiency, DLSS2/3, RT and Nvidia media engines even if it's 200$ more and like you said value is subjective.

Few people are buying an Ultra, just like few people are buying a 4090. I was talking about mainstream systems, not the halo products.

The 80 card from Nvidia has never been mainstream. It's always been the 50 series or the currently the 60 series. I would say the 4080 is like the base M1 Ultra while the 4090 is like the full fat 64 GPU core ultra.

So in the end I too agree with you that Apple has amazing value in certain Macs. It's up to us to make that choice.