Intel Posts Another Record Quarter, 14nm Shortage To Worsen In Q4

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Paul Alcorn
Editor-in-Chief

Paul Alcorn is the Editor-in-Chief for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • Tanyac
    From an investor point of view this is probably good news.
    From a consumer point of view these people should be lined up and shot.
    The blatant exploitation of consumers is appalling. If it weren't for the fact that AMD motherboards weren't so damned expensive I'd jump ship. No negligible performance margins are worth this rubbish.
    And we've also got to deal with a predictable and correctable shortages - alogn with RAM, Flash, (and in our case graphics cards), whose prices are still on the rise....

    This seems a concerted effort by manufacturers to kill the computing industry completely.
    Reply
  • octavecode
    I'm betting Intel will have a record drop in revenue next year....Their products are just not appealing any more.
    Reply
  • adi6293
    This is quite sad tbh, how can we expect AMD to complete when they make 1.5 billion a quarter next to Intels 19.....and there is also nVidia who also makes more money that AMD....
    Reply
  • tikal
    AMD offers great value. Still, there are too many ignoramuses out there that rather overpay for INTEL CPU.
    Reply
  • fredfinks
    21433173 said:
    This is quite sad tbh, how can we expect AMD to complete when they make 1.5 billion a quarter next to Intels 19.....and there is also nVidia who also makes more money that AMD....

    AMD was nearly dead a few years ago. Different ballpark.

    Competition is good but based on what i saw while working at major retailer, regarding quantity of RMAs, led me to build a particular disdain for that brand.


    21433272 said:
    AMD offers great value. Still, there are too many ignoramuses out there that rather overpay for INTEL CPU.

    Get the product that suits your needs. If on par, id pay extra for intel. no hesitation. ive seen what the return box is full of and its not coloured blue.
    Like early SSD days, you had your supertalents and OCZs but there was one that you could trust.

    Theyre doing better than Cyrix so credit where credits due.
    Reply
  • Co BIY
    21432959 said:
    This seems a concerted effort by manufacturers to kill the computing industry completely.

    This sounds like a problem I'm having locally: "My favorite restaurant is sure to fail, I don't even go there anymore because they have raised prices and the wait for service is terrible with the line of customers always going out the door."

    Reply
  • toffie47
    @TANYAC AMD motherboard expensive? AMD motherboards cost slightly less than their comparable Intel counterpart.
    Reply
  • johnrob
    I was planning to build a new computer in march but I think intel prices are already bloated and now they are expected to go up?

    All i wanted was 144+ fps on a 2k display for less than $2,000. Oh well it's been fun to dream.
    Reply
  • Onus
    Fredfinks, I'm indeed interested in what was in the "return box," but also, and a lot more importantly, why it was there. In all my years in IT, I've read from time to time about processor bugs (typically Intel!), but not dead CPUs or dead chipsets. Motherboards, yes; I've personally had some die on me (mostly S775 Biostar and Gigabyte), or read of horrendous problems (mostly AM3 MSI), but not dead CPUs themselves.
    Also, and I believe this is a big deal, companies trying to make the cheapest junk possible typically use AMD because it costs less, and low-end junk is junk, no matter who makes it; that's not the fault of AMD either; there are plenty of high-end AMD systems still out there. I could not claim to be suffering if I were still running my Asus 990FX Sabertooth, no matter how many cheap MSI G43 and G46 boards fill the dumpsters (and catch fire). So, I'm willing to bet the return box was indeed full of AMD-based systems, as various other cheap parts croaked (e.g. insufficient VRMs, overrated PSU-shaped objects), performance was dismally unacceptable (e.g. 5400RPM hard drives, IGP graphics), or other inadequacies reared their ugly heads (e.g. not enough RAM, undersized PSUs when trying to upgrade graphics).
    Reply
  • redgarl
    21433276 said:
    21433173 said:
    This is quite sad tbh, how can we expect AMD to complete when they make 1.5 billion a quarter next to Intels 19.....and there is also nVidia who also makes more money that AMD....

    AMD was nearly dead a few years ago. Different ballpark.

    Competition is good but based on what i saw while working at major retailer, regarding quantity of RMAs, led me to build a particular disdain for that brand.


    21433272 said:
    AMD offers great value. Still, there are too many ignoramuses out there that rather overpay for INTEL CPU.

    Get the product that suits your needs. If on par, id pay extra for intel. no hesitation. ive seen what the return box is full of and its not coloured blue.
    Like early SSD days, you had your supertalents and OCZs but there was one that you could trust.

    Theyre doing better than Cyrix so credit where credits due.

    You are obviously working in retail with OEM systems like ACER, Lenovo and HP which choose the most abysmal junk for their system wearing the AMD logo.

    I am a DIY builder and all my AMD/ATI product were faring a lot better than my Intel/Nvidia builds.

    My BFG 8800 GTX died within a year, my Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 died 3 times in 18 months, my EVGA 1080 FTW died twice in a year...

    My only problem with AMD/ATI was when Asus was involved.

    Not to say that my mini-ITX 4770k build with a dGPU was running like garbage in comparison to my 2400G with my MSI B450i which use the iGPU.

    I had the total opposite experience from you and I have been building PC for 20 years.
    Reply