Slashdot Mirror
Intel Claims Chip Suppliers Will Flock To Its Mobile Tech
MojoKid writes It has been over six years since Intel first unveiled its Atom CPUs and detailed its plans for new, ultra-mobile devices. The company's efforts to break into smartphone and tablet sales, while turning a profit, have largely come to naught. Nonetheless, company CEO Brian Krzanich remains optimistic. Speaking to reporters recently, Krzanich opined that the company's new manufacturing partners like Rockchip and Spreadtrum would convert entirely to Intel architectures within the next few years. Krzanich has argued that with Qualcomm and MediaTek dominating the market, it's going to be tougher and tougher for little guys like Rockchip and Spreadtrum to compete in the same spaces. There's truth to that argument, to be sure, but Intel's ability to offer a competitive alternative is unproven. According to a report from JP Morgan, Intel's cost-per-wafer is currently estimated as equivalent to TSMC's average selling price per wafer — meaning TSMC is making money well below Intel's break-even. Today, Intel is unquestionably capable of building tablet processors that offer a good overall experience but the question of what defines a "good" experience is measured in its similarity to ARM. It's hard to imagine that Intel wants to build market share as an invisible partner, but in order to fundamentally change the way people think about Intel hardware in tablets and smartphones, it needs to go beyond simply being "as good" and break into territory that leaves people asking: "Is the ARM core just as good as the Intel chip?"
That's not really clear how much the cost per wafer matters.
Intel are a process node ahead of the competition so presumably they can fit more transistors on a given wafer, so the worth of a wafer is higher. Also if that's a best-to-best comparison rather than equivalent-node-to-equivalent node then it's not a direct comparison.
I'd assume intel's yields and costs on old but not retired processes are resprctively higher and lower than on the top end node
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Intel has flexed its near monopoly power heavily over the years. ARM licenses its tech and anybody can build compatible chips if they want. If I were an OEM I would be wary of giving Intel back control over my devices.
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
If Intel's product is actually better, they wouldn't have to make such bold predictions because people will want it.
This is just more marketing bullshit.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
I've said it before: companies that are perfectly happy with ARM chips now are not going to be in a hurry to lock themselves in to sole-source chips.
http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3202785&cid=41735071
Intel would have to be better than ARM, and not just a little bit better... they would have to be dramatically better, such that the risk of being locked in to a sole source vendor would be worth accepting. It hasn't happened yet and I don't expect it to happen.
It will be difficult for any company, even AMD, to really challenge Intel in the high-end CPU market. But it would take a miracle for Intel to lock down the mobile CPUs market.
Intel's plan:
0) Get everyone locked in to needing to buy chips from Intel.
1) Charge stiff margins for those chips.
2) Profit!
Intel does have some chips in some Android devices, but they aren't charging the stiff margins they would like to charge. I don't think they will ever manage to do it.
Second best would be to not charge stiff margins but at least get a large chunk of the available profits from the mobile space. But I don't think they will be able to push out ARM and gain majority share of the market; they will continue to be a niche player.
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely