Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Samsung Ends Intel's 2-decade-plus Reign in Microchips (ap.org)

Posted by msmash on from the end-of-era dept.

Intel has lost its long-held title as the world's top computer chip makerâ"at least by one important yardstick. From an Associated Press report: Intel's more than two decade reign as king of the silicon-based semiconductor ended Thursday when Samsung Electronics surpassed the U.S. manufacturer to become the leading maker of the computer chips that are a 21st century staple much as oil was in the past. Samsung reported record-high profit and sales in its earnings report for the April-June quarter, and while Intel's reported earnings beat forecasts, the U.S. company's entire revenue was smaller than sales from Samsung's chip division. Samsung said its semiconductor business recorded 8 trillion ($7.2 billion) in operating income on revenue of 17.6 trillion won ($15.8 billion) in the quarter. Intel said it earned $2.8 billion on sales of $14.8 billion.

63 of 117 comments (clear)

  1. Samsung celebrated with fireworks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    They didn't have any actual fireworks on hand, they just turned on Note 7's and threw them in the air.

    1. Re:Samsung celebrated with fireworks by AquaDuck · · Score: 1

      It doesn't count. When Samsung can produce chips that are as powerful and do as much as Intel's chips, then they will have taken the lead, not before then.

      It's like saying Matchbox is the number one producer of cars in the world, even though they only make toy cars.

      Similar to Mattel at one time (maybe stll, too lazy to check) being the world's largest manufacturer of women's clothing - for Barbie!

    2. Re:Samsung celebrated with fireworks by Isaac-Lew · · Score: 1

      It doesn't count. When Samsung can produce chips that are as powerful and do as much as Intel's chips, then they will have taken the lead, not before then.

      It's like saying Matchbox is the number one producer of cars in the world, even though they only make toy cars.

      Similar to Mattel at one time (maybe stll, too lazy to check) being the world's largest manufacturer of women's clothing - for Barbie!

      Pedantic note: Matchbox is also owned by Mattel (along with Hot Wheels).

    3. Re:Samsung celebrated with fireworks by AquaDuck · · Score: 1

      Pedantic note: Matchbox is also owned by Mattel (along with Hot Wheels).

      Hah, forgot that! It actually makes it even funnier ("brought to you by Mattel, the world's largest women's clothing and automobile manufacturer"). Also, just to make it clear, GGP is wrong, it really does count. It's not just about individual chips in head-to-head competition.

    4. Re:Samsung celebrated with fireworks by AnilJ · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately that is not much of a relief to Intel. Samsung has a 2.5 to 1 better profit margins than Intel. That is the rub. How would Intel be able to keep investing in upgradation and R&D. Samsung: Income $7.2 billion on Sales of $15.8 billion Intel: Income $2.8 billion on sales of $14.8 billion What say?

  2. Re:samsung beats Intel by Khyber · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Thank you for proving that users logging in here via Facebook are pretty much fucking retarded.

    It has a processor, that makes it a computer.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  3. Re:samsung beats Intel by jellomizer · · Score: 1

    Desktops are not computers .. No matter how many Gen Xers think they are...

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  4. Re:samsung beats Intel by Archtech · · Score: 1

    Well, to be absolutely precise, mobile phones contain computers.

    --
    I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
  5. Intel losing to ARM, not just on mobile by cerberusss · · Score: 4, Informative

    Basically Intel is losing to ARM. But not just on mobile. They're also in trouble for tablets, and desktops are going to get real close. Bare Feats regularly does comparative synthetic benchmarks between Apple's tablets (ARM) and laptops (Intel). Last time was in June: http://barefeats.com/ipadpro20...

    Below, Intel means 3.5GHz Dual-Core i7 processor + Iris Plus Graphics 650 GPU. And ARM means Apple's ARM-based 2.39GHz A10X processor. As you can see, these tablets are getting really close to laptop performance.

    Single-Core (highest=fastest):
    Intel: 4650
    ARM: 3951

    Multi-Core (highest=fastest):
    Intel: 10261
    ARM: 9332

    GPU compute score (highest=fastest):
    Intel: 26353
    ARM: 27814

    GFXBench Metal Manhattan (highest=fastest):
    Intel: 37 FPS
    ARM: 42 FPS

    I for one, am really happy. Intel has needed some competition desperately. Now there's AMD, and there's ARM, and we as the consumers are getting more and better options.

    --
    8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    1. Re:Intel losing to ARM, not just on mobile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      http://www.pcworld.com/article/3006268/tablets/tested-why-the-ipad-pro-really-isnt-as-fast-a-laptop.html

      This is a good article on why performance tests aren't always the best.

    2. Re:Intel losing to ARM, not just on mobile by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      TL;DR:
      Intel should have kept StrongARM.

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    3. Re:Intel losing to ARM, not just on mobile by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      I believe Intel had a royalty-free arrangement with ARM, Ltd. for some historical reasons carried over from DEC (patents trade?). It was a very sweet deal for Intel, and they sold it off to Marvell. Marvell hasn't had much success with the XScale business either, so in the end I guess Intel made the right call even if I don't understand why XScale has been a failure.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    4. Re:Intel losing to ARM, not just on mobile by somenickname · · Score: 1

      I have to wonder about the accuracy of these benchmarks. I deal with reasonably powerful ARM Cortex-A53 chips at work and, we generally develop on fairly modern Intel i7 desktop chips and then cross compile the code to the ARM chips. We always assume the A53 chip will do 1/10th the integer or floating point operations of the i7 chips. It's almost always true. If it takes 10 seconds to do some complex test on the i7, it's usually going to take 100 seconds to do it on the A53.

      Most likely what is happening in these benchmarks is that the Intel chips are running at near idle while the ARM chips are practically bursting at the seams. Or, the benchmarks have unknowingly (or knowingly) skewed towards capping the performance at something that is achievable by the ARM but trivial to achieve by the Intel chip.

    5. Re:Intel losing to ARM, not just on mobile by cerberusss · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they're completely synthetic benchmarks so that must be kept in mind. Plus an Intel CPU has the whole PCI express stuff.

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    6. Re:Intel losing to ARM, not just on mobile by AquaDuck · · Score: 1

      Yeah. Benchmarks are interesting and even useful, but they're so extremely context-sensitive that it's hard to compare across non-similar implementations of anything.

    7. Re:Intel losing to ARM, not just on mobile by mikael · · Score: 1

      DEC worked with ARM to make StrongARM, then a cross-licensing deal was made between Intel and DEC after a lawsuit.

      https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/d...

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
  6. The decline of the Personal Computer/Desktop by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft and Intel for the past generation was king of computing, with their dominance in the x86 IBM (Compatible) Personal Computer.
    Which had been people primary computing platform. This has been moved to mobile devices for most people primary computing.

    Now Intel and what we call the PC isn't going to die, but be used more towards workstation and server jobs. There is plenty of business opportunity and long term growth in these markets. As long as Microsoft and Intel don't try to bring back the good old days of dominance again.

    We still need faster computers and operating systems with mouse and keyboards for serious work. But email and web browsing is not longer a primary function, it will be on these workstations, just because people are using it for more important stuff.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:The decline of the Personal Computer/Desktop by mikael · · Score: 1

      Originally it was the UNIX workstations with custom graphics hardware that were king. Then in the late 1990's, they were competing against Windows NT with commodity hardware. Price competition for the low-end home PC used for Email and Web browsing/purchases drove prices down to below $600 and made the Windows licence the largest overhead:

      https://linux.slashdot.org/sto...

      Dual socket quad-SLI motherboards became the new high-end workstation (and many laptops), while netbooks, then smartphones became the new commodity PC's (something bought to do read email, web surfing and book tickets).

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    2. Re:The decline of the Personal Computer/Desktop by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Now Intel and what we call the PC isn't going to die, but be used more towards workstation and server jobs. There is plenty of business opportunity and long term growth in these markets. As long as Microsoft and Intel don't try to bring back the good old days of dominance again.

      WinTel hasn't exactly given up the business desktop or the gaming desktop just yet. I think it'll be a long while before they retreat into the workstation/server market.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    3. Re:The decline of the Personal Computer/Desktop by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      For the workstation market they were.
      However some of the real reasons for the decline, was that the Intel CPU's (Pentium) and the rise of higher end video cards. Started to make the standard Desktop PC perform better than a work station.
      Microsoft dominance in the desktop, which allowed for compatibility with NT to cross over as well meaning your exe file will install and work on your workstation and the low end desktop at home. Also Microsoft marketing pushed their product as user friendly compared to Unix, so people jumped on that bandwagon too.

      The sub $600 never really pushed the business market, as the super cheap PC had a lot of problems. Most business who tried that route moved back to the more dependable PC's. Linux on the cheap PC's may had offered some benefit for the small business giving them Unixy features with a lot less cost, but Linux was still struggling then, and quality problems with cheap hardware wasn't helping them. So linux was mainly at that time a good OS for Appliance software.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:The decline of the Personal Computer/Desktop by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't call it retreating, however I would like to see More Workstation based features in their systems. We need fast computers with less eye candy now, but with UI features that are helpful and productive.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    5. Re:The decline of the Personal Computer/Desktop by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      Yes, I could do with a lot less eye candy.

  7. Re:samsung beats Intel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Double Retarded then

  8. Reign? by eneville · · Score: 1

    Reign? More like niagra!

    --
    Why UNIX?
  9. Re:samsung beats Intel by spun · · Score: 2

    The difference engine is not a computer, no matter how much Victorians think it is...

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  10. Meekrow Cheep by sexconker · · Score: 1

    In his brain. Those crazy Russians.

  11. Re:samsung beats Intel by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    phones are not computers .. no matter how many Millennials think they are...

    Sure they are. An iPhone 4 could perform 1.6 Gigaflops. A Cray 2 (1985) could perform 1.9. IBM's Deep Blue (1997) was rated at 11.4 GFLOPS. A Samsung S5 was rated at 142. A three year old smartphone is more powerful than a supercomputer from 20 years ago. I'd say that what we call a phone today is more like a computer that you can make calls on. It's certainly nothing like the rotary dial phones I grew up with.

    Just because I'm old and can't always relate to Millennials, doesn't make them automatically wrong. I'm pretty sure it's the same in your case as well.

  12. Re:samsung beats Intel by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

    /pedant mode on

    A central processor, memory, data storage, and at least one external I/O interface (user, network, serial, whatever) combined, will make something a computer. A CPU by itself is just a CPU.

    (and yes, a smartphone obviously qualifies as a computer) /pedant mode off

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  13. Re:samsung beats Intel by Khyber · · Score: 1

    "it is a much different breed of computer than desktops and laptops"

    How so? My mobile phone runs all the same programs I use on my desktop system. The only real fundamental difference is a touchscreen versus keyboard and mouse input, and that's just truly a difference in peripherals.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  14. Re:samsung beats Intel by Penguinisto · · Score: 1

    An abacus is not a computer, no matter how many Chinese - oh, wait... nevermind. Shit.

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
  15. The time of the Tiny People by puddingebola · · Score: 2

    Intel can't beat ARM on cost, and the difference in performance is no longer as significant as it once was. Consumers value mobility more than power now. Cheap smartphone on Google returns search results ranging from $5 to $20.

  16. Re:samsung beats Intel by erapert · · Score: 1

    People are not computers, no matter how much Greeks think they are...

  17. Re:samsung beats Intel by Aighearach · · Score: 1

    What did you think apps were? Video calls to a giant library that holds up the correct 3x5 card depending what button you press?

  18. Re:samsung beats Intel by Aighearach · · Score: 1

    /pedant mode on

    A central processor, memory, data storage, and at least one external I/O interface (user, network, serial, whatever) combined, will make something a computer. A CPU by itself is just a CPU.

    (and yes, a smartphone obviously qualifies as a computer) /pedant mode off

    You're an awful pedant, sorry.

    First of all, the processor doesn't have to be central. That makes it easier to program, but it is not necessary.

    Second, you said memory twice. You don't need multiple memory, you don't have to have auxiliary memory at all.

    Third, you don't need "one external I/O interface," you in fact need at least one input, and also at least one output. They don't have to be combined, and in fact they rarely are at the hardware level. Also, "I/O" covers anything that is an input or an output; a read-only interface is still an "I/O interface." If you only have "one external I/O interface" then I can simulate the entire system with a single resistor because all you did is convert electricity to heat. It has to either be bi-directional (rare), or you need at least two.

    And you only need the memory if it is a digital computer, to store your digits. An analog computer can often leave that out if it is calculating continuously, and memory is only needed if you want temporal isolation. Digital computing of course requires temporal isolation for the values to have consistent meaning.

  19. How? by unixisc · · Score: 1

    What exactly did Samsung sell that helped them achieve this? Did they have the bulk of Qualcomm's fab orders? I saw somewhere that flash memory was one driver. While memories - both flash and DRAM do have volumes, they are also commodity priced, so that wouldn't exactly help them in terms of margins. Does Qualcomm's chips have higher margins than Intel's?

    Intel might want to consider upping the ante on their Custom business, fabbing things for Qualcomm, Apple & others. They do have process advantages, and could bring key benefits to those chips as a result, like reduced power consumption.

    1. Re:How? by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      What exactly did Samsung sell that helped them achieve this? Did they have the bulk of Qualcomm's fab orders? I saw somewhere that flash memory was one driver. While memories - both flash and DRAM do have volumes, they are also commodity priced, so that wouldn't exactly help them in terms of margins. Does Qualcomm's chips have higher margins than Intel's?

      Intel might want to consider upping the ante on their Custom business, fabbing things for Qualcomm, Apple & others. They do have process advantages, and could bring key benefits to those chips as a result, like reduced power consumption.

      I think Qualcomm is using TSMC and other maybe GlobalFoundries - Samsung doesn't really offer a fab business. Samsung however does make their own SoCs - and all of Samsung's phones outside North America use their Exynos processors.

      Apple also uses them for part of the SoCs used in the iPhone and iPad, though they did lose out to TSMC at one point, but I suspect Apple still uses them - they have a fairly big fab in Texas because of it.

      And yes, Samsung flash and DRAM memory is a huge part of their business - supporting SSDs and billions of phones worldwide. This stuff is commodity priced, but they do have customers like Apple that place huge orders for it.

  20. Re:samsung beats Intel by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    Arduino is a computer?

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  21. Re:samsung beats Intel by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

    GI Joe says otherwise: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    --
    There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
  22. Sad by thegreatbob · · Score: 1

    The following represents the tears I have shed:

    --
    There is no XUL, only WebExtensions...
    1. Re:Sad by Myrdos · · Score: 1

      The following represents the tears I have shed:

      Poor fellow. Looks like they shorted out his keyboard.

    2. Re:Sad by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 1

      >> Poor fellow. Looks like they shorted out his keyboard.

      That was just Priebus cracking it in half over his ex-employer's head.

  23. Re:samsung beats Intel by networkBoy · · Score: 1

    This got me to thinking...
    If you ported the entire BlueGene/L to the phone would it actually outperform the supercomputer, or is there some other factor that would end up being a limiting factor besides the raw FLOPS?

    Pretty sure performance/watt would be so far off the scale that it wouldn't be considered the same ballpark, but I wonder about the actual top speed.

    --
    whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
  24. How can this be? by emil · · Score: 1

    Samsung fabs Apple A#, as well as Qualcomm Snapdragon ARM processors in addition to their own Exynos ARM. ARM processors in general are much less expensive/lower margin than x86.

    If Samsung is only making a foundry manufacturing fee on Apple and Snapdragon, how can their "operating income" be larger than Intel? Exynos can't be that profitable.

    1. Re:How can this be? by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Samsung also is a world leader in memory production, including to computers, phones, SSDs, .

      I don't know if any of their display technology falls into this or if all of it does but if so then they are massive there too.

      I don't know what other IC stuff they may do but they of course do lots of home electronics and a whole lot of non-electronic-focused stuff Korea too.

    2. Re:How can this be? by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Apple makes a lot of money on sales per unit sold. A lot of other bands use a lot of cpu's and other chips in a lot more devices.
      Win, win, win.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  25. Re:samsung beats Intel by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    The microprocessor-based device that sits on your desktop that you've been calling a Personal Computer isn't a computer either. Computers fill huge rooms and are only used for very serious scientific work.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  26. Re:samsung beats Intel by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    HT83C51 and 8XC51FC found in microwaves and washing machines is MCS-51 compatible (8051, 8032, etc) and is by the broadest technical definition a computer, even if few would consider an ordinary microwave to be a computer.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  27. Re: samsung beats Intel by aliquis · · Score: 1

    Building a gaming desktop today you may put in 125 million more times RAM than in the Atari 2600. Which to be fair could have another 256 bytes on cartridge.

    3 TB HDD would be 750 million times the storage of the 4 kB cartridges.

  28. Re:samsung beats Intel by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

    A smartphone is a general purpose computing device just like a PC. The form factor doesn't matter. It's not like computers had keyboards or screens to begin with. Initially the were programmed with toggle switches and lights. Then keyboards and printers. Then keyboards and monitors.

  29. UNIX pre-RISC was the bottom of the barrel. by emil · · Score: 1

    It was, after all, designed as a stripped-down MULTICS that could run on constrained hardware.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  30. makerÃ" by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    makerawithahatdoublequote? Is that Portuguese?

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  31. Re:samsung beats Intel by Kjella · · Score: 1

    Well if it has a FLOPS rating I'm guessing my microwave, dishwasher, washing machine, TV, car and well.... pretty much any other part of modern equipment I own is a computer. You might say general purpose computer but then you'd probably argue when or if they've crossed that line. If you don't got root, is it just a very flexible appliance? You probably have to nail down the definition first and when you've done that you'll probably figure out it's changed because language isn't static. I'd wager that 99% of the time if I said "I'll check that on my computer" the reply would be "Don't you have your phone on you?", as in the phone is not recognized as such. Laptop is a type of computer, desktop is a type of computer, workstation is a type of computer, server is a type of computer... phone? Not in ordinary English.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  32. Samsung has at least 3 Fabs by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1

    List of semiconductor fabrication plants::

    Company / YR........ Products.................. Location
    Samsung / 2011.......DRAM, VNAND....South Korea, Hwaseong
    Samsung / 2011.......Microprocessors......USA, TX, Austin
    Samsung / 2014.......VNAND..................China, Xian

    1. Re:Samsung has at least 3 Fabs by unixisc · · Score: 1

      That's what I thought. When I worked in the flash memory industry 10 years ago, Samsung used to be one of the fabs for one of my previous employers, and another of my employers would procure pSRAM, DRAM and NAND flash from them.

  33. Bad analogy by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    computer chips that are a 21st century staple much as oil was in the past

    21st century societies are still much more able to stand a shortage of chip production than an oil shortage. You can carry on using your last year's mobile, but you cannot use last year's oil.

  34. Re:samsung beats Intel by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    I can agree that Smartphones blur the lines. But some of us old timers think of a general purpose computer as being an especially good replacement for a typewriter, and a phone is a terrible typewriter.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  35. Re:samsung beats Intel by spire3661 · · Score: 1

    NO IT IS NOT. Its much more akin to a dumb terminal than a PC.

    --
    Good-bye
  36. Re:samsung beats Intel by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

    I sort of wish we could call smartphones and tablets "personal computers", and PCs as we know them could be re-designated as "workstations". To me, those monikers actually make a lot more sense. There's no real doubt that the "personal computer" for the modern masses is the smartphone, and the PC has been related to the platform where "work gets done".

    --
    Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
  37. More competition... by XSportSeeker · · Score: 1

    I always welcome more competition...
    Still wondering why Intel abandoned Atom though.
    I know it wasn't doing particularly well, but sounds weird for them to completely step out of a market.

  38. Re:samsung beats Intel by nasch · · Score: 1

    It's strange to have to point this out, but a smartphone can run programs internally without connecting to a server. It is not at all like a dumb terminal.

  39. Re:samsung beats Intel by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 1

    I sort of wish we could call smartphones and tablets "personal computers", and PCs as we know them could be re-designated as "workstations". To me, those monikers actually make a lot more sense. There's no real doubt that the "personal computer" for the modern masses is the smartphone, and the PC has been related to the platform where "work gets done".

    Kind of like back in the day "Home computers" vs "Personal Computers". Home computers were simpler and more appliance like. This is more similar to the user experience expected of smartphones and tablets. Which is ironic because PCs (in the Laptop / desktop sense) spend most of their time at home, while smartphones and tablets are typically always on the go.

  40. Re:samsung beats Intel by slashrio · · Score: 1

    My phone runs Debian Linux. How is that not a computer?

    --
    "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
  41. Re: samsung beats Intel by Khyber · · Score: 1

    "You don't use a USB otg cable to run your phone with a keyboard and mouse?"

    Why would you do that when bluetooth (originally designed for low-bandwidth wireless peripherals) already exists and I just beam a laser keyboard on any surface I have immediately available to me and wear my finger-mounted mouse?

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.