Seems like Intel is striking back at Qualcomm and Apple which chips are based on the ARM architecture. So X86 isn't dead after all. What I didn't know is that memory is now baked into the chip? https://www.theverge.com/2024/6/3/24169115/intel-lunar-lake-architecture-platform-feature-reveal Also see: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/thr...ps-will-be-ready-for-pcs-in-late-2023.445241/
For traditional laptop tasks (work and school projects) the 16GB memory package will be nice. And for most advanced users, the 32GB should be sufficient. But with no ability to add more RAM, some users (not counting the habitual complainers) will definitely complain. That said, apparently another Arrow Lake option will soon be available. Still, with memory on the CPU die, thus no need for I/O across a (relatively slow) motherboard bus, not sure more RAM will be needed, except for extreme exceptions. Full disclosure, I've been buying $50 worth of Intel every month since 1995 and have over 700 shares. So I definitely have a keen interest in it doing well. I'm looking to replace my 14 year old truck!
So I guess this will improve performance? I didn't even know it was possible to integrate RAM on the CPU. Intel isn't exactly a top performer on Wall Street sadly enough. It seems like all the money flows to AMD and ARM. But I hope Intel will bounce back, I have been using their CPU's for the last 25 years or so. I was planning to switch to AMD, but I believe Lunar Lake might become a turning point.
Why not? CPUs already have L1, L2, and L3 on- die memory caches. And they integrate memory controllers and graphics on the same die too. If they have the space, and they do, no reason they cannot integrate RAM as well. Never heard of computer or System on a chip? As for Intel stock, yeah, it has been disappointing lately. But it analysts still say to "Hold", suggesting they predict good things in the near future. What a lot of people don't understand is Intel manufacturers so much more than just computer CPUs. And with 2 new chip factories located in the US (Ohio and Arizona) coming on line soon bringing back chip manufacturing to the US, the hope is that will mean good things for the company too. Fingers crossed.
OK I see. I suppose Apple's M1/M2/M3 CPU's are also a ''system on a chip'' right? Yes, I was shocked about how investors reacted to Q2 2024 earnings, it dropped to $20. I hate it how Wall Street always overreacts to things, as if companies are going bankrupt, just because they have had a couple of quarters with less profit/revenue growth. However, Intel does have a debt of $30 billion, which can become a problem when revenue goes down. They are spending quite heavily on building those new plants of course. Intel is now worth about $87 billion which in theory might make them a takeover target. But I don't see it happening.
The problem as I see it (and I definitely am NOT an economist) is there is some perception that if a company is not growing, it must be failing. I don't get that. So what I hate is how their extreme reactions tend to be only one way. For example, because some business or the economy "only" grew by 2% instead of 2.5% some anonymous eggheads "guessed" it would, the market plummets 1000 points. But then, in the next day or two, everyone realizes it really was a false alarm and not the end of the world, the market "starts" to recover - but it takes weeks or even longer to get back to the level before the false or greatly overblown scare occurred. Same (in reverse) with gas/oil prices. OPEC makes some threat, or some oil producing country has some minor civil upheaval and suddenly (like within minutes) gas prices shoot up $0.50/gal. But 2 days later, the threat never materializes or the dust settles in that country. But do the prices quickly come back down? No way! It often takes weeks. Why? Greed . Yup.
Exactly, I don't get this obsession with constant growth either. Who cares if a company has a couple of years that it stops growing? Well, the stock market cares, but I think it's kinda silly since most companies don't even offer dividends. However, they do buy back their own shares, which is kinda ridiculous if you think about it. But my point is, that a stock can go up regardless if it's actually growing revenue and profits, because it's simply a question of supply and demand. So stocks getting extremely punished for a slight earnings miss is pretty stupid, because longtime investors shouldn't panic right? So I came to the conclusion it's probably short sellers who cause these major corrections, they manipulate the markets. Of course people who trade on margin will be forced to sell their shares which will cause a snowball effect. BTW, I've read that shareholders will sue Intel because they felt they were being misleaded by Intel's management. Exactly, that's what I hate too. Markets always go down way more quickly than they rise. But like I said, it's probably because of market manipulation by short sellers, who profit from declining stock prices. I got hit pretty badly this year by sudden and major corrections of stocks like ASML, Super Micro, MongoDB, Lululemon and Charter Communications. But I can only blame myself for taking too much risk, at the end of the day, it's pretty much a casino. My bad, I forgot that it's clearly mentioned on Wikipedia. But the major drawback is that you can't upgrade RAM, would be cool if they could change this in the future.
Well, it happened yesterday, Chipotle Mexican Grill was down $8 and Starbucks was up $20, simply because Chipotle's CEO will make the switch to Starbucks. So in other words, investors now believe Chipotle will stop growing, while Starbuck will explode. It's kinda silly isn't it. Bu anyway, the latest news is that Intel will postphone their Intel Innovation event to 2025. They also are going to lay off 15.000 people, not a surprise given the unexpected $1.5 billion loss that they made. And they have yet to release a software patch for serious CPU bugs found in Intel's newest desktop CPU's: https://www.pcmag.com/news/amid-layoffs-and-cpu-controversy-intel-postpones-innovation-event https://www.pcmag.com/news/asus-msi-release-motherboard-bios-updates-to-address-intel-cpu-bug
It's a bit vague to me, I wonder what exactly Qualcomm wants to buy. https://www.reuters.com/technology/...-chip-design-business-sources-say-2024-09-06/
