CPUs


Intel Announces Q1 2017 Financial Results: Record Quarter

Intel Announces Q1 2017 Financial Results: Record Quarter

Today Intel announced their earnings for Q1 of their 2017 fiscal year, and the results were good. Intel delivered record revenue for the quarter, of $14.8 billion, up from $13.7 billion a year ago. Intel is a company that loves their margins, and they were once again over 60% for the quarter, coming in at 61.8%, which is 2.5 percentage points higher year-over-year. Operating income was up 40% to $3.6 billion, and net income was up 45% to $3.0 billion, which resulted in earnings-per-share of $0.61 for the quarter, also up 45% from a year ago. This is even though Q1 2016 was 14 weeks, versus 13 weeks in 2017.

Intel Q1 2017 Financial Results (GAAP)
  Q1’2017 Q4’2016 Q1’2016
Revenue $14.8B $16.4B $13.7B
Operating Income $3.6B $4.5B $2.6B
Net Income $3.0B $3.6B $2.0B
Gross Margin 61.8% 60.9% 59.3%
Client Computing Group Revenue $7.976B -12.6% +5.7%
Data Center Group Revenue $4.232B -9.34% +5.8%
Internet of Things Revenue $721M -0.7% +10.8%
Non-Volatile Memory Solutions Group $866M +6.1% +55.5%
Intel Security Group $534M -2.9% -0.6%
Programmable Solutions Group $425M +1.2% +18.4%
All Other Revenue $42M -35.4% -16%

Intel’s Client Computing Group continued to have gains, with revenue for the quarter up 6% to $7.976 billion. Significantly for Intel, operating income for this segment jumped from $1.885 billion a year ago, to $3.031 billion this year. While we’ve seen the company forced to slow down its movement to smaller processes, the current 14nm node has been well refined and the Kaby Lake processors have been solid performers. The next generation 10nm node is looking very promising though, with Intel claiming 25% better performance and 45% lower power consumption versus Kaby Lake thanks to the density improvements.

The Data Center Group also had gains, with revenues up 6% year-over-year to $4.232 billion, although the growth has slowed somewhat. Operating income for the group was $1.487 billion for the quarter, down from $1.764 billion a year ago. This will be an interesting space to watch with increased competition in both the x86 and ARM space, but Intel will be releasing new Xeon chips as well with a change in branding.

The Internet of Things Group continued to show gains as well, with revenue up 11% year-over-year to $721 million, and up 35% since Q1 2015, so in two years they have seen some substantial growth in this segment.

Non-Volatile Memory Solutions Group had the largest jump in revenue, with revenue up 55% to $866 million. However, this group also saw an operating loss increase to $129 million, compared to a $95 million loss a year ago. This should be an exciting segment to watch though with Intel bringing their Optane products to market, with both the DC P4800X SSD and Optane caching memory. If you haven’t checked out those reviews yet, they are well worth the read, and 3D XPoint definitely brings some advantages even on a Gen 1 product.

Intel’s Security Group is showing its final mention in their earnings, since Intel’s divestiture of the group closed on April 3, 2017, and subsequently it will fall in to the “All Other” category starting next quarter. Revenue for this group was pretty flat, at $534 million, compared to $537 million a year ago. Operating income was up to $95 million though, from $85 million last year.

The Programable Solutions Group, which is Intel’s FPGA segment, had a revenue increase of 18% to 425 million, and an operating income of $92 million, compared to an operating loss of $200 million a year ago.

Finally, the All Other category had revenues of $42 million and an operating loss of $1.082 billion.

Looking towards next quarter, Intel is forecasting revenues of $14.4 billion, plus or minus $500 million, and a gross margin around 62%, give or take a couple of points.

Source: Intel

Skylake-SP Xeon List Published: Moving from E7/E5 Naming to Xeon Gold and Xeon Platinum

Skylake-SP Xeon List Published: Moving from E7/E5 Naming to Xeon Gold and Xeon Platinum

Presumably by accident, Intel this week has published a list of its upcoming processors that belong to the soon-to-launch Skylake Xeon families. The names were published by Intel in a PCN, or Product Change Notification, which makes it likely that this was an accidental disclosure.

In the PCN, it details that LGA3647 CPUs (which covers Xeon Phi processors and the upcoming Skylake Xeons) will have an arrow indicating which way processors should be oriented in the socket. It seems like an arbitrary PCN, just printing an arrow on a heat spreader, which makes this published list somewhat unexpected. But these names show the key parts of the Purley platforms for servers.

One of the poorly kept secrets in the industry over the last few weeks is that Intel is changing the nomenclature of its Xeon CPUs going forward. This will be a difficult change to explain, given that users are so familiar with the previous naming system, and the translation between old and new is not a simple one-to-one mapping. Skylake-SP thus introduces the new Xeon Gold and Xeon Platinum lineups for different markets of servers. We expect all these CPUs to be on LGA3647, given that the PCN seems to suggest that this singular print marking on the heatspreader was not on this socket design before.

Unfortunately, the published list does not have full CPU information, but we do get names and frequencies of 34 Skylake-SP processors (see details below) that will belong to the Xeon Gold and Xeon Platinum lineups, as well as the fact that these processors are designated with the H0 stepping. We might not see all these processors at launch (which at this time has still not officially been announced), and we expect Intel to expand the Xeon Gold/Platinum family with new models over the several quarters following the launch.

Based on the document, the initial Xeon Gold family will consist of 20 processors featuring 5000- and 6000-series model numbers. The Xeon Platinum lineup will feature 14 chips belonging to the 8000-series.

Basic Specifications of Intel Xeon Gold and Platinum CPUs
Model Freq.
(Base)
Product
Code
S-Spec
Xeon Platinum 8180M 2.5 GHz CD8067303192101 SR37T
Xeon Platinum 8180 CD8067303314400 SR377
Xeon Platinum 8176M 2.1 GHz CD8067303133605 SR37U
Xeon Platinum 8176 CD8067303314700 SR37A
Xeon Platinum 8170M CD8067303319201 SR3BD
Xeon Platinum 8170 CD8067303327601 SR37H
Xeon Platinum 8168 2.7 GHz CD8067303327701 SR37J
Xeon Platinum 8164 2.0 GHz CD8067303408800 SR3BB
Xeon Platinum 8160T 2.1 GHz CD8067303592800 SR3J6
Xeon Platinum 8160M CD8067303406600 SR3B8
Xeon Platinum 8160 CD8067303405600 SR3B0
Xeon Platinum 8158 3.0 GHz CD8067303406500 SR3B7
Xeon Platinum 8156 3.6 GHz CD8067303368800 SR3AV
Xeon Platinum 8153 2.0 GHz CD8067303408900 SR3BA
 
Xeon Gold 6154 3.0 GHz CD8067303592700 SR3J5
Xeon Gold 6152 2.1 GHz CD8067303406000 SR3B4
Xeon Gold 6150 2.7 GHz CD8067303328000 SR37K
Xeon Gold 6148 2.4 GHz CD8067303406200 SR3B6
Xeon Gold 6142M 2.6 GHz CD8067303405700 SR3B1
Xeon Gold 6142 2.6 GHz CD8067303405400 SR3AY
Xeon Gold 6140M 2.3 GHz CD8067303405500 SR3AZ
Xeon Gold 6140 2.3 GHz CD8067303405200 SR3AX
Xeon Gold 6138T 2.0 GHz CD8067303592900 SR3J7
Xeon Gold 6138 2.0 GHz CD8067303406100 SR3B5
Xeon Gold 6136 3.0 GHz CD8067303405800 SR3B2
Xeon Gold 6134M 3.2 GHz CD8067303330402 SR3AS
Xeon Gold 6134 3.2 GHz CD8067303330302 SR3AR
Xeon Gold 6132 2.6 GHz CD8067303592500 SR3J3
Xeon Gold 6130T 2.1 GHz CD8067303593000 SR3J8
Xeon Gold 6130 2.1 GHz CD8067303409000 SR3B9
Xeon Gold 6128 3.4 GHz CD8067303592600 SR3J4
Xeon Gold 6126T 2.6 GHz CD8067303593100 SR3J9
Xeon Gold 6126 2.6 GHz CD8067303405900 SR3B3
Xeon Gold 5122 3.6 GHz CD8067303330702 SR3AT

Most importantly, the PCN confirms that Intel is about to scrap its Xeon E5/E7 naming nomenclature for something different with the introduction of the Skylake-SP/EP processors. Instead of E5 and E7, Intel will call its CPUs for 2P and 4P/MP servers Xeon Gold and Xeon Platinum. Moreover, the feature-sets of chips aimed at different kinds of servers will also be different, just like today. The upcoming Xeon Gold CPUs will work in 2P configurations and will thus replace the existing Xeon E5-series. Meanwhile, it is logical to assume then the replacement for the Xeon E7 will be called the Xeon Platinum, and apart from higher maximum core count will also support various additional capabilities, including RAS features. We suspect that there will be more names than Gold and Platinum coming to market to cover other aspects of Intel’s product stack.

In the processor stack above, we also get T and M processors in the mix. T processors have historically been lower power processors, and this is likely still the case given that the T processors have lower frequencies than most of the rest of the CPUs. Some CPUs, like the Xeon Gold 6130 and 6130T, are at 2.0 GHz for both: this is likely relating to different turbo frequencies, but also the T product is binned for lower power. The M processors are somewhat of a mystery, as we’ve never had M on a processor before, except in mobile. Speculating a bit on our part, this could be a reference to MCDRAM, which is a feature we see on Xeon Phi processors. Although to be clear, we have nothing to suggest that Intel will be including MCDRAM on these parts, as the Xeon CPU die itself may be big and the MCDRAM silicon is also relatively sizeable. We suspect that the M processors will have a given feature or features in common, which might come at an extra expense in the final price tag.

In previous generations, Intel typically creates three different core designs for it’s latest Xeons: a low core count (LCC), medium/high core count (MCC/HCC, depending on the document), and an extreme core count (XCC) version. The XCC version has the highest amount of cores, the most cache, and costs the most, but typically the per-core frequency is low. Intel sometimes offers the XCC in a small core count configuration, but with a large cache, and something like the Xeon Platinum 8156 at 3.6 GHz most likely fits that description. One of the things that should seem obvious is that the naming of each processor is not linear with clock frequency. For example, the Gold 6150 runs at 2.7 GHz base, but the Gold 6152 runs at 2.1 GHz base. Using that fourth digit extensively means that we hope Intel has a strong and obvious way to describe which part of the CPU names mean specific things. At this point it is hard to see a specific pattern, given we do not know core counts.

Disclaimer: There’s a significant amount of information in the ecosystem about the upcoming Skylake-SP platform, mostly from leaks that we can’t personally confirm. So while we appreciate there is information out there, we’ve kept this analysis specifically to what is confirmed or could be inferred, as per AnandTech policy.

Intel Discontinues the Intel Developer Forum; IDF17 Cancelled

In a bit of breaking news this morning, it appears that Intel has decided to cancel their Intel Developer Forum tradeshow going forward, including this summer’s expected IDF17.

In an announcement posted on the IDF website, Intel has announced that IDF is no more, and that the entire IDF program is ending.

Intel has evolved its event portfolio and decided to retire the IDF program moving forward. Thank you for nearly 20 great years with the Intel Developer Forum! Intel has a number of resources available on intel.com, including a Resource and Design Center with documentation, software, and tools for designers, engineers, and developers. As always, our customers, partners, and developers should reach out to their Intel representative with questions.

Previously, Intel had stated that there would not be an IDF in China this year. However an IDF was still expected in the US, albeit with a “new format.” Prior to today’s update, Intel’s IDF page stated the following (as can be seen on this cached copy of the page).

We are making changes to the Intel Developer Forum. This fall the event in San Francisco will have a new format and we will not be hosting an event in China. More details to come soon.

Meanwhile the official Moscone Center Calendar had (and still has) Intel reserving Moscone West from August 15th through the 17th.

IDF has been Intel’s yearly home to major product announcements. This has spanned from CPU announcements like Skylake and Kaby Lake, to storage products like Optane, to networking fabrics like Omni-Path. So the cancellation of IDF means that Intel no longer has a (currently scheduled) venue to announce new products and update the public and investors on their plans. Though what’s more interesting is how this will affect developers (both presenting and attending), who were the heart and soul of the show.

While it seems highly unlikely that Intel is doing away with trade shows and launch events entirely, it’s clear that something is afoot at Intel, and that as a result the traditional IDF is gone. With Intel’s product roadmap becoming increasingly elongated and less aligned to a yearly cadence, a yearly tradeshow is obviously a harder event to hold and justify. But what will replace their combination trade show and venue for product announcements remains to be seen.

We’ve reached out to Intel for more information, and will update this story if we hear anything further.

 

Update 13:26 ET (Ian): I just got off the phone with Intel, discussing why IDF is being cancelled. The main reason I was given is that Intel has been changing rapidly over the last two-to-three years, especially as they are changing from a PC-centric company to a data-centric company. With the rise of AI, FPGAs, Optane, IoT, wireless comms, automotive, and the other new areas that Intel is moving into, Intel felt that IDF no longer fills the need when it comes to giving out information. As a result, the decision has been made to find new ways to communicate with the audience (media, developers and companies) and the ecosystem with targeted events. These will be like the recent AI Day or Manufacturing Day, or be connected to partner events, or involve separate geocentric events. So rather than have one big melee on everything, Intel is set to split its message across several different areas in the hope that it accurately digs deep enough into every area. I was told that Intel wants to find a better way to present the experiences in each of the fields, and this is the way to do that.

Personally, I feel the loss of an event like IDF is frustrating. Here was an annual event, usually held around the same time each year, that went deep into how Intel is pushing their portfolio in the PC space. In the last couple of years, the event expanded into IoT and automotive, and attendances kept rising (despite some of the hardware talks being attended by six people – trust me it was a fun talk nonetheless). With Intel deciding to move to a multitude of different events, I can understand the need to focus on specific parts at each event – if you want to deep on AI, hold an AI event; if you want to go deep on cloud computing, hold a Cloud Day. However, this gives Intel more opportunities to have a disconnected message, and not speak as one, especially if a particular event is split based on region. It also makes it harder to plan from our side, because undoubtedly we have to travel to an event at a few weeks notice that might occur the same time as a holiday that was paid for six months ago. IDF ensured regularity – there were keynotes on the important topics, and it was a chance for Intel to lay all the high-end cards on the table (and have everyone there to talk to). As noted, Intel also removed IDF Shenzhen from the event schedule. If Intel now plans to have something like an ‘x86 developer conference’ and have it held on the same day at different global locations, that only adds to the logistical complexity, and splits the key members of the team giving the talk(s) or answering the questions. Again, I can see Intel’s reasoning for wanting to focus given the spectrum of markets it is now moving into, but IDF will be missed.

Intel Discontinues the Intel Developer Forum; IDF17 Cancelled

In a bit of breaking news this morning, it appears that Intel has decided to cancel their Intel Developer Forum tradeshow going forward, including this summer’s expected IDF17.

In an announcement posted on the IDF website, Intel has announced that IDF is no more, and that the entire IDF program is ending.

Intel has evolved its event portfolio and decided to retire the IDF program moving forward. Thank you for nearly 20 great years with the Intel Developer Forum! Intel has a number of resources available on intel.com, including a Resource and Design Center with documentation, software, and tools for designers, engineers, and developers. As always, our customers, partners, and developers should reach out to their Intel representative with questions.

Previously, Intel had stated that there would not be an IDF in China this year. However an IDF was still expected in the US, albeit with a “new format.” Prior to today’s update, Intel’s IDF page stated the following (as can be seen on this cached copy of the page).

We are making changes to the Intel Developer Forum. This fall the event in San Francisco will have a new format and we will not be hosting an event in China. More details to come soon.

Meanwhile the official Moscone Center Calendar had (and still has) Intel reserving Moscone West from August 15th through the 17th.

IDF has been Intel’s yearly home to major product announcements. This has spanned from CPU announcements like Skylake and Kaby Lake, to storage products like Optane, to networking fabrics like Omni-Path. So the cancellation of IDF means that Intel no longer has a (currently scheduled) venue to announce new products and update the public and investors on their plans. Though what’s more interesting is how this will affect developers (both presenting and attending), who were the heart and soul of the show.

While it seems highly unlikely that Intel is doing away with trade shows and launch events entirely, it’s clear that something is afoot at Intel, and that as a result the traditional IDF is gone. With Intel’s product roadmap becoming increasingly elongated and less aligned to a yearly cadence, a yearly tradeshow is obviously a harder event to hold and justify. But what will replace their combination trade show and venue for product announcements remains to be seen.

We’ve reached out to Intel for more information, and will update this story if we hear anything further.

 

Update 13:26 ET (Ian): I just got off the phone with Intel, discussing why IDF is being cancelled. The main reason I was given is that Intel has been changing rapidly over the last two-to-three years, especially as they are changing from a PC-centric company to a data-centric company. With the rise of AI, FPGAs, Optane, IoT, wireless comms, automotive, and the other new areas that Intel is moving into, Intel felt that IDF no longer fills the need when it comes to giving out information. As a result, the decision has been made to find new ways to communicate with the audience (media, developers and companies) and the ecosystem with targeted events. These will be like the recent AI Day or Manufacturing Day, or be connected to partner events, or involve separate geocentric events. So rather than have one big melee on everything, Intel is set to split its message across several different areas in the hope that it accurately digs deep enough into every area. I was told that Intel wants to find a better way to present the experiences in each of the fields, and this is the way to do that.

Personally, I feel the loss of an event like IDF is frustrating. Here was an annual event, usually held around the same time each year, that went deep into how Intel is pushing their portfolio in the PC space. In the last couple of years, the event expanded into IoT and automotive, and attendances kept rising (despite some of the hardware talks being attended by six people – trust me it was a fun talk nonetheless). With Intel deciding to move to a multitude of different events, I can understand the need to focus on specific parts at each event – if you want to deep on AI, hold an AI event; if you want to go deep on cloud computing, hold a Cloud Day. However, this gives Intel more opportunities to have a disconnected message, and not speak as one, especially if a particular event is split based on region. It also makes it harder to plan from our side, because undoubtedly we have to travel to an event at a few weeks notice that might occur the same time as a holiday that was paid for six months ago. IDF ensured regularity – there were keynotes on the important topics, and it was a chance for Intel to lay all the high-end cards on the table (and have everyone there to talk to). As noted, Intel also removed IDF Shenzhen from the event schedule. If Intel now plans to have something like an ‘x86 developer conference’ and have it held on the same day at different global locations, that only adds to the logistical complexity, and splits the key members of the team giving the talk(s) or answering the questions. Again, I can see Intel’s reasoning for wanting to focus given the spectrum of markets it is now moving into, but IDF will be missed.

Intel Discontinues the Intel Developer Forum; IDF17 Cancelled

In a bit of breaking news this morning, it appears that Intel has decided to cancel their Intel Developer Forum tradeshow going forward, including this summer’s expected IDF17.

In an announcement posted on the IDF website, Intel has announced that IDF is no more, and that the entire IDF program is ending.

Intel has evolved its event portfolio and decided to retire the IDF program moving forward. Thank you for nearly 20 great years with the Intel Developer Forum! Intel has a number of resources available on intel.com, including a Resource and Design Center with documentation, software, and tools for designers, engineers, and developers. As always, our customers, partners, and developers should reach out to their Intel representative with questions.

Previously, Intel had stated that there would not be an IDF in China this year. However an IDF was still expected in the US, albeit with a “new format.” Prior to today’s update, Intel’s IDF page stated the following (as can be seen on this cached copy of the page).

We are making changes to the Intel Developer Forum. This fall the event in San Francisco will have a new format and we will not be hosting an event in China. More details to come soon.

Meanwhile the official Moscone Center Calendar had (and still has) Intel reserving Moscone West from August 15th through the 17th.

IDF has been Intel’s yearly home to major product announcements. This has spanned from CPU announcements like Skylake and Kaby Lake, to storage products like Optane, to networking fabrics like Omni-Path. So the cancellation of IDF means that Intel no longer has a (currently scheduled) venue to announce new products and update the public and investors on their plans. Though what’s more interesting is how this will affect developers (both presenting and attending), who were the heart and soul of the show.

While it seems highly unlikely that Intel is doing away with trade shows and launch events entirely, it’s clear that something is afoot at Intel, and that as a result the traditional IDF is gone. With Intel’s product roadmap becoming increasingly elongated and less aligned to a yearly cadence, a yearly tradeshow is obviously a harder event to hold and justify. But what will replace their combination trade show and venue for product announcements remains to be seen.

We’ve reached out to Intel for more information, and will update this story if we hear anything further.

 

Update 13:26 ET (Ian): I just got off the phone with Intel, discussing why IDF is being cancelled. The main reason I was given is that Intel has been changing rapidly over the last two-to-three years, especially as they are changing from a PC-centric company to a data-centric company. With the rise of AI, FPGAs, Optane, IoT, wireless comms, automotive, and the other new areas that Intel is moving into, Intel felt that IDF no longer fills the need when it comes to giving out information. As a result, the decision has been made to find new ways to communicate with the audience (media, developers and companies) and the ecosystem with targeted events. These will be like the recent AI Day or Manufacturing Day, or be connected to partner events, or involve separate geocentric events. So rather than have one big melee on everything, Intel is set to split its message across several different areas in the hope that it accurately digs deep enough into every area. I was told that Intel wants to find a better way to present the experiences in each of the fields, and this is the way to do that.

Personally, I feel the loss of an event like IDF is frustrating. Here was an annual event, usually held around the same time each year, that went deep into how Intel is pushing their portfolio in the PC space. In the last couple of years, the event expanded into IoT and automotive, and attendances kept rising (despite some of the hardware talks being attended by six people – trust me it was a fun talk nonetheless). With Intel deciding to move to a multitude of different events, I can understand the need to focus on specific parts at each event – if you want to deep on AI, hold an AI event; if you want to go deep on cloud computing, hold a Cloud Day. However, this gives Intel more opportunities to have a disconnected message, and not speak as one, especially if a particular event is split based on region. It also makes it harder to plan from our side, because undoubtedly we have to travel to an event at a few weeks notice that might occur the same time as a holiday that was paid for six months ago. IDF ensured regularity – there were keynotes on the important topics, and it was a chance for Intel to lay all the high-end cards on the table (and have everyone there to talk to). As noted, Intel also removed IDF Shenzhen from the event schedule. If Intel now plans to have something like an ‘x86 developer conference’ and have it held on the same day at different global locations, that only adds to the logistical complexity, and splits the key members of the team giving the talk(s) or answering the questions. Again, I can see Intel’s reasoning for wanting to focus given the spectrum of markets it is now moving into, but IDF will be missed.