CPUs


AMD Exits Dense Microserver Business, Ends SeaMicro Brand

AMD Exits Dense Microserver Business, Ends SeaMicro Brand

AMD’s Q1’15 earnings announcement just came out a bit ago, and while we’re still waiting for the analyst call to take place to get more details, there is one item we want to get to right away, and that’s the fate of AMD’s dense server business. As part of today’s earnings release, AMD has announced that they’re existing the dense server system business – operating under the SeaMicro brand – effective immediately.

AMD initially acquired SeaMicro back in 2012 for $334 million as part of their larger play into being an agile company, aiming to take a big chunk of what was expected to be a fast-growing market micro/dense server market. In the microserver model, servers are built using very large numbers of lower performance cores, making the servers leaner, more power efficient systems for tasks that involve large numbers of low-impact threads (think: web servers). This in turn mapped well to AMD’s processor designs, where both the Bulldozer and Cat families would be well suited for such a design, not to mention AMD’s future ARM based CPUs.

SeaMicro’s first product post-acquisition was the SM15000, a dense server design announced in late 2012 that offered either AMD “Piledriver” Opterons or Intel “Ivy Bridge” Xeon CPUs. However as it turns out that first design was also the last design; SeaMicro did not release any additional products prior to today’s announcement from AMD.

Jumping back to today, AMD’s announcement comes as the company is continuing to try to find a solid foothold as a semi-custom silicon company, to which it would appear that the SeaMicro business no longer fits into. AMD’s initial announcement does offer a bit of insight as to why they’re exiting the business – to “sharpen and simplify” what the company invests in –  and we’ll likely hear more on today’s call.

Meanwhile it’s worth noting that we haven’t heard anything from SeaMicro in some time now, so today’s announcement is perhaps not all that surprising. Still, AMD’s first ARM processors were set to ship this year – the Opteron A1100 – which would have been a good fit for the SeaMicro servers. However A1100 itself appears to be behind schedule at this time, as AMD has yet to bring A1100 to market beyond last year’s development kit.

Anyhow, as part of exiting the dense server business, AMD will be taking a $75 million dollar special charge, which is “primarily related to impairment of previously acquired intangible assets” and will include a $7 million cash payment. Meanwhile AMD’s announcement doesn’t say what will become of the SeaMicro team – at this point we’re not entirely sure how large it is after AMD’s most recent restructuring – though I wouldn’t be surprised if they at least rolled some of that expertise into future ARM server CPUs. As for the SeaMicro brand itself, with AMD’s exit the brand has been shuttered, and AMD has deactivated the SeaMicro website.

Update: Here are the prepared remarks from AMD’s CFO regarding SeaMicro

At the corporate level, we continue aligning larger portions of our R&D investments to take advantage of long-term growth opportunities across our EESC segment. As we prioritize our R&D investments and simplify our business, we made the decision in the first quarter to exit the dense server systems business as we increase investments in our server processor development. We retain the fabric technology as a part of our overall IP portfolio. We see very strong opportunities for next-generation, high-performance x86 and ARM processors for the enterprise, datacenter, and infrastructure markets and we will continue to invest strongly in these areas.

Intel Reports Q1 2015 Earnings: Lower PC Sales And Higher Data Center Revenues

Intel Reports Q1 2015 Earnings: Lower PC Sales And Higher Data Center Revenues

Intel released their Q1 2015 earnings today. The company posted revenues of $12.8 billion USD for the quarter which is down 13% from Q4 2014, and flat year-over-year. Gross Margin was 60.5%, which is up 0.9% over Q1 2014 and down 4.9% over last quarter. Operating Income came in at $2.6 billion, and Net Income was $2.0 billion, which was up 3% over Q1 2014 and down 46% as compared to their last quarter. Earnings per Share was $0.41, which is up 8% year-over-year and down 45% quarter-over-quarter.

There are a couple of notes to make about this year’s reporting structure. Last November it was made known that the Mobile division would merge with the PC Division. The Mobile division has long been a source of large operating losses mostly due to the contra revenue plan to boost Atom sales in tablets. It also should mean that mobile becomes as big of a priority for Intel as the PC CPU space, which should benefit the company in the long term with the push to lower power devices. For Q1 2015, Intel is no longer reporting the Mobile division as a separate reporting structure, and instead it will be combined into the Client Computing Group.

The new numbers will of course reflect this, so any year-over-year comparisons will also be compared with like-for-like data.

Intel Q1 2015 Financial Results (GAAP)
  Q1’2015 Q4’2014 Q1’2014
Revenue $12.8B $14.7B $12.8B
Operating Income $2.6B $4.5B $2.5B
Net Income $2.0B $3.7B $1.9B
Gross Margin 60.5% 65.4% 59.6%
Client Computing Group Revenue $7.4B -16% -8%
Data Center Group Revenue $3.7B -10% +19%
Internet of Things Revenue $533M -10% +11%
Software and Services Revenue $534M -4% -3%
All Other Revenue $615M 0% +13%

That being said, the Client Computing Group did not have an excellent quarter. Declining PC sales due to the slowing of corporate customers performing Windows 7 migrations has put a damper on this group. Revenue for the group was $7.4 billion, which is down 16% from last quarter, and down 8% from last year. Breaking the numbers down a bit further, desktop platform volumes were down 16% year-over-year, which is a pretty sharp decline. At the same time, the average selling price for desktop platforms went up 2% to help offset this loss. Notebook platforms on the other hand were up 3% year-over-year, but the average selling prices of notebook platforms went down 3%. Tablet volumes were up 45% as compared to Q1 2014. Compared to Q4 2014, the entire group had revenue down 16%, platform volumes down 18%, and average selling prices up 1%.

The Data Center Group had almost the polar opposite, with revenue of $3.7 billion which is up 19% year-over-year, with platform volumes up 15%, and average selling prices up 5%. Compared to Q4 2014, revenue was down 10% with volumes down 7% and average selling price also down 3%.

The Internet of Things group is still relatively small at Intel, but posted an 11% year-over-year growth with revenues now coming in at $533 million. This is a 10% drop as compared to Q4 2014.

Software and Services is roughly the same size of overall business as IoT, with revenues at $534 million, which was down 3% year-over-year and 4% quarter-over-quarter.

The “All Other” segment which includes non-volatile memory (NAND flash memory), SoCs for wearables and emerging computing, and corporate expenses had revenues of $615 million, up 13% year-over-year and flat quarter-over-quarter.

Intel bought back 26 million shares in Q1, meaning they have repurchased 203 million shares back since Q1 2014.

In Q2 we should start to see the new Atom chips come to market, and devices like the Surface 3 have already been confirmed to be running the latest 14 nm Atom chip. Also, there should be some talk of Skylake, which is the next Intel Core architecture, although details may be scarce until Q3.

On the financial side, Intel is forecasting revenue of $13.2 billion plus or minus $500 million for Q2, with a Gross Margin of 62%. For the full year, Intel is expecting revenue to remain flat.

Source: Intel

Intel & Cray Land Contract for 2 Dept. of Energy Supercomputers

Intel & Cray Land Contract for 2 Dept. of Energy Supercomputers

Late last year the United States Department of Energy kicked off the awards phase of their CORAL supercomputer upgrade project, which would see three of the DoE’s biggest national laboratories receive new supercomputers for their ongoing researc…

Analyzing Intel Core M Performance: How 5Y10 can beat 5Y71 & the OEMs’ Dilemma

A processor architect can battle between two major opposing principles. The one most of us seem to enjoy is performance, which when taken to the extreme exhibits an all-or-nothing approach. At the other end is low-power operation which has become the main focus of the laptop and notebook market where battery capacity and density is at a premium. The position in the middle of this is efficiency, trying to extract the best of performance and power consumption and provide a product at the end of the day which attempts to satisfy both.

Of course processor architects only have control up to the point where the chips leave the fab, at which point the final product design is in the hands of OEMs, who for various reasons will have their own product design goals. It’s this latter point that has resulted in an interesting situation developing around the Core M ecosystem, where due to OEM design goals we’ve seen the relative performance of Core M devices vary much more than usual. In our tests of some of the Core M notebooks since the beginning of the year, depending on the complexity of the test, the length of time it is running and the device it is in, we have seen cases where devices equipped with the lowest speed grades of the Core M processor are outperforming the highest speed grade processors in similar types of devices, an at-times surprising outcome to say the least.

AMD To Face Securities Fraud Lawsuit

AMD To Face Securities Fraud Lawsuit

In a bit of news that’s unfortunately not an April Fool’s joke, a US District Court has ruled that AMD must face claims from investors over potential securities fraud committed by the company.

At the heart of the matter is AMD’s L…