By: anon (anon.delete@this.anon.com), January 31, 2013 12:47 pm
Room: Moderated Discussions
Richard Cownie (tich.delete@this.pobox.com) on January 31, 2013 12:25 pm wrote:
> anon (anon.delete@this.anon.com) on January 31, 2013 6:45 am wrote:
> > By designing and manufacturing ARM cores?
> >
> > This is surely what they are going to do if the market revenue
> > gets large enough, and they fail to compete with x86.
>
> I don't doubt that Intel could design excellent ARM cores. However, I don't
> believe that they could design ARM cores with sufficient advantage over the
> competitors to command the high margins they get on many of their x86 cpu's.
> So that wouldn't give them enough profit to keep making the investments
> in fabs and R&D needed to stay far ahead.
>
Why not? If they already have manufacturing advantage, and they take ARM market share, ARM competitors now have less money to threaten Intel's lead. And they still have x86.
> anon (anon.delete@this.anon.com) on January 31, 2013 6:45 am wrote:
> > By designing and manufacturing ARM cores?
> >
> > This is surely what they are going to do if the market revenue
> > gets large enough, and they fail to compete with x86.
>
> I don't doubt that Intel could design excellent ARM cores. However, I don't
> believe that they could design ARM cores with sufficient advantage over the
> competitors to command the high margins they get on many of their x86 cpu's.
> So that wouldn't give them enough profit to keep making the investments
> in fabs and R&D needed to stay far ahead.
>
Why not? If they already have manufacturing advantage, and they take ARM market share, ARM competitors now have less money to threaten Intel's lead. And they still have x86.