Technology

59534 readers

3209 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

1093

Intel's stock drops 30% overnight —company sheds $39 billion in market cap | As of now, Intel's market value is a fraction of Nvidia's worth and less than half of AMD's (www.tomshardware.com)

submitted 3 months ago by ForgottenFlux@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

275 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Intel's stock dropped around 30% overnight, shaving some $39 billion from the company's market capitalization since rumors of a pending layoff first emerged. The devastating results come after the chip giant reported a loss for the second quarter, complained about yield issues with the Meteor Lake CPU, provided a modest business outlook for the next few quarters, and announced plans to lay off 15,000 people worldwide.

When the NYSE closed on July 31, Intel's market capitalization was $130.86 billion. Then, a report about Intel's massive layoffs was published, and the company's market capitalization dropped sharply to $123.96 billion on August 1. Following Intel's financial report yesterday, the company's capitalization dropped to $91.86 billion. Essentially, Intel has lost half of its capitalization since January. As of now, Intel's market value is a fraction of Nvidia's worth and less than half of AMD's.

As Intel's actions look rather desperate, analysts believe that Intel's challenges are existential. "Intel's issues are now approaching the existential," Stacy Rasgon, an analyst with Bernstein, told Reuters.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] BombOmOm@lemmy.world 262 points 3 months ago (27 children)

It certainly doesn't help Intel has been intentionally selling defective product in the 13th and 14th gen lines. People are quite reasonably going to AMD more and more.

[–] jws_shadotak@sh.itjust.works 35 points 3 months ago (26 children)

Does AMD have anything to compete with Intel QSV? I'm looking to upgrade my Plex server and was looking at a newer Intel CPU.

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 55 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (8 children)

The latest AMD cpus do have transcoding, but Amd transcode isn't very good and isn't very compatible with Linux.

You can pick up an Intel A310 single slot GPU for $100 and it has AV1 encode, which is something that the igpu QSV doesn't have. Works very well in my Epyc motherboard with 76 pcie lanes. I definitely recommend going with an ATX 1st gen Epyc cpu+motherboard if you want something that can do NVMe raid.

[–] sanpo@sopuli.xyz 24 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Amd transcode isn’t very good and isn’t very compatible with Linux

It's compatible just fine. But the quality... well, it's not the worst, but definitely not the best quality.

[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 9 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Politely, not the worst compared to what, exactly?

It's way worse than qsv, nvenc, x264 or x265 which are basically the only hardware or cpu options you're likely to run into doing plex transcoding.

[–] sanpo@sopuli.xyz 4 points 3 months ago

I don't have QSV or NVENC hardware to compare, but AMD is perfectly fine in most cases.
I mostly noticed quality drop with very busy scenes and some scene transitions.
Outside of those the quality was acceptable.

I'd say on my setup it's comparable to software encoding with x264 veryfast preset.

And my GPU is 5 years old now, so I'm sure newer cards have improved.

[–] ag10n@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

QSV is a very good product, high-quality and efficient. It’s also very mature, lots of signage in large deployments. I’ve tried AMD’s AMF streaming and at lower bit-rates you get a lot more blocking. It’s fine but QSV has an edge.

https://www.pcworld.com/article/827992/tested-intel-arc-av1-video-encoder-vs-nvidia-amd.html

[–] schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business 4 points 3 months ago

Lower quality at any given bitrate was my experience too. For local stuff it didn't really matter: if I could do 3x the bitrate to get the same quality, then meh, who cares.

If you're streaming/doing shit over the internet/encoding for something like Youtube, though, it's uh, not a good tradeoff because you can't necessarily even make that tradeoff.

[–] jlh@lemmy.jlh.name 1 points 3 months ago

I think AMF is still faster/better quality than CPU transcoding, depending on the preset.

load more comments (6 replies)

load more comments (23 replies)