Qualcomm reportedly delivers takeover offer to Intel

It's a rumor with no merit. Qualcomm couldn't afford them. It would be at least a $150billon acquisition. Only a tiny handful of companies could afford that.

Not even the source of the article presents a source. It's just a "they did it believe us".
 
It's a rumor with no merit. Qualcomm couldn't afford them. It would be at least a $150billon acquisition. Only a tiny handful of companies could afford that.

Not even the source of the article presents a source. It's just a "they did it believe us".

How so?...
 
It's a rumor with no merit. Qualcomm couldn't afford them. It would be at least a $150billon acquisition. Only a tiny handful of companies could afford that.

Not even the source of the article presents a source. It's just a "they did it believe us".

Elon Musk could buy it...











...said every Musk fanboi on X.
 
Well Qualcomms networth themselves is around 190billion. Thing is its 65% owned by investors. So they might have the financial clout to put an offer in. I can't see Intel ever taking the bait though. Company is too big to be bought out. I dont see a CEO or board of shareholders of such a monstrous corporation ever doing it.
 
Regardless of who would ever try to buy intel it'd never be allowed same as nvidia trying to obtain arm here however for very different reasons US Government wouldn't allow it if things were ever that dire that intel needed to sell I could guarantee the US government would take it over too much of an ongoing concern and half the reason intel has had so much government aid in different ways.

I doubt any offer of any note was made if it included the fabs your looking at a vastly higher sum than you'd think.

I'd actually say amd would be a more likely buyer in this case but nah I doubt that was if it happened a serious offer.
 
No one already in the industry would ever be allowed to buy Intel unless it was splintered off and certain divisions sold to other corporations.

If an IT firm came alone who for arguments sakes specialised in Anti virus software.. their chances are stronger. No chance of monopoly control.

I honestly wish that companies like Cyrix still existed and had taken a healthy chunk in the CPU market. Maybe our prices would not be so scandalous.
 
Can't see it happening as Intel is 1 of Israel's biggest money makers what with 1 of Intel's main R&D branches being there and they come up with some ingenious stuff.

If Qualcomm took over any operations in and around Kiryat Gat would be shutdown and moved elsewhere and I highly doubt people inside Intel want that.
 
I don't think people realize how much assets/liquid/cash Intel has. The fabless side of their business alone is worth at least $100 billion with all their technology and patents let alone companies they've gobbled up. Add in the fab side and including all the equipment or whatnot you're looking at another $100 billion. This company has hit a bump in its otherwise generally successful history.

Not only that they have pretty much kept or beaten the SP500 average earnings for years. Intel are no where close to selling.


I think to get Intel to even think about selling the offer would need to be no less than $250 billion
 
Last edited:
Double that and then your in the right ballpark.

They not going anywhere atm they will bounce back this isnt so out of the norm in the industry isnt not heading to bfg land anytime soon.

Hell i even picked up a 12th gen i3 laptop a month back and boosted its ram to 20gb as much as id prefered a ryzen 5 laptop i didn't see anything clise to the price i paid.

So as unlikely for me to buy anything intel it goes deeper as another thing happened i even got an asus one as it was £200 off back to school deal.

So generally speaking price alone vs spec at that price dictated my choice regardless of how id never normally want either brand.

Sure its only uhd graphics but it can actually game pretty well even play cyberpunk 2077 on it sure compromises are made but my use case is playstation remote play and it certainly manages that with zero issue.

The key thing intel need to chsnge in a big way is focusing on what people want and cutting out other ideas as half the issues they have are being a step behind on things lately.

The whole AI thing in there mind is mega money but reality where is there evo system for it even amd is doing a better job slowly in this sense and when it comes to ai nvidia have that market.

Just my general though is unless you have something really viable then why bother wasting money on it, then with gpu market you started you invested if you decide to stop its a waste but make something stronger and sort it out.

If they don't change their approch over the next decade they will be 50% worse off and in all honesty thats exactly where i see it going for them.

Itll not be a bfg moment even at that point but i dont see the current head lasting i honestly don't unless some huge change.

The worst part for intel is who exactly is going to turn things around and in all truth i honestly think they don't know but losing keller was a big hit to them regardless of how they spin it cause hes the sort whole completely an ark guy engineer would do a better job than they have had in years cause youd st least see big things getting done rather than stagnation.

How some big finance company hasnt given him a budget to just freely make something and a company for it baffles me.

The reason nvidia and amd are doing well is simply the head directing and discussing correctly its important okay they don't do everything but they lead the course and direction of a company.

Intel atm is a company that will bounce back they just seem like most extremely intrested in trends without substance or a real direction.

Sure they have what they need to do it and even most things they do arent bad but they are seeking that next thing.

My question is will they have learned anything or will it be a return too stagnated production of 5% per year when they do.

Cause between sandy bridge and 9th gen there was no leaps at all in my view and while i honestly loved the 2500k i had no option in my mind until ryzen 1700 and if intel doesn't see the flaw in that they are doomed to repeat it a massive issue to them.

Cause oh i went from 1700 too 5800x and i have options to me.

And generally intel isnt one of them more likely to buy an nvidia gpu that an intel desktop cpu, thats just me as a general consumer making my own choices.

But there big blurb like normal not around as much, but the intel laptop very decent for the cost nothing special does what i need.

But if a ryzen of similar performance had been at the same price i 100% guarantee id have got the ryzen.

Thats intels biggest issue now when amd start knocking out strix and strix halo laptops intel are in trouble they are going to lose a similar % of that market share and that must have them highly concerned.
 
Double that and then your in the right ballpark.

My question is will they have learned anything or will it be a return too stagnated production of 5% per year when they do.

Cause between sandy bridge and 9th gen there was no leaps at all in my view and while i honestly loved the 2500k i had no option in my mind until ryzen 1700 and if intel doesn't see the flaw in that they are doomed to repeat it a massive issue to them.

That's not what happened nor is it what's happening!

If you remember when Ryzen was at it's infancy everyone was talking about TSMC's 7nm node and how it would be a game changer and all, around this same time Intel was boasting how their 10nm process was better then what TSMC's 7nm would be, they had higher density and better clocks and all that.

But you might also remember that Intel's 10nm node was already delayed by years at this point! And it kept being delayed untill TSMC's surpassed it, and then it didn't matter anymore and Intel just gave up on it, changed their naming scheme and moved on to their next node.

You see the problem wasn't that Intel didn't want to make better CPUs, the problem was that way back when, they decided they would try to make better nodes on existing machines! Because they didn't want to spend on new ASML machines, and that's literally all there is to it! They took a risk believing they could make better nodes without buying new, more advanced lithography machines, and they actually eventually did it. It just took so long and cost so much and had such terrible yields that it didn't matter in the end.

But now Intel has learned it's lesson and they secured all the next-generatin High-NA EUV machines from ASML for the next few years (They literally acquired everything ASML could possibly produce and with this move Intel has taken TSMC out of the game for at least a few years)

Now TSMC can still bring new nodes with the machines they curretly have but once intel has High-NA EUV up and running they will have an advantage.

You see, what actually determines hardware performance isn't the architecture, it's the process node, if you want to make a big difference with architecture alone, you will need many years improving little by little untill you reach a meaningful improvement.

The only thing AMD brought with Ryzen that makes you feel like there's plenty room for improvement is a really large stack of products you can go from a 4 core Ryzen 3, all the way up to a 16 core Ryzen 9, and you also have x3d around. But if you actually look at the performane improvement from generation to generation it isn't actually much better than waht Intel had back when they were dominating and it's mostly what's expected from the node process jump, with little in the form of architecture that's becasue they where just moving slowly throught the not very meaningful recent process nodes from TSMC. Just the same as Intel's back then they were stuck with their existing machines, each node were just slightly better than the previous one, to the point they stopped even giving them new numbers and just started placing +++++ in front of it.

Had intel bought EUV machines and started planning EUV nodes back around their 5th gen, they would be in a way better position now, but that's what happened, it isn't that they didn't want to move on, they just couldnt, becasue management told them, they wouldn't get shiny new toys to play with and make better CPUs.

Also, I'm not so sure AMD's Strix Halo will do much, they are already delaying it, they might just make a paper launch of it, AMD really seems to be leaving the consumer market behind, especially on mobile devices, they really do'nt seem to care, their current lineup is leterally worse than the previous one, and companies are complaining they don't get much volume of chips from AMD, and that's ignoring the fact that Stix Halo won't necessarily beat Intel's Core Ultra 200s, they are beasts, I've been talking with friends for years that eventualyl we would get RAM chips in the CPUs for better integrated graphics performance, and altough Apple did it first, Intel has taken the lead and brought it to the windows machines before AMD, while bringing their new Xe architecture as well, so I predict Intel to win this one, even if they lose the power batte they will still win becasue you'll actaulyl be able to buy the intel laptops, while AMD's Strix Halo machines will be too expensive and forever out of stock.

Oh yeah and evidencing how AMD isn't actually trying too hard to improve Ryzen, Intel has a new interconnect ready while AMD is still struggling with Infinity Fabric that was clearly limited since the first iteration, back then I tought they would soon introduce a new solution but no, they are just patching it up bit by bit, intead of developing a better solution, I mean, they were first to market with some kind with 3D chip implementation, but they just seem to have stopped there, at least I haven't heard of any new AMD scientific paper on the matter while Intel is full steam ahead with 3D interconects.
 
Last edited:
I dont fully agree or disagree here in all aspects. However i was on a q6600 before the 2500k they are both good chips so i know they will bounce back.

Thing is the reason why amd started to win and bounce back take into account there share price pre ryzen was $2 in all essential purposes they were barely alive.

The reason thou was 8 core chip not like fx fakery at a consumer price Intel were still charging 1k for that kind of chip at the time. So while all your points have validity the simple fact in my view as a consumer not even enthusiast fully is that it was a big swing and its that reason.

Amd doubled down on that in everyway possible hence 16/32 in consumer but there amd took time on sorting things out and mindshare in the server market but its changed hasnt it and itll take just as long to swing back again cause server people are way harder to impress than any of us cause its purely about the numbers in all ways.

Intel of course will bounce back and while im happy with the budget laptop id still have prefered a ryzen simply due to gfx intel are way behind in that department xe ark is 3 years old and nothing new and where is the battlemage its way behind and not be competitive with 5k or rdna4 let alone the key improvements coming on amd and obviously nvidias chiplet cause essentially nvidia is way on it now.

So reality in my view your right and wrong cause its viewpoint.

See other mistakes intel made paid benchmarks hmm ?
Even currently with the electrical damage they covered up and blamed there partners over the 13, 14th gen chips.

So intel made plenty of mistakes over the years in my view you could if you wanted say it was the things you did and its certainly part of it but you cant ignore the huge amount of other reasons.

The server companies care about one thing cost performance in there use case the fact Intel lost a huge chunck this year of market share says enough cause them companies don't move for no reason.

Ryzen was the change $2 a share now $155 epic is where the money is and now i think with udna all that side will get some focus.

The other thing i never liked about intel is using clock speed numbers as a marketing tool as anyone should understand comparing that is pointless its like comparing rev levels on a car the only part that matters is the performance end of story, overclocking was a big thing for a long time these days not so much and once i understood amds way it works its simple and im not actually doing much at all for it, kinda took the fun out of things in some ways.

See enthusiast will always want or go halo me ill go my budget and at the moment value is there hence the gaps, in my view intel need that next thing but in order to do it and then not slip back into old ways well i don't see the whole pie tasting good.

I think the strixx laptops will do well were soon find out, but there like anything on the forum over the years always passion in different ways on all sides but that what the forum has been for to debate discussion.

So i don't disagree thou i also don't fully agree.

Also you awnsered your own question in a way companies are complaining they don't get enough chip volume meaning they want more right ?

Idk its not black and white but intel is definitely trying to get on trends and hit a flow again where as nvidia are smart no denying it cause not only they riding the wave they hit it at the right time and are ready far better eco system than the rest, amd considering where they were to where they are now the key issue i see for them is too many products they need to reduce the amount simple for production time but they have foot in door arcoss the board i think they needed the volume of products to make the revenue if they can slim it down and streamline it i think itll do them better. Thou maybe its a cost thing with binning on chiplets ect.

Just why make the 6 and 12 core chips at all just make 8 and 16 end of in my view a way easier thing to market. If they done that across the board rather than trying to fill every gap i just think it would overall be better for them.
 
Last edited:
I don't think people realize how much assets/liquid/cash Intel has. The fabless side of their business alone is worth at least $100 billion with all their technology and patents let alone companies they've gobbled up. Add in the fab side and including all the equipment or whatnot you're looking at another $100 billion. This company has hit a bump in its otherwise generally successful history.

Not only that they have pretty much kept or beaten the SP500 average earnings for years. Intel are no where close to selling.


I think to get Intel to even think about selling the offer would need to be no less than $250 billion

For intel to sell. They would need to suddenly start bleeding money. And they could literally haemorrhage cash for years and still survive comfortably.
 
Back
Top