Wednesday, May 3rd 2017

Samsung Could Become Top Chipmaker in 2Q17, Dethrone Intel

Samsung could be on the verge of a historic dethroning of Intel as the dominant chipmaker in the IC world, if a recent report from IC Insights is to be believed. The report shows Samsung actually exceeding Intel's semiconductor sales in 2Q 2017, no doubt spurred on by mobile market growth and the proliferation of ARM based SOCs manufactured by Samsung.

Intel has held the dominant position for nearly a quarter century as its x86 architecture powered most PCs and notebooks/netbooks since 1993. The number of components they sell is not just limited to CPUs either: Intel is a provider of chips for everything from networking to thermal sensors, for Samsung to compete with such a giant in the semiconductor market at all (let alone exceed their sales) is quite a feat indeed.
IC Insights also notes that Samsung's sales are benefiting majorly from the recent increase in NAND/DRAM prices, which it expects to "cool" (drop) later this year. If true, this may be a temporary crown for Samsung, but regardless, it is quite an achievement for the South Korean Electronics group.

The report itself may be accessed in the source link. Source: IC Insights
Add your own comment

14 Comments on Samsung Could Become Top Chipmaker in 2Q17, Dethrone Intel

#1
Solaris17
Dainty Moderator
I can easily believe that samsung in sheer numbers can beat intel, but it doesn't mean the same thing for us. Atleast not yet.
Posted on Reply
#2
R-T-B
Solaris17 said:
I can easily believe that samsung in sheer numbers can beat intel, but it doesn't mean the same thing for us. Atleast not yet.
Well, it's sheer dollars here rather than numbers/quantities. But yes, that's not what we look at as techies.
Posted on Reply
#4
m1dg3t
No wonder Trump wants to start s#it on the peninsula. :rolleyes:

Considering Intels market penetration this would indeed be quite the feat for Samsung.
Posted on Reply
#5
1c3d0g
Top chipmaker in SALES. Big difference! Although word on the street is that Samsung is quite close to 10nm volume manufacturing, which should worry Intel deeply.
Posted on Reply
#6
HopelesslyFaithful
1c3d0g said:
Top chipmaker in SALES. Big difference! Although word on the street is that Samsung is quite close to 10nm volume manufacturing, which should worry Intel deeply.
No it wont. Sammy 10nm is like intel 14nm. Intel measurements are 100% accurate and how your supposed to measure. Most other places measure wrong for marketing purposes by measure something that isn't accurate of true density and size.

Intels 10nm is like Sammy 7nm.

If intel really wanted to destroy the other companies it could if it wanted to make its own custom ARM chips and FAB them at their process which is always a year a head if not more than the other companies.
Posted on Reply
#7
evernessince
HopelesslyFaithful said:
No it wont. Sammy 10nm is like intel 14nm. Intel measurements are 100% accurate and how your supposed to measure. Most other places measure wrong for marketing purposes by measure something that isn't accurate of true density and size.

Intels 10nm is like Sammy 7nm.

If intel really wanted to destroy the other companies it could if it wanted to make its own custom ARM chips and FAB them at their process which is always a year a head if not more than the other companies.
Um, not it can't. You are seriously suggesting that Intel gave up billions of the mobile market because it doesn't want to. Their shareholders would bitch slap them.
Posted on Reply
#8
lexluthermiester
evernessince said:
Um, not it can't. You are seriously suggesting that Intel gave up billions of the mobile market because it doesn't want to. Their shareholders would bitch slap them.
Exactly what I was thinking. Although, Intel does have the ability to mass fab at 12nm. While that extra 2nm might not make a big difference in the desktop/laptop market, it would have a noticeable impact in the mobile platforms. And Intel does have maker rights to ARM architecture IC's.

The real problem is that Intel may not be sure which direction to go. With negative over-all public reaction to Microsoft products in the past few years, including Windows 10, people are flocking to non-Microsoft mobile platforms as a primary form-factor for daily computing. As a result the PC market is continuing to take a hit. Alternative OS's are gaining a foot hold a lot faster than ever before. And Microsoft is becoming more irrelevant by the day. If this trend continues, and it's showing no signs of slowing down, Intel may have to re-invent itself to adapt. Samsung has no such limitation as it's already in a dominant position in the mobile market.

This is a very uncertain time for Intel and even AMD as they are both losing market share to mobile platforms the world over. And Microsoft is partly to blame because of their very unpopular, unethical and in some places, unlawful privacy violations. People are unwilling to trust Microsoft anymore and they're unwilling to trust anything with the Microsoft/Windows name on it regardless of the brand name on the box. I'm seeing this literally all over the world[at least where I travel].
Posted on Reply
#9
Vayra86
lexluthermiester said:
Exactly what I was thinking. Although, Intel does have the ability to mass fab at 12nm. While that extra 2nm might not make a big difference in the desktop/laptop market, it would have a noticeable impact in the mobile platforms. And Intel does have maker rights to ARM architecture IC's.

The real problem is that Intel may not be sure which direction to go. With negative over-all public reaction to Microsoft products in the past few years, including Windows 10, people are flocking to non-Microsoft mobile platforms as a primary form-factor for daily computing. As a result the PC market is continuing to take a hit. Alternative OS's are gaining a foot hold a lot faster than ever before. And Microsoft is becoming more irrelevant by the day. If this trend continues, and it's showing no signs of slowing down, Intel may have to re-invent itself to adapt. Samsung has no such limitation as it's already in a dominant position in the mobile market.

This is a very uncertain time for Intel and even AMD as they are both losing market share to mobile platforms the world over. And Microsoft is partly to blame because of their very unpopular, unethical and in some places, unlawful privacy violations. People are unwilling to trust Microsoft anymore and they're unwilling to trust anything with the Microsoft/Windows name on it regardless of the brand name on the box. I'm seeing this literally all over the world[at least where I travel].
At least you got the one half right, but the other, makes no sense. People move to mobile systems, and the marketplace is saturated by now. Has nothing to do with Windows or x86 at all, and everything with form factor and usage of the device. If it were Windows as the big problem, people would've embraced Linux. Instead, they embrace Linux on their phone (Android). And that is also why MS wants to push Windows to 'all devices'.
Posted on Reply
#10
lexluthermiester
Vayra86 said:
At least you got the one half right, but the other, makes no sense.
No, I got things spot on.

Vayra86 said:
People move to mobile systems, and the marketplace is saturated by now.
Except that the mobile market is continuing to grow at a rate exactly that of the shrinkage of the PC market. Coincidence you say? Rubbish.

Vayra86 said:
Has nothing to do with Windows or x86 at all, and everything with form factor and usage of the device. If it were Windows as the big problem, people would've embraced Linux. Instead, they embrace Linux on their phone (Android).
You missed the point entirely whilst simultaneously contradicting yourself. People HAVE replaced Windows with Linux[Android] and Unix[iOS]. They're replacing PC's with Phones, Phablet's and Tablets and they're using them as their primary computing devices. There are now more devices in the world running Android than all versions of Windows combined. Microsoft hasn't been replaced as the top OS producer since the late 1980's, and then only for a short time. I know, I was there.

Vayra86 said:
And that is also why MS wants to push Windows to 'all devices'.
And look at how well received that push is. Microsoft knows they're being pushed out of the market and the public is not sad to see them go, thus the colossal failure of Windows 8/8.1, Windows Phone and Windows 10 on phones. They're getting desperate as evidenced by all the nonsense they keep trying, and failing, to shove down our throats.

I've been in this industry since 1980 and have seen all of the ebb and flow of technological trends. Some worked, some didn't. Companies have come and gone. Even the once mighty IBM, who created the PC standard, is no longer around[the PC market]. Very few are. Microsoft has lost touch with it's consumer base. Perhaps they're not irrelevant yet, but if they don't drastically change their business model and get back in touch with market needs, they soon will be. It's only a matter of time, and they already have one foot in the grave, regardless of their profit declarations. IBM and Cryix had record profit years even as they were on the way out.

Sorry, this is reality. You don't have to like it, but it is what it is.
Posted on Reply
#11
Prima.Vera
Is only natural when you have the full support of your government and more than that. The entire SK economy is based on Samsung's financial decisions.
Also if someone can do some digging to see how much taxes are paying Samsung and then compare it to Intel's ;)
Posted on Reply
#12
Vayra86
lexluthermiester said:
No, I got things spot on.


Except that the mobile market is continuing to grow at a rate exactly that of the shrinkage of the PC market. Coincidence you say? Rubbish.


You missed the point entirely whilst simultaneously contradicting yourself. People HAVE replaced Windows with Linux[Android] and Unix[iOS]. They're replacing PC's with Phones, Phablet's and Tablets and they're using them as their primary computing devices. There are now more devices in the world running Android than all versions of Windows combined. Microsoft hasn't been replaced as the top OS producer since the late 1980's, and then only for a short time. I know, I was there.


And look at how well received that push is. Microsoft knows they're being pushed out of the market and the public is not sad to see them go, thus the colossal failure of Windows 8/8.1, Windows Phone and Windows 10 on phones. They're getting desperate as evidenced by all the nonsense they keep trying, and failing, to shove down our throats.

I've been in this industry since 1980 and have seen all of the ebb and flow of technological trends. Some worked, some didn't. Companies have come and gone. Even the once mighty IBM, who created the PC standard, is no longer around[the PC market]. Very few are. Microsoft has lost touch with it's consumer base. Perhaps they're not irrelevant yet, but if they don't drastically change their business model and get back in touch with market needs, they soon will be. It's only a matter of time, and they already have one foot in the grave, regardless of their profit declarations. IBM and Cryix had record profit years even as they were on the way out.

Sorry, this is reality. You don't have to like it, but it is what it is.
But MS is already moving to new business with Azure, which is doing extremely well and Microsoft as a brand is still one of extremely high value. None of the numbers show that people are fed up with MS. The only thing MS doesn't have is exactly as you say an answer to the move to mobile, while other companies DO have an answer for that. You then start jumping to conclusions based on your own view of the company and Windows.

Let's not just look at 2016... take it back five years and all you can see is that DESPITE the shaky Windows versions, they're only growing. And not only that, but they are growing during a transitional period that included a change of leadership. Even their worst year of the past five (2015) saw more than double income digits compared to 2002.
Posted on Reply
#13
HopelesslyFaithful
evernessince said:
Um, not it can't. You are seriously suggesting that Intel gave up billions of the mobile market because it doesn't want to. Their shareholders would bitch slap them.
intel could easily produce ARM SOCs at 10nm (yields for tinny dies are much better than large dies) which is like sammy and TSMC 7nm and destroy the other competition if they were so inclined to do so but they dont. I don;t know why. ARM is just something that is not in their company focus. Business has goals and set limits on where and how they want to grow and maybe producing ARM is one of those limits but given the process advantage and skill Intel has in engineering vs other companies Intel could easily cause massive market disruption but they dont for whatever reason. I wouldnt be so brash and guess why but you can. lol
Posted on Reply
#14
Prima.Vera
HopelesslyFaithful said:
intel could easily produce ARM SOCs at 10nm (yields for tinny dies are much better than large dies) which is like sammy and TSMC 7nm and destroy the other competition if they were so inclined to do so but they dont. I don;t know why.
No, is not that easy. You can not just re-purpose entire fabs over night, or even in a couple of months. Besides, business is booming for Intel on both desktop and server side with HUGE profit margins because of the monopoly on the x86 side, so why to re-purpose when there is such competition on ARM market.
I can really understand their strategy.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment