Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel_老虎社区_美港股上老虎

Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel

Leo Sun2021-04-01

Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years. During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...

网页链接

免责声明：本文观点仅代表作者个人观点，不构成本平台的投资建议，本平台不对文章信息准确性、完整性和及时性做出任何保证，亦不对因使用或信赖文章信息引发的任何损失承担责任。

EdInvesting
·2021-04-06
Please get your fact on shortages rights. TSMC is not able to keep up with the demand and the shortage is at them and not Intel.
回复
点赞
举报
Fynn_SG
·2021-04-05
Buy amd
回复
3
举报
收起
- j9911:
  Like and comment this comment! :P For the coins!
  2021-04-06
  回复
  举报
- Fynn_SG:
  ok
  2021-04-06
  回复
  举报
- j9911:
  Thanks!!!
  2021-04-06
  回复
  举报
Hipposaurus
·2021-04-03
Good
回复
1
举报
收起
- Hipposaurus:
  aa
  2021-04-03
  回复
  举报
- Hipposaurus:
  aa
  2021-04-03
  回复
  举报
IcySilver
·2021-04-02
Sounds like $AMD(AMD)$has a better gameplan in this competition
回复
1
举报
收起
- WYCKOFFPRO:
  [财迷]
  2021-04-02
  回复
  举报
- Hipposaurus:
  yes
  2021-04-03
  回复
  举报
- Hipposaurus:
  yup
  2021-04-03
  回复
  举报
木吉蒂
·2021-04-02
At current PE 30+ & with Earnings expected to jump 50%+, the fwd PE will be in 20s. Not too hi, depending on whether they can continue to grow earnings at this pace
回复
2
举报
收起
- KinKat:
  [惊讶]
  2021-04-03
  回复
  举报
MoneyCub
·2021-04-02
AMD awesome!
回复
1
举报
AlanYe
·2021-04-02
Comment and like if your Tesla fan ?
回复
3
举报
CL777
·2021-04-02
No brainer. AMD to the moon
回复
7
举报
收起
- Sheryl85:
  [强]
  2021-04-02
  回复
  举报
- CL777:
  [财迷]
  2021-04-02
  回复
  举报
KFFun
·2021-04-02
AMD!
回复
点赞
举报
lbphang
·2021-04-02
AMD is in better position now. CEO's direction is important.
回复
点赞
举报
1nquisit0
·2021-04-02
please like and comment. thanks
回复
点赞
举报
BinBin23
·2021-04-02
How about you buy both of them ? One growth one dividend [贱笑] [暗中观察] [眼眼]
回复
点赞
举报
Annalz
·2021-04-02
Best Buy😍 no buy no loss
回复
点赞
举报
TJW1991
·2021-04-01
Talk like intel is useless
回复
1
举报
收起
- Annalz:
  Talking with its meaning surely tIp
  2021-04-02
  回复
  举报
manekineko
·2021-04-01
Nice article
回复
3
举报
Dt1412
·2021-04-01
Amd
回复
2
举报
Aaden
·2021-04-01
AMD is definitely a better bet now
回复
6
举报

热议股票

7x24

全部

关于我们·老虎社区守则·老虎社区账号管理规范·老虎社区服务协议·老虎社区隐私政策

公司名称：北京至简风宜信息技术有限公司

违法和不良信息投诉：010-5681-3562（工作时间9:30-18:30）

邮箱：service@laohu8.com

营业执照：91110105MA01A4U55R

ICP备：京ICP备18016422号

网安备：京公网安备11010502036490

关注我们

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"data":{"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","thumbnail":"","is_english":true,"pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","id":"2124789392","market":"us","top_or_hot":-1,"title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","media":"Leo Sun","content":"<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">网页链接</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"fool_stock","html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">网页链接</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","isBrief":false,"type":0,"news_type":1,"symbol":"03086","symbol_name":"华夏纳指","start_time":0,"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","article_id":"2124789392","we_media_id":null,"thumbnails":[],"rights":null,"url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"columns":[],"sourceInfo":{"source_id":"fool_stock","name":"Motley Fool"},"weMediaInfo":null,"summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","collect":0,"end_time":0,"defaultTopTitle":"fool.com","property":[],"viewcount":null,"language":"en","relate_stocks":{"03086":"华夏纳指","AMD":"美国超微公司","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"translate_title":"更好地购买：先进微设备(AMD)对英特尔","themeId":null,"isJumpTheme":false,"ttsUrl":null,"symbols_score_info":{"03086":0.9,"09086":0.9,"AMD":0.9,"INTC":0.9},"content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","kind":"highlight","is_publish_news":true,"is_publish_highlight":true,"is_publish_live":false,"is_publish_wemedia":null,"editions":null,"column":"","sentiment":"0","news_tag":"","news_rank":0,"symbols":[],"gpt_button":1},"commentList":[{"id":343374843,"gmtCreate":1617683566882,"gmtModify":1634297117834,"author":{"id":"3569243948486771","authorId":"3569243948486771","name":"EdInvesting","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f2b5d72aa406299a552424310e264b8","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3569243948486771","authorIdStr":"3569243948486771"},"htmlText":"Please get your fact on shortages rights. TSMC is not able to keep up with the demand and the shortage is at them and not Intel.","listText":"Please get your fact on shortages rights. TSMC is not able to keep up with the demand and the shortage is at them and not Intel.","text":"Please get your fact on shortages rights. TSMC is not able to keep up with the demand and the shortage is at them and not Intel.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/343374843","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":349516791,"gmtCreate":1617624867213,"gmtModify":1634297498077,"author":{"id":"3568363571084074","authorId":"3568363571084074","name":"Fynn_SG","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/af6a81aaed46a93c5c6d439b31e60a66","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3568363571084074","authorIdStr":"3568363571084074"},"htmlText":"Buy amd","listText":"Buy amd","text":"Buy amd","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/349516791","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":3966683,"gmtCreate":1617668994078,"gmtModify":1635743537970,"authorId":3577226522854068,"author":{"id":3577226522854068,"idStr":"3577226522854068","authorId":3577226522854068,"name":"j9911","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/54648ba81cf8a677700c43848a863a64","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":349516791,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Like and comment this comment! :P For the coins!","text":"Like and comment this comment! :P For the coins!","html":"Like and comment this comment! :P For the coins!"},{"id":3968278,"gmtCreate":1617682559144,"gmtModify":1635743415268,"authorId":3568363571084074,"author":{"id":3568363571084074,"idStr":"3568363571084074","authorId":3568363571084074,"name":"Fynn_SG","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/af6a81aaed46a93c5c6d439b31e60a66","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":349516791,"type":1,"supId":3966683,"prevId":0,"content":"ok","text":"ok","html":"ok"},{"id":3970141,"gmtCreate":1617707475964,"gmtModify":1635743292467,"authorId":3577226522854068,"author":{"id":3577226522854068,"idStr":"3577226522854068","authorId":3577226522854068,"name":"j9911","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/54648ba81cf8a677700c43848a863a64","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":349516791,"type":1,"supId":3966683,"prevId":0,"content":"Thanks!!!","text":"Thanks!!!","html":"Thanks!!!"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":340621578,"gmtCreate":1617408816694,"gmtModify":1634521112956,"author":{"id":"3576672028211051","authorId":"3576672028211051","name":"Hipposaurus","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/66076a5767c5d8616ed31ebd48495f11","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3576672028211051","authorIdStr":"3576672028211051"},"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/340621578","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":3948966,"gmtCreate":1617408987989,"gmtModify":1635744861623,"authorId":3576672028211051,"author":{"id":3576672028211051,"idStr":"3576672028211051","authorId":3576672028211051,"name":"Hipposaurus","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/66076a5767c5d8616ed31ebd48495f11","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":340621578,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>aa</u>","text":"<u>aa</u>","html":"<u>aa</u>"},{"id":3948970,"gmtCreate":1617409040985,"gmtModify":1635744861403,"authorId":3576672028211051,"author":{"id":3576672028211051,"idStr":"3576672028211051","authorId":3576672028211051,"name":"Hipposaurus","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/66076a5767c5d8616ed31ebd48495f11","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":340621578,"type":1,"supId":3948966,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>aa</u>","text":"<u>aa</u>","html":"<u>aa</u>"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":340046139,"gmtCreate":1617325707221,"gmtModify":1634521428298,"author":{"id":"3574577404599862","authorId":"3574577404599862","name":"IcySilver","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/484d3b69652c2ca3d6cd65bc1007a60b","vip":2,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3574577404599862","authorIdStr":"3574577404599862"},"htmlText":"Sounds like <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">$AMD(AMD)$</a>has a better gameplan in this competition&nbsp;","listText":"Sounds like <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">$AMD(AMD)$</a>has a better gameplan in this competition&nbsp;","text":"Sounds like $AMD(AMD)$has a better gameplan in this competition","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/340046139","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":3945688,"gmtCreate":1617339780302,"gmtModify":1635745084066,"authorId":3574982782498607,"author":{"id":3574982782498607,"idStr":"3574982782498607","authorId":3574982782498607,"name":"WYCKOFFPRO","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e6df9a333ebef85a0ceac10611fda7c0","vip":2,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":340046139,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"[财迷]","text":"[财迷]","html":"[财迷]"},{"id":3948957,"gmtCreate":1617408895289,"gmtModify":1635744862598,"authorId":3576672028211051,"author":{"id":3576672028211051,"idStr":"3576672028211051","authorId":3576672028211051,"name":"Hipposaurus","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/66076a5767c5d8616ed31ebd48495f11","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":340046139,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"yes","text":"yes","html":"yes"},{"id":3948974,"gmtCreate":1617409090577,"gmtModify":1635744860977,"authorId":3576672028211051,"author":{"id":3576672028211051,"idStr":"3576672028211051","authorId":3576672028211051,"name":"Hipposaurus","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/66076a5767c5d8616ed31ebd48495f11","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":340046139,"type":1,"supId":3948957,"prevId":0,"content":"<u>yup</u>","text":"<u>yup</u>","html":"<u>yup</u>"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":340056051,"gmtCreate":1617324999273,"gmtModify":1634521435639,"author":{"id":"3577229760496516","authorId":"3577229760496516","name":"木吉蒂","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/89290f2c42589f1e42296c61dde71238","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3577229760496516","authorIdStr":"3577229760496516"},"htmlText":"At current PE 30+ &amp; with Earnings expected to jump 50%+, the fwd PE will be in 20s. Not too hi, depending on whether they can continue to grow earnings at this pace","listText":"At current PE 30+ &amp; with Earnings expected to jump 50%+, the fwd PE will be in 20s. Not too hi, depending on whether they can continue to grow earnings at this pace","text":"At current PE 30+ & with Earnings expected to jump 50%+, the fwd PE will be in 20s. Not too hi, depending on whether they can continue to grow earnings at this pace","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/340056051","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":3948143,"gmtCreate":1617386219011,"gmtModify":1635744915947,"authorId":3577917165320806,"author":{"id":3577917165320806,"idStr":"3577917165320806","authorId":3577917165320806,"name":"KinKat","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/05a5d7e664c9e14d1097e19f1846ce94","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":340056051,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"[惊讶]","text":"[惊讶]","html":"[惊讶]"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":340064455,"gmtCreate":1617323860577,"gmtModify":1634521447715,"author":{"id":"3559862059870297","authorId":"3559862059870297","name":"MoneyCub","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1f4ae708d214afbc1b0b1f68ecc65c7e","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3559862059870297","authorIdStr":"3559862059870297"},"htmlText":"AMD awesome!","listText":"AMD awesome!","text":"AMD awesome!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/340064455","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":340060634,"gmtCreate":1617323364128,"gmtModify":1634521454033,"author":{"id":"3563407973348151","authorId":"3563407973348151","name":"AlanYe","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/50efd00e3a7df7e0920a04606904a662","vip":1,"crmLevel":7,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3563407973348151","authorIdStr":"3563407973348151"},"htmlText":"Comment and like if your Tesla fan ?","listText":"Comment and like if your Tesla fan ?","text":"Comment and like if your Tesla fan ?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/340060634","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":340086883,"gmtCreate":1617322956342,"gmtModify":1634521458305,"author":{"id":"3560241002253187","authorId":"3560241002253187","name":"CL777","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e9aef3dd830373a0427a3447b1b564e3","vip":1,"crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3560241002253187","authorIdStr":"3560241002253187"},"htmlText":"No brainer. AMD to the moon","listText":"No brainer. AMD to the moon","text":"No brainer. AMD to the moon","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/340086883","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":3943826,"gmtCreate":1617324642609,"gmtModify":1635745229673,"authorId":3563253186452228,"author":{"id":3563253186452228,"idStr":"3563253186452228","authorId":3563253186452228,"name":"Sheryl85","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b7a9183a9332355f694e2f0af874b0ed","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":340086883,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"[强]","text":"[强]","html":"[强]"},{"id":3944950,"gmtCreate":1617333103895,"gmtModify":1635745141222,"authorId":3560241002253187,"author":{"id":3560241002253187,"idStr":"3560241002253187","authorId":3560241002253187,"name":"CL777","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e9aef3dd830373a0427a3447b1b564e3","vip":1,"crmLevel":6,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":340086883,"type":1,"supId":3943826,"prevId":0,"content":"[财迷]","text":"[财迷]","html":"[财迷]"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":340081401,"gmtCreate":1617322852403,"gmtModify":1634521459882,"author":{"id":"3565161371430593","authorId":"3565161371430593","name":"KFFun","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3565161371430593","authorIdStr":"3565161371430593"},"htmlText":"AMD!","listText":"AMD!","text":"AMD!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/340081401","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":340033360,"gmtCreate":1617321222050,"gmtModify":1634521475058,"author":{"id":"3579412093917127","authorId":"3579412093917127","name":"lbphang","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3579412093917127","authorIdStr":"3579412093917127"},"htmlText":"AMD is in better position now. CEO's direction is important.&nbsp;","listText":"AMD is in better position now. CEO's direction is important.&nbsp;","text":"AMD is in better position now. CEO's direction is important.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/340033360","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":357741291,"gmtCreate":1617316085513,"gmtModify":1634521504219,"author":{"id":"3553900041025922","authorId":"3553900041025922","name":"1nquisit0","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3c22511f65f9157a35a7f105f2b1d9bf","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3553900041025922","authorIdStr":"3553900041025922"},"htmlText":"please like and comment. thanks","listText":"please like and comment. thanks","text":"please like and comment. thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/357741291","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":357765956,"gmtCreate":1617304082575,"gmtModify":1631884063578,"author":{"id":"3564021307246137","authorId":"3564021307246137","name":"BinBin23","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3564021307246137","authorIdStr":"3564021307246137"},"htmlText":"How about you buy both of them ? One growth one dividend [贱笑]&nbsp;[暗中观察]&nbsp;[眼眼]&nbsp;","listText":"How about you buy both of them ? One growth one dividend [贱笑]&nbsp;[暗中观察]&nbsp;[眼眼]&nbsp;","text":"How about you buy both of them ? One growth one dividend [贱笑] [暗中观察] [眼眼]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/357765956","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"CN"},{"id":357780437,"gmtCreate":1617298762429,"gmtModify":1634521527309,"author":{"id":"3577089953267281","authorId":"3577089953267281","name":"Annalz","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ffd285ab6189bb61da4b48c3e149eedc","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3577089953267281","authorIdStr":"3577089953267281"},"htmlText":"Best Buy😍 no buy no loss","listText":"Best Buy😍 no buy no loss","text":"Best Buy😍 no buy no loss","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/357780437","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":357473748,"gmtCreate":1617292534684,"gmtModify":1634521551314,"author":{"id":"3578904826776116","authorId":"3578904826776116","name":"TJW1991","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c1d13fbb3feb6459408472fb351d6fe0","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3578904826776116","authorIdStr":"3578904826776116"},"htmlText":"Talk like intel is useless","listText":"Talk like intel is useless","text":"Talk like intel is useless","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/357473748","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":3942283,"gmtCreate":1617298798170,"gmtModify":1635745336252,"authorId":3577089953267281,"author":{"id":3577089953267281,"idStr":"3577089953267281","authorId":3577089953267281,"name":"Annalz","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ffd285ab6189bb61da4b48c3e149eedc","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":357473748,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"Talking with its meaning surely tIp","text":"Talking with its meaning surely tIp","html":"Talking with its meaning surely tIp"}],"langContent":"EN"},{"id":357439090,"gmtCreate":1617288459110,"gmtModify":1634521578677,"author":{"id":"3557059841248518","authorId":"3557059841248518","name":"manekineko","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2621e2547da4dc7e450da498cd2e8341","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3557059841248518","authorIdStr":"3557059841248518"},"htmlText":"Nice article","listText":"Nice article","text":"Nice article","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/357439090","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":357490574,"gmtCreate":1617287993698,"gmtModify":1634521583744,"author":{"id":"3569374301908252","authorId":"3569374301908252","name":"Dt1412","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/61f9dd5a09490dcc3db856532e674755","vip":1,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3569374301908252","authorIdStr":"3569374301908252"},"htmlText":"Amd&nbsp;","listText":"Amd&nbsp;","text":"Amd","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/357490574","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":357572400,"gmtCreate":1617287339200,"gmtModify":1634521589982,"author":{"id":"3576299146818908","authorId":"3576299146818908","name":"Aaden","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0badbe7763ff2fb009c583446388ad99","vip":1,"crmLevel":5,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3576299146818908","authorIdStr":"3576299146818908"},"htmlText":"AMD is definitely a better bet now","listText":"AMD is definitely a better bet now","text":"AMD is definitely a better bet now","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/357572400","repostId":2124789392,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2124789392","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1617286860,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2124789392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-04-01 22:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2124789392","media":"Leo Sun","summary":"The market leader is still struggling against the underdog.","content":"<p><b>Intel</b>&nbsp;and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMD\">AMD</a></b>, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.</p>\n<p>During that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the <b>Nasdaq</b>'s 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against <b>NVIDIA </b>(NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.</p>\n<p>However, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08e3dfa107617b2cfac81bb0b09b1d1\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Image source: Getty Images.</p>\n<h3>The key differences between Intel and AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.</p>\n<p>Intel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to <b>SK Hynix</b> last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.</p>\n<p>Intel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind <b>Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</b> (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.</p>\n<p>AMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.</p>\n<p>Last year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including <b>Sony</b>'s PS5 and <b>Microsoft</b>'s Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.</p>\n<h3>Which chipmaker is growing faster?</h3>\n<p>Based on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>Revenue Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>Intel</b> (NASDAQ:INTC)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>13%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>2%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>8%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p><b>AMD</b> (NASDAQ:AMD)</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>23%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>4%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>45%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.</p>\n<p>AMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to&nbsp;slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.</p>\n<p>Intel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Intel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.</p>\n<h3>Profitability and valuations</h3>\n<p>After Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&amp;D problems.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.</p>\n<table border=\"1\" width=\"597\">\n <colgroup></colgroup>\n <tbody>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <th width=\"212\"><p>EPS Growth (YOY)</p></th>\n   <th width=\"107\"><p>2018</p></th>\n   <th width=\"96\"><p>2019</p></th>\n   <th width=\"124\"><p>2020</p></th>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>Intel</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>32%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>6%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>9%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr valign=\"TOP\">\n   <td width=\"212\"><p>AMD</p></td>\n   <td width=\"107\"><p>360%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"96\"><p>39%</p></td>\n   <td width=\"124\"><p>102%</p></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.</p>\n<p>Intel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.</p>\n<p>AMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.</p>\n<p>Analysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and&nbsp;13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.</p>\n<p>Wall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and&nbsp;53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment&nbsp;than Intel.</p>\n<h3>The winner: AMD</h3>\n<p>Intel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Better Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBetter Buy: Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) vs. Intel\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-01 22:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/><strong>Leo Sun</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/04/01/better-buy-advanced-micro-devices-amd-vs-intel/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2124789392","content_text":"Intel and AMD, which hold a near-duopoly in x86 CPUs for PCs and servers, have treated investors very differently over the past three years.\nDuring that time, Intel's stock price rose nearly 25% but underperformed the Nasdaq's 85% gain. Its manufacturing issues, chip shortages, market share losses, and the abrupt resignation of its CEO in 2018 all weighed down its stock.\nMeanwhile, AMD's stock price surged nearly 670% as it profited from Intel's missteps. It produced smaller and more cost-efficient chips than Intel, didn't suffer any chip shortages, held its ground against NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) in gaming GPUs, and stuck to its long-term roadmap under its visionary CEO.\nHowever, past performance never guarantees future gains, so we should take a fresh look at both chipmakers to see if AMD is still the better buy.\n\nImage source: Getty Images.\nThe key differences between Intel and AMD\nIntel generated 56% of its revenue from PC-centric chips last year. It generated 36% of its revenue from data center chips, while the remaining 8% came from other types of chips -- including IoT (Internet of Things) chips, programmable chips, computer vision chips, and memory chips.\nIntel agreed to sell most of its memory chip business to SK Hynix last October, and it's developing discrete GPUs to complement its CPUs and compete against NVIDIA and AMD. However, Intel's core business still mainly relies on its sales of x86 CPUs for PCs and data centers.\nIntel manufactures its own chips with its internal foundry. But Intel's foundry fell behind Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing (NYSE:TSM), the world's largest third-party foundry, in the \"process race\" to create smaller chips in recent years. Those mistakes clogged up Intel's foundries and caused shortages of its latest CPUs.\nAMD, which outsources the production of its CPUs and GPUs to TSMC instead of manufacturing them internally, didn't struggle with any shortages. As a result, AMD's share of the global x86 CPU market more than doubled from 18.1% to 39.4% between the first quarters of 2017 and 2021, according to PassMark Software, as Intel's market share plunged from 81.9% to 60.5%.\nLast year, AMD generated nearly two-thirds of its revenue from its computing and graphics segment, which sells its Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs. The rest of its revenue came from its EESC (enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom) business, which mainly sells custom chips for gaming consoles (including Sony's PS5 and Microsoft's Xbox Series consoles) and Epyc CPUs for data centers.\nWhich chipmaker is growing faster?\nBased on these facts, it's easy to see why AMD grew at a faster clip than Intel over the past three years.\n\n\n\n\nRevenue Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel (NASDAQ:INTC)\n13%\n2%\n8%\n\n\nAMD (NASDAQ:AMD)\n23%\n4%\n45%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year.\nAMD's growth decelerated in 2019, mainly due to slower sales of gaming consoles. However, its growth accelerated again in 2020 as it launched its new Ryzen CPUs and Radeon GPUs, while Intel's ongoing chip shortage continued to generate tailwinds for both its PC and data center businesses.\nIntel's overall revenue growth initially seems stable, but its data center chip sales declined year over year in the second half of 2020 -- which partly offset its higher sales of PC CPUs during the pandemic.\nIntel recently outsourced the production of some of its chips to TSMC to resolve its ongoing shortages, but it doesn't expect to launch its next-gen 7nm chips until 2023. AMD launched its first 7nm CPUs back in 2019, and it will likely launch its first 5nm chips in 2022.\nProfitability and valuations\nAfter Intel's former CEO Brian Krzanich resigned in 2018, CFO Bob Swan took the helm and mainly focused on cutting costs and repurchasing shares instead of resolving Intel's R&D problems.\nMeanwhile, AMD continued to generate explosive earnings growth without relying on buybacks or cost-cutting measures. Instead, it reinvested most of its cash back into the development of its new chips.\n\n\n\n\nEPS Growth (YOY)\n2018\n2019\n2020\n\n\nIntel\n32%\n6%\n9%\n\n\nAMD\n360%\n39%\n102%\n\n\n\nData source: Annual reports. YOY = year over year. Non-GAAP.\nIntel's new CEO, Pat Gelsinger, is trying to get the chipmaker back on the right track, but that process could take years.\nAMD's CEO, Lisa Su, has led the chipmaker's ongoing turnaround since 2014. Su's main strategies, which include the expansion of AMD's gaming console business and the development of new chips that address the performance issues of prior generations, will continue to cause headaches for Intel.\nAnalysts expect Intel's revenue and earnings to decline 7% and 13%, respectively, this year. Those dismal growth rates indicate Intel's stock still can't be considered cheap at 14 times forward earnings.\nWall Street expects AMD's revenue and earnings to jump 38% and 53%, respectively, this year. Those growth rates easily justify its higher forward P/E ratio of 31. We should always be skeptical of analysts' forecasts, but AMD clearly looks like a much healthier investment than Intel.\nThe winner: AMD\nIntel's low valuation and forward dividend yield of 2.1% might limit its downside potential, but I believe it will underperform AMD again this year. Intel isn't doomed yet, but Gelsinger must resolve the company's biggest problems before I consider this classic chipmaker to be a worthy long-term investment again.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"}],"hasMoreComments":true,"newsSizeData":{"likeSize":32,"commentSize":17,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false}}