Why Integration Matters to Intel Corporation's PC Business

Integration is important even outside of Intel's mobile business. Find out why!

Feb 18, 2014 at 5:00PM

While there has been a tremendous amount of focus on Intel (NASDAQ:INTC) integrating connectivity and communications into its mobile system-on-chip products, (in order to more effectively compete in the smartphone and tablet markets), many seem to miss that such integration could prove to be a massive boon for Intel's PC chip business. It could also serve to distance it from its only real competitor -- Advanced Micro Devices (NASDAQ:AMD).

The real value of integration
When Intel launched Sandy Bridge in 2011, the company saw an immediate ASP uplift as it gained further PC content share, and it saw a mix shift within its product stacks as customers were willing to pay a premium for higher end integrated graphics solutions. Take this snippet from Intel's 2011 fourth quarter conference call:

From here, our CapEx, really, will be a function of 2 things: it's the unit growth that we see going forward, and it's the speed at which we bring capabilities to that leading-edge process technology. And I think graphics has been the classic example of that. As we move that to the process edged to the leading-edge process technology, it did drive an increase in CapEx but it also drove a really capable product line that we got paid for. 

The idea is that as more functionality is integrated onto the main processor complex, the more value that particular chip has. So, in the example of integrating graphics onto the die, notebook and desktop vendors could cut out a low end discrete GPU from their designs -- saving money. Intel, realizing that a move to integrated graphics would save OEMs significantly on everything from additional graphics-specific RAM, cooling solutions, board space, etc., could then charge a premium for its integrated part and still end up with a mutually beneficial arrangement.

Bringing this to connectivity
It's hard to imagine a laptop or even a desktop PC that doesn't connect. A laptop without Wi-Fi is near useless, and a desktop without some kind of LAN (either Wi-Fi or Ethernet) is extremely limited. Today, all PCs either come with third-party chips (or are Intel-designed) to handle Ethernet/Wi-Fi. While higher-performance PCs are likely to be better off with discrete networking solutions (as these can be higher performing/higher quality), the majority of low-cost PCs would be just fine with Wi-Fi/Ethernet built into the main processor.

The benefit for Intel is pretty obvious: it can drive up chip ASPs (at constant gross margin levels) and absorb the value that the discrete chip vendor, which was likely to be someone other than Intel, was getting on its products. It would also simplify the mainboard design and reduce the number of components needed on the mainboard. It would, at least for the majority of mainstream systems, be a "win/win".

This would grow competitive advantage over AMD
By integrating connectivity onto its PC platforms, Intel's chips would offer a material integration advantage over AMD. While AMD appears to have Ethernet IP that it could conceivably integrate onto its PC processors, it does not have Wi-Fi/Bluetooth/NFC. Intel would be able to integrate this on its 14-nanometer generation.

Intel's growing process lead, which manifests itself as improved an cost/transistor, means that this integration can be done in an increasingly economical fashion. With the cost/transistor difficulties that Taiwan Semiconductor and the other foundries are facing, AMD may find it difficult to justify doing all of this work in what is a seemingly dwindling position in PCs. That said, if AMD is serious about tablets, it will need to go down this path.

Foolish takeaway
At this point, Intel should be very aggressive in integrating new functionality and absorbing as much of the silicon value into its processors as possible. The company has been doing a good job, relative to AMD, but compared to the level of sophistication that we are seeing from the mobile SoC players, Intel still has a ways to go. However, that necessity to catch up in mobile could pay off handsomely in the PC space.

Let's face it, every investor wants to get in on revolutionary ideas before they hit it big. Like buying PC-maker Dell in the late 1980's, before the consumer computing boom. Or purchasing stock in e-commerce pioneer Amazon.com in late 1990's, when they were nothing more than an upstart online bookstore. The problem is, most investors don't understand the key to investing in hyper-growth markets. The real trick is to find a small-cap "pure-play", and then watch as it grows in EXPLOSIVE lock-step with it's industry. Our expert team of equity analysts has identified 1 stock that's poised to produce rocket-ship returns with the next $14.4 TRILLION industry. Click here to get the full story in this eye-opening report.

Ashraf Eassa owns shares of Intel. The Motley Fool recommends Intel. The Motley Fool owns shares of Intel. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

4 in 5 Americans Are Ignoring Buffett's Warning

Don't be one of them.

Jun 12, 2015 at 5:01PM

Admitting fear is difficult.

So you can imagine how shocked I was to find out Warren Buffett recently told a select number of investors about the cutting-edge technology that's keeping him awake at night.

This past May, The Motley Fool sent 8 of its best stock analysts to Omaha, Nebraska to attend the Berkshire Hathaway annual shareholder meeting. CEO Warren Buffett and Vice Chairman Charlie Munger fielded questions for nearly 6 hours.
The catch was: Attendees weren't allowed to record any of it. No audio. No video. 

Our team of analysts wrote down every single word Buffett and Munger uttered. Over 16,000 words. But only two words stood out to me as I read the detailed transcript of the event: "Real threat."

That's how Buffett responded when asked about this emerging market that is already expected to be worth more than $2 trillion in the U.S. alone. Google has already put some of its best engineers behind the technology powering this trend. 

The amazing thing is, while Buffett may be nervous, the rest of us can invest in this new industry BEFORE the old money realizes what hit them.

KPMG advises we're "on the cusp of revolutionary change" coming much "sooner than you think."

Even one legendary MIT professor had to recant his position that the technology was "beyond the capability of computer science." (He recently confessed to The Wall Street Journal that he's now a believer and amazed "how quickly this technology caught on.")

Yet according to one J.D. Power and Associates survey, only 1 in 5 Americans are even interested in this technology, much less ready to invest in it. Needless to say, you haven't missed your window of opportunity. 

Think about how many amazing technologies you've watched soar to new heights while you kick yourself thinking, "I knew about that technology before everyone was talking about it, but I just sat on my hands." 

Don't let that happen again. This time, it should be your family telling you, "I can't believe you knew about and invested in that technology so early on."

That's why I hope you take just a few minutes to access the exclusive research our team of analysts has put together on this industry and the one stock positioned to capitalize on this major shift.

Click here to learn about this incredible technology before Buffett stops being scared and starts buying!

David Hanson owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway and American Express. The Motley Fool recommends and owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway, Google, and Coca-Cola.We Fools don't all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

©1995-2014 The Motley Fool. All rights reserved. | Privacy/Legal Information

Compare Brokers