저자: JimCramer · 외국인
요약 보기
엔비디아가 인텔에 약 50억 달러를 투자하면서 주가가 3.5%(약 1500억 달러 시총) 상승한 것을 '기적'으로 묘사. 인텔 파운드리 고객 확보 가능성과 제품 협업의 의미를 논의. 인텔 18A 칩 출시(Panther Lake)가 신뢰 회복의 계기가 될 것이라는 전망. 다만 인텔의 GPU·AI 가속기 시장 대응 실패와 AMD 대비 열세도 언급.
다듬은 글
ENT certainly weren't created for the stock of Nvidia, though a company with a $4 trillion market cap that's not at all hostage to interest rates. In fact, it's not even hostage to its own industry as we saw today. Which is why Nvidia could make a $5 billion investment in a one-time semiconductor kingpin today, Intel, and see its own stock rally 3.5% or $150 billion in response.
You spend five billion and you tack on $150 billion in market cap. Now that's a miracle. This is the kind of gain everybody wants and it's much easier to get when you don't spend all of your time worrying about the Fed and quarter points and dot plots or putting the hate on the individual stocks as almost every professional does because they think that you can't handle.
First, let me tell you these incredibly wild circumstances that explain why Intel even needed the cash so that Nvidia could make the profit. At one time, Intel was by far the most important semiconductor company in the world. It owned the PC and server market, but it didn't go into fast chips, the kind that Nvidia makes, the kind that originally for gaming.
But all although a firm with a market value of almost $4 trillion is not at all vulnerable to interest rate fluctuations. The industries were undoubtedly not designed with Nvidia's stock in mind. As we witnessed today, it isn't even captive to its own industry. For this reason, Nvidia's stock could rise 3.5% or around $150 billion if it invested about $5 billion in Intel, a former semiconductor powerhouse.
You respond by spending about $5 billion and adding about $150 billion to the market capitalization. That's a miracle. Now, this is the type of profit that everyone desires. It's also far simpler to obtain when you don't spend all of your time worrying about the Fed quarter points dot plots or attacking certain stocks as nearly all professionals do because they believe you are incapable of handling it.
Let me start by telling you about these very bizarre situations that explain why Intel even need the money in order for Nvidia to turn a profit. Intel used to be the world's most significant semiconductor company. It dominated the market for PCs and servers, but it refrained from producing fast chips such as those made by Nvidia, which were initially intended for gaming, but eventually produce artificial intelligence.
Furthermore, Intel dominated advanced micro devices for years. However, Lisa Sue was extremely direct when she took over at AMD and aimed to acquire Intel's business. Intel stands to gain a great deal from this. There is no doubt that there are net advantages on the PC front as well as on the AI and data center fronts.
The only thing I can think of is that I was hoping for a little more discussion regarding Foundry. I was hoping for something a little bit more, perhaps a bigger agreement that stated that Intel will be producing Nvidia GPUs. Even while it is true that Intel Foundry makes the x86 chip, that doesn't mean it won't occur.
This announcement simply did not include it. Indeed, Pat, it's fascinating that you noticed that as this has undoubtedly been the main concern for Intel and the foundry company, it is producing chips for its own consumption. But when will it attract other customers? What does it mean that Nvidia is not including that in today's deal?
Does that mean it doesn't trust Intel's ability to accomplish this? I believe it's well to start Intel has a foundry road map. Correct. They had 18A followed by 18B a year later and then what is known as 4A. Additionally, I think that Nvidia is assessing those various procedures and stages and I think that discussions are ongoing.
It's not only Nvidia by the way, I believe that Nvidia like with Apple and other corporations is devoted to TSMC. Furthermore, I believe that taking this action could be seen as a sign of disloyalty rather than, say, Intel's lack of technology. Execution raises some good points. In my opinion, confidence will undoubtedly increase after Intel produces its own Intel 18A chips.
The first of which will be dubbed Panther Lake in a few months. Additionally, I do believe that some Foundry clients will join Intel. Furthermore, it's clear that Nvidia is not a charity, isn't it? Therefore, this agreement must have some value for them. How did they benefit from it? Yes, in my opinion, it provides them with a degree of autonomy.
Let's start by examining the PC side. AMD is now causing a stir in the PC industry. Market share is being taken by them. Additionally, Nvidia may not be included in every socket that accepts an AMD CPU and GPU. Although, Nvidia continues to dominate the higher end of the GPU market. This gives them a competitive advantage with a very high-end GPU and an Intel CPU that is tuned to run x86 software which is crucial at the moment because the majority of games and professional developers use x86 instruction sets.
This alternative may be able to more effectively compete with Apple. Thus, it offers them the possibility of success there. In actuality, it's about choice. Last night, I spoke with individuals who informed me that Nvidia's road map will remain unchanged, meaning that both ARM and Intel alternatives will be available for their end users, hyperscalers, corporations, and others of that type.
I do believe that confusion may result if these new goods are released in 2 and 1/2 years. However, keep in mind that one person's perplexity is another's choice. Additionally, more options are better for clients, regardless of whether they want to choose an ARM or Intel CPU. I was just looking at some historical charts of the two this morning.
Pat, to give you a little perspective, I was comparing the market capitalizations of Nvidia and Intel. I was comparing Intel's and Nvidia's quarterly revenue and the path itself is simply amazing. Let's look at the market capitalization. Intel has been making some progress in that area for some time.
When its revenue and projections took off, Nvidia clearly took off. However, Nvidia is now so dominating whereas Intel was the giant for a long time. Since you've been covering this industry for so long, I'm just interested in your opinions and viewpoint on that. Yes. Additionally, I witnessed the highs and lows during my 11 years at AMD and what took place.
Three things took place when it came to Foundry and Foundry Technologies. Intel first lost the plot. As a result, AMD was able to collaborate with TSMC on more contemporary architectures that are currently employed in the market. Then there was the AI boom which fueled the revenue. While the market for CPUs isn't declining, the market for AI GPUs and accelerators has completely exploded.
Additionally, Intel failed to capitalize on the data center AI boom associated with data center G, which is unexpected. I mean, the business had a failed design called Larabi. In addition to having a product named Gotti3 that is highly competitive on particular workloads, they have acquired two businesses.
It is quite comparable to the homegrown accelerators that the hyperscalers utilize. However, let's imagine that you make a couple of billions of dollars as opposed to Nvidia's hundreds of billions of dollars. The market takeoff was almost missed by them. Furthermore, it doesn't imply that Intel employees lack comprehension or technological sophistication.
GPUs are really challenging. This explains why in terms of market share, Nvidia leads and AMD trails far behind. These businesses have 30 years of experience with G. This technology is challenging. Yes, it's challenging technology and Nvidia has struck the mark at the ideal time for the current AI surge.
We really appreciate you coming, Pat. I always appreciate hearing your point of view on these matters. Thank you. Look, over the past few weeks, we've had a number of different co-investments in Intel, if you will. For well around $9 billion, the government made a significant investment. Soft Bank invested almost $2 billion in us.
Individuals were expecting us to see other individuals. Therefore, I don't think it is. This one, in my opinion, was unexpected for perhaps two reasons. The first is the size of the investment. At least for Intel, $5 billion is a substantial sum of money. Perhaps not as much for Nvidia, but a significant sum of money for Intel and significantly larger than instance what we observe for.
Second, I believe the other collaboration's nature. Many others, I believe, had hoped for a cooperation in manufacturer or foundry. That is not what this is. This is a collaboration on a product. And since Intel's manufacturing flow and process technology are still up in the air, I believe it makes sense.
We're not sure. However, their goods business also need a great deal of assistance. In several other areas, they have been kind of bleeding share. Therefore, if a significant and influential partner like Nvidia can step in and potentially support Intel's product business, that could help Intel continue.
Comments 0