MAAT INDEX

CLAIM #32138 · Intel Corporation (INTC) · 2025Q1 earnings call · Apr 24, 2025 · due Oct 24, 2027

You know, longer term, you know, this is a high-intensity model, obviously. You know, we've talked about roughly having 25% capital intensity as we look at this in a full IDM model. And I think that's probably a good working assumption on a long-term basis.

David Zinsner · CFO

PENDING
graded after results covering Oct 24, 2027 are reported

How to check this claim

Look at: Capital expenditures as a percentage of revenue (capital intensity), full year

It came true if: Capital intensity approximately 25% (23%-27%) for a full fiscal year

Where: Company income statement and cash flow statement (10-K), capex/revenue as disclosed or calculated

In context

me, 25-26? Are you looking at rationalizing that given the footprint, fab footprint that you have? David Zinsner: Yeah. Yeah. Oh, go ahead. Sorry. Go ahead, please. Okay. In '25, you know, we think we can operate to an $18 billion number as we talked about. I would just tell you we have $50 billion or so of assets under construction, you know, that are a lot of which are equipment that's still in bubble wrap. So we're in some ways, you know, taking a more aggressive approach to driving better return on what we've spent already. And that's allowing us to spend less in capital. I think that story probably plays out next year as well, although I think it's too early to talk about guidance for CapEx for next year. You know, we're gonna leverage our assets under construction next year as well. You know, longer term, you know, this is a high-intensity model, obviously. You know, we've talked about roughly having 25% capital intensity as we look at this in a full IDM model. And I think that's probably a good working assumption on a long-term basis. John Pitzer: Thank you, Vijay. Jonathan, can we have the next question, please? Operator: Certainly. And our next question comes from the line of Stacy Rasgon from Bernstein Research. Your question, please. Stacy Rasgon: Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. Wanted to go back to that seven nanometer constraint capacity constraint. Think you're seeing a lot of demand for Raptor Lake. I guess I'm just surprised given how good Meteor Lake and Lunar Lake are supposed to be. Like, why are you seeing so much more demand for the older generation parts versus new ones? Or is it, I mean, are you pushing the older gen stuff like you because the margins are better? Like, what's going on there? Michelle Johnston Holthaus: Yeah. Thanks for the question, Stacy. We're not pushing the old parts based

Verify independently

SEC filings for INTC · Claim quote is verbatim from the 2025Q1 earnings call.