SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC)
INTC 42.61+6.5%Jan 7 3:59 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: dale_laroy who wrote (140299)7/30/2001 4:17:12 PM
From: fingolfen   of 186894
 
Potentially, isotopically pure Si could add so little to the wafer cost that increased cost could be made up for by increased yield. With SOI the situation is the opposite, since SOI will both increase cost per wafer and decrease yield. My best estimate is that Clawhammer and Northwood will be roughly the same cost per processor to produce using 200mm wafers, but Northwood will initially cost more on 300mm wafers, then less on 300mm wafers by Q2 2003.

Not sure I agree there on a few counts. Methods for isotopic purification are fairly well understood, and all are relatively expensive.

I agree completely on SOI...

I disagree about the cost structure. If Claw and NW cost the same on 200mm wafers, then NW is going to be less expensive on 300mm. Intel has already indicated that the only reason to go to 300mm wafers is cost reduction, to the tune of 30%.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News