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 40.08-0.7%2:56 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Paul Engel who wrote (48463)2/24/1998 12:30:00 AM
From: Jeff Fox   of 186894
 
Paul, re 0.6 micron i740 never meant for sale

More often than not you will see and experience things that nearly destroy your confidence in the company and its potential.

Although I agree with this argument, Perhaps you are giving a bum rap to the i740 program by using it as a bad example of this.

One example of recent vintage was the i740 - somebody decided it was going to use a 0.6 micron process (this was done at a time when the 0.25 micron process was being ramped!) The part nearly worked but was HUGE, SLOW and sucked power like an old Cyrix 6x86!

- Perhaps the i740 graphics VHDL was so new to Intel that it was felt that a "silicon breadboard" was needed to ring out the design?

- Perhaps at the time the .35 micron logic tools were not available and a 0.6 micron spin would serve the goals of the program? The i740 was done by an offshoot of the chipset group with chipset tools - different from the CPU group procedures.

- Perhaps .35 micron wafer starts were tight and .06 micron capacity was "free" and available for test wafers?

- Perhaps the 0.6 micron silicon was never meant to be offered for sale? Perhaps the "early" silicon spin actually accelerated and improved the quality of the .35 micron i740?

Jeff
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext