TWY - <800MHz estimation was based on 1.5V and device designs of Dec 98 IEDM paper. 933MHz estimation was based on actual 1.65V release and 10% improved device design (notch process)
of Dec 99 IEDM paper. I still questioned 1GHz but agreed based on some physical analysis I saw on a 733MHz part. This seems very consistent to me and maybe rates more than just a
prognostication. I must agree with Kap on at least one point. The DETAILS do seem to elude you.>
TWY, if you haven't guessed by now in all your years observing Intel, it typically does not make a habit of divulging every lucid detail of its process development efforts. You might consider that Intel's business model does not incorporate significant foundry business, and the competitive reasons for operating this way should be obvious. I know you know about competitive analysis. I guess that's my point to you, insoumuch in your seemingly total reliance on published data, when in fact Barrett demonstrated the thing at 1GHz chilled. I asked you once to "think out of the box", or something like that. I don't see you doing that. If you continue to rely on what Intel publishes, you will continue to under estimate the situation.
Anyway, the main reason I am posting is that we may have a misunderstanding. I asked you once to please enable you PM capability , but you evidently refused. Put yourself in my place, and the timing involved, and who was involved, to see an aliased person on a very public forum, shoot off the message you did. That was very inappropriate, IMHO.
All you had to do was ask.
PB |
