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.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Bill Jackson who wrote (77753)10/29/1999 1:34:00 PM
From: Elmer  Read Replies (1) of 1572941
 
Re: "Intel does indeed have enourmous costs and many fabs that will prove a burden as they scale to .13 and make 4-5 times as many chips and they fabs get severely underutilsed..."

I don't see this happening. As feature sizes get smaller you add more transistors such as cache, graphics controllers etc. If all people did was shrink features and not add transistors, we'd see wafers with 1000s of 386s on each of them. You will likely see processor die sizes remain in a general range with today's CuMine near the bottom of that range @104mm2 or smaller as Intel shrinks CuMine. The size will grow somewhat as Intel adds larger and larger caches and video etc. Defect densities and target markets (huge caches on Xeons) will dictate the reasonable upper limit.

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

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News