Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

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 Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Kenith Lee who wrote (89881)	1/26/2000 11:50:00 PM
From: THE WATSONYOUTH	Read Replies (1) of 1570719

Re: "Yields are fine because the center of distribution (COD) is around 600. This explains the lack of 750+." Based on what I saw from the overclocker sites, the center of the distribution at launch was perhaps 775MHz. Intel seems to be requiring at least a 10% guardband. So 806MHz would be needed to ship 733MHz. So a 775MHz center may not yield many 880MHz (ship as 800MHz) My guess is that they only recently cranked down on channel length perhaps 100A and the center of the distribution is now around 880MHz. Until these parts come off the line, 800MHz parts will be very scarce. If this scenario is correct, it means that Intel was just being too conservative with the channel length target. If this process/design gets them to a shippable 1GHz (1.1GHz with guardband), then there should not be any yield degradation at 880MHz. They simply did not have an aggressive enough initial channel length target to get a high enough percentage of 800MHz shippable parts. Period. This error opens up short term opportunities for AMD. THE WATSONYOUTH.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next