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: Process Boy who wrote (90001)1/27/2000 1:50:00 PM
From: milo_morai  Read Replies (1) of 1574685
 
PB you need to read better I never said you stated that.

Read the posts back to the source. My point was Tench's info didn't jive with yours.

I've been a Lurker on this thread for 6 months so I'm not that new. AthlonK75 ring a bell?

If I have a question mark behind a statement it's not something I'm stating as a fact. It's is questionable statement or a question.

Tench just admitted he wasn't sure about his info before you posted, and deferred me to You.

Thanx for being critical of me, I appreciate it.

And I've been paying very close attention to you or I wouldn't have questioned Tench. You THINK?
Milo

Tench writes:
To: John Petzinger who wrote (89938)
From: Tenchusatsu
Thursday, Jan 27, 2000 2:31 AM ET
Reply # of 90001

Petz, <Intel has 14 fabs online. How come only 5 are making microprocessors>

Those five are 0.18u fabs. I'm sure there are still several 0.25u fabs churning out Katmai (Pentium III), Tanner (Pentium III Xeon), and Mendocino
(Celeron) CPUs.

Also, I work right next to two fabs here in Oregon which is making 0.18u flash products, and those are in addition to the five (or so) 0.18u fabs
making processors.
Previously, one of those two fabs was making 0.35u products, from Klamath (classic Pentium II) to 450NX (4-way Xeon
chipset).

Furthermore, there has to be several fabs that make high-volume chipsets, from the venerable 440BX (I think on 0.35u) to the 810e and 820 (I think
on 0.25u). And in terms of sheer die size alone, chipsets consume more silicon that processors, although they are usually made on a process that is
one generation behind the leading edge.

And finally, there are the "miscellaneous" products, such as StrongARM, microcontrollers, etc.

<80% of Intel's core business?>

Well, some fabs are dedicated toward manufacturing chipsets. And chipsets are seen as "enabling" sales of processors. I think sooner or later,
chipsets should be seen more as an independent business unit in itself, but until then, they'll continue to play "Sideshow Bob" next to the star
attraction.

How's that for a partial explanation to all your questions?

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