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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD)
AMD 203.76-1.1%Nov 21 9:30 AM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: AK2004 who wrote (14870)10/18/2000 1:50:45 PM
From: PetzRead Replies (1) of 275872
 
Is it *possible* that Intel has been sandbagging us on the P4 die size? I don't see how they can predict falling unit costs in Q1 if the die size is 217mm or even the earlier (smaller) estimate. Is 217mm consistent with the transistor count?

One possibility -- Intel might have meant that P4 unit cost would decline in Q1 because the local-interconnect version will replace the original version. In other words, unit cost would "fall" from 3x PIII level to 2x PIII level.

Any thoughts?

Petz
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