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 : Intel Corporation (INTC)
INTC 47.27-2.2%1:41 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: fingolfen who wrote (135425)5/18/2001 12:32:15 PM
From: dale_laroy  Read Replies (1) of 186894
 
>I think you're stretching here without good factual basis...<

Actually, the historical norm has been 2 years. The pattern is doubling of devices per die every 18 months. For years this was accomplished from a combination of halving the design rules every 2 years and increasing the die size.

You are however right about me in a way stretching things. With a two year norm between process technologies, from June/July 1999 through June/July 2001 would be right on schedule. Therefore, it could argued that there is no slowdown and therefore be projected that the shift to 100nm will be right on schedule in the June/July 2003 timeframe.

OTOH, the launch in June/July 1999 differs from the launch in June/July 2001 in a much more significant way than relative volumes. The June/July 1999 launch was a true step in process generation using 248nm lithography, while the June/July 2001 launch will be a process shrink. The real generational timeframe will be determined by when Intel starts shipping in volume using 193nm lithography.

AMD has historically been very aggressive with process shrinks, sometimes moving ahead of Intel. Their problem this time appears to be that they have discovered that actual 193nm lithography is needed for some of the mask steps, so they can not do a pure process shrink, as had been originally planned.

The point is that all bets are off with regards to the move to 100nm. If it is a process shrink, there is potential that AMD will beat Intel to 100nm. It is however, probably a safe bet that Intel will use 157nm lithography first, but probably not in 2003.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News