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 253.73+1.6%Jan 22 3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: wanna_bmw who wrote (52094)8/23/2001 1:27:13 AM
From: pgerassiRead Replies (1) of 275872
 
Wanna_bmw:

It is you who has been in denial of AMD's manufacturing capabilities over time. AMD has two fabs producing CPUs, Fab 25 and Fab 30. Fab 25 has a demonstrated volume of about 5,000 200mm Al wafers per week of CPUs and Fab 30 is to be able to start 5-6,000 200mm Cu wafers per week when fully ramped at end of Q4 this year. When that happens and given the 50/50 split between Durons and Athlons, 10,000 can be started per week or somewhere between 1.5 to 2 million CPUs per week or 19.5 to 26 million 0.18u CPUs per quarter. The whole CPU market was estimated by Mercury Research World Wide was about 34.5 million in Q2. Thus, if all wafers would be started for Palominos and Morgans for sale in Q2-02 (a wafer started week 1 in Q1-02 takes 13 weeks to a finished CPU package or week 14), AMD could supply 57% to 77% of the market. Of course, 0.13u would be ramping at that time and about 10% would be available at week 1 (assuming Fab 30 only), that share could be 60% to 80%. By week 40, these could rise to 75% to 100% (I am assuming that by this time Fab 25 would have some 0.13u copper lines at 200mm and could be even more, if at 300mm).

I do not know if manufacture by FASL would be considered outsourced production of Durons wrt the Intel-AMD cross license deal. If AMD argues that FASL is internal to AMD, these numbers become much easier to get to 100% of share due to the doubling or more (<= 0.18u process) capacity. If not, AMD could rip a majority of share in CPUs from Intel just with the wholly owned two FABs of production.

Turning the tables on Intel, what would Intel do if they only got the value end PC and embedded CPUs (yes, this means that SOI Hammers and Bartons are crushing IA-64 and Xeons by most accounts)? Before you spout off that this will never happen, remember that Xeons did and supposedly IA-64 will do the same to overpriced RISC systems to get Intel to this point. Turnabout does make for ironies, especially when companies fail to take into account history, even more so when it was their own from the other side. You can even see this happen to Intel wrt DRAM (If you check back, they left a market rather than to compete against determined competitors). The problem now is there is no lucrative market to jump to right now.

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