Intel Corporation (INTC) 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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC)

INTC 36.38

-1.3%

3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: fingolfen who wrote (146632)	11/1/2001 8:23:29 PM
From: maui_dude	Read Replies (2) of 186894

fingolfen, Thanks for the explanation. It probably explains only modest gains wrt the cost. But another way of looking at it is that Intel hasn't really gained much from P4/.13 transition (from a cost standpoint). Given a large P4 die size, .13 was a 'must', just to keep up (of course, it has a lot more room to continue to ramp up, but that doesn't help cost yet). For a chip that is so much bigger than P3 and a new architecture, it should have been comparable in size (given their performance). I understand that Hyperthreading takes some real-estate and the extra area may be justified with the extra 30% performance gain. But until a working HT P4 chip is ready to ship, doesn't it make sense to ship P4 on .13 with a reduced die and improve the cost structure ? Does anyone know if all these jackson technology layout is placed in one area to simply remove it and creating a new P4 stepping without major rework ? BTW, what percentage of the area is used up to enable HT in P4 ? Maui.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next