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 237.57-2.6%Nov 11 3:59 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Elmer who wrote (66429)12/27/2001 10:40:17 PM
From: Dan3Read Replies (1) of 275872
 
Re: keep cropping up about the high speed XPs using .13u transistors with channel lengths down to 70nm.

Implying that Intel's aren't.

When P4 was at 1.5GHZ and Athlon was at 1.2GHZ, both were using 90nm channel lengths, and Intel was claiming 130nm channel lengths in its .18 process specifications, while AMD was claiming as short as 70nm for its .18 process. Now P4 is at 2GHZ and AMD is at 1.5GHZ - both 33% faster. AMD almost certainly is at 70nm for those parts, but Intel almost certainly is also at 70nm for the 2GHZ P4. You've decided that AMD sped up its chips by shortening channel lengths, while Intel was able to substitute what, magic?

Intel was limited to 1.5GHZ with the P4 when the measured channel lengths were 90nm and Intel was claiming 130nm in its SPECs. It has become faster, and Intel continues to list 130nm as the "official" channel length. That was wrong before, why shouldn't it be wrong now?
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