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 40.56+10.3%Nov 28 12:59 PM EST
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Ali Chen who wrote (162579)3/20/2002 1:41:57 PM
From: Yousef  Read Replies (2) of 186894
 
Ali,

Re: "This is an utter BS I ever heard of ..."

It is true that 300mm defect density is better at this point relative to the
150mm -> 200mm conversion. This is due to the FACT that the defect mechanisms
on 300mm seem to be the same as encountered at 200mm AND the amount of
edge/center ratio continues to decrease. The edge of the wafer will almost
always yield more poorly than the center due to film/polish/litho non-uniformities
at the edge. Thus 300mm should intrinsically have lower defect density
better yield) than 200mm. BTW Ali, please consider sticking to the
"architecture thingy" in the future. TIA.

Make It So,
Yousef
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