Sarmad,
There was an Intel paper a year or two ago comparing production cost in 200mm fabs and 300 mm fabs. It claimed that when a product was moved from a 90nm process in a 200mm fab to 65 nm process in a 300mm fab, the expected cost savings would be 40%. I think that is the exact amount of the price reduction that Intel made in April.
LOL. Does one have to have a lobotomy to become an Intel shareholder? I guess it has to be lobotomy plus brainwashing.
I know this will not penetrate, but let me try anyway:
Suppose, that silicon cost does, hypothetically go down 40%. So the $20 dollar of the silicon cost goes down to $12, for savings of $8.
Intel cuts prices by 40% from $150 to $90, for loss of revenue of $60. I doubt this will ever connect in the brain of an Intel shareholder, but I tried again... For nth time.
In the meantime, intel is putting 2 of those dies in the package Pentium D, for silicon cost of $24, and the packaging cost will go up (because of MCM) from $8 to $16, so the cost actually went up from $28 to $40, or $12, while the price went down by $60 for net revenue loss of $72.
No wonder Intel guided for HIGHER costs, lower margins, (implicitly for) lower ASPs and of course lower revenues...
Joe |
