@PCM
I think you can't compare it this way. Why? Because this is not
a yield or binning problem, PCM has "structural" problems. Why?
The most important SPEC these days in Flash seem to be DIE size.
There are other topics too (of course), which could play a
significant role, but if you can't manufacture devices cheap,
relative to competition, you end with loosing MSS and probably
high losses. When I remember correctly, the last hard facts for
PCM I have seen point to the direction, that a PCM DIE is 4x
as large as a Spansion 2b/c design at the SAME node. Its easy
to spot the big problems. If SPSN manages to go to 4b/c at a
larger (volume) base, the difference is no smaller than 8x.
This means SPSN is 3 process nodes ahead compared to Intel and
even if we take a 2b/c design, SPSN is 2 nodes virtually ahead.
Intel on 45nm = SPSN on 90nm. If SPSN manages 45nm in the next
time, Intel would need a 2x node instantly and we didn't spoke
about yields etc. pp. Thats the fundamental PCM problem and we
haven't seen any indication, that this could be changed or will
be changed in the next future. I'm sure, that Numonyx will reach
progress over time, but is SPSN standing still?
In the end, I'm hoping, that Numonyx will concentrate on PCM
which will end on a closed road. The longer they try it, the
better it is for us.
BUGGI |
