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 252.66-2.7%1:54 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: jackthetab who wrote (262546)11/12/2009 11:40:06 PM
From: fastpathguruRead Replies (2) of 275872
 
Doesn't answer the question of what's the viable and profitable (low cost) alternative.

Perhaps the benefit is flexibility.

Like I posted about Bobcat earlier, from yesterday's slides:

*Very low power design
– Sub one-watt capable
* 90% of today’s mainstream performance in less than half of the silicon area
* Synthesizable / Easy to Reuse
* Complete ISA support
– SSE1-3 and virtualization

The design is done. It can be ported easily to any foundry's current or future process. It can be combined by AMD w/3rd party IP.

AMD doesn't have to dedicate capacity from a bleeding-edge fab to pump out as many as they want; they only need the bleeding-edge capacity for the boutique designs.

Before, mass-market vs. boutique designs were essentially competing for limited capacity within AMD's expensive high-end fab... I.e. non-optimal capacity utilization. (Chartered added only token capacity, being limited to 20% and running tweaked designs that required SOI.)

Now, mass-market and/or customized x86 chips can be pumped out ad infinitum, without competing for the same capacity that will produce the boutique designs.

That's a decidedly non-trivial gain, from my perspective.

fpg
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext