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.
Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials
AMAT 252.34+1.0%12:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: derek cao who wrote (15072)1/27/1998 11:25:00 AM
From: TI2, TechInvestorToo  Read Replies (1) of 70976
 
The entire fabrication process needs to support 12in at the same time. If you have the steppers, etchers etc and not the silicon (or vice versa) then the 12" fab won't happen. IMHO this is the reason for the pushout of 12" (300mm) fabs, all of the equipment (and materials) required are not on the same schedule as the chip design roadmaps. So the conversion to 250 nm devices is occurring while 300 mm catches up.

IMO the company(ies) to pay the tab for supporting the infrastructure to larger substrates has to wait (a very long time) to get payback. Arguably IBM paid the tab for 200mm wafers and began 10 yrs before everyone else. It is rumored that IBM (Intel, Samsung etc) was not willing to pay the tab for 300mm because of the ever increasing cost. The benefit of an IBM picking up the task is that you get an intregrated manufacturing line perspective with a schedule so that you have at least one supplier of each type of equipment available on the same timeline. No single company is proving this guidance/funding for 300mm. SEMATECH I would guess is the closest substitute. Committes of companies are not as efficient as a single company agenda hence the current 300mm pushout.

Comments?
TI2
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext