Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (65177)	7/14/1999 2:05:00 AM
From: Process Boy	Respond to of 1580174

WATSONYOUTH- <I don't know if AMD chose to bring in copper and low k dielectric TOGETHER at .18um. Certainly, this is not trivial. Copper alone would be less risky than both but with MUCH less performance benefit.> I've been wondering what the MOT dielectric is for .18 myself. There are lower risk "low-k" options, such as what Intel calls SiOF, but this is admittedly not a dramatically lower dielectric constant material. But as you point out, the newer lower k material is risky because it is very early in the learning curve as far as working with the stuff, whatever it is [there are several options out there with no obvious front-runners yet, IMHO]. I agree, Cu + Low-k at this stage of the learning curve would be swinging for the fences for AMD, with Cu + SiO, or low risk low-k option, being much safer from an integration stand point, but probably with only modest performance gains relative to Al at .18um. PB