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: Zoran who wrote (79987)	11/15/1999 11:36:00 PM
From: THE WATSONYOUTH	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579682

Re: "Whenever you cannot control one of the major factors of the process variations in real time (cross section SEM's are destructive), your technology becomes inherently unmanufacturable. This doesn't mean that Intel's engineers are not going to do a good job at minimizing those variations but their job is more difficult to start with. If the gate will have to shrink in order to achieve greater speeds then this problem will be exacerbated." If Intel achieves a 200A per edge (400A total) smaller device by this notch technique, you would have to compare the relative degree of control had they not used this technique. Since the same final channel length must be achieved for competitive reasons, Intel would be forced to either print the lithography 400A smaller or use some other type of RIE trimming technique. How do you know that when this comparison is made, the notching technique is not better? Only Intel can know the answer to this question. If they use this notching approach, I have to assume they have made the comparison and are convinced of its manufacturability. THE WATSONYOUTH