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: Elmer who wrote (80132)	11/16/1999 9:16:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570548

RE:"I know what the binsplit is but I don't know what the yields are."... Seems you aren't getting the total picture. This is very dangerous... Yields a problem, bin splits not a problem...Hummm what's wrong with this picture? How many they losing at final testing? Seems like an enigma... Jim

To: Elmer who wrote (80132)	11/16/1999 9:18:00 PM
From: Mani1	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1570548

Elmer Re <<I know what the binsplit is but I don't know what the yields are. I can't believe they would get this good a binsplit if there were any kind of yield problem that was defect density related.>> I certainly can not dispute that binsplit is good, all speed grades are equally scarce. But if the yields are good then shouldn't we see a lot more Coppermines? Question, if there exist a yield problem due to high defect density resulting from an immature process, would that also damage binsplit? Do binsplit and yields usually go hand in hand? All the good stuff that Intel has been saying, along with what you, Paul and PB have been saying here, does not jive with the extreme shortage of parts at all levels. It just doesn't. Mani