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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (83732)	12/21/1999 1:31:00 AM
From: Petz	Respond to of 1584948

Tenchusatsu, re:<I'm really not so sure AMD can afford to compete against Intel's huge manufacturing capacity in the value markets> The segmentation strategy is even more important for AMD than for Intel. Second, once you reach a full fabs capacity production, there are really no "economies of scale" which Intel receives from having 5+ CPU fabs. I said: <<the key design problem with the K6-3 was insufficient redundant SRAM columns?>> You replied: <It just means AMD's yields were lower than they expected. Sure, you can improve yields somewhat by adding more SRAM columns, but then you have the trade-off of fewer die per wafer.> I got the impression that, in fact, the K6-3 might have been designed with absolutely NO redundant columns. This is clearly an example of a poor design tradeoff. A couple of extra mm of die size might have doubled yields to the K6-2 level. There's no question that K6-2 yields are at the 70%+ level. Judging by the prices being charging for K6-3 vs. K6-2, I'd estimate that K6-3 yields are half or less of the K6-2. Petz