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: hmaly who wrote (89877)	1/26/2000 10:28:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574129

Re: "Elmer I feel you are trying to be disingenuous with your "most in history" story. Of course. Name me one year in Intel's history when they haven't been able to ship more chips yoy. The computer industry has seen phenominal growth the last 20 yrs. The problem is that Intels growth in shipments went from 30.5 to 31.4 chips 3q to 4q 99. which is about 3% increase in quarters where you would normally see 20% plus increases. So even if Intel hadn't downsized to .18 um Intel should easily have been able to increase shipments by 3%. By downsizing to .18 um Intel with comparetive yields should easily have been able to increase production by 10% even with only one fab at .18. I am not certain you have heard of this, but most companies have a new thing called "inventory which is used to supply parts during busy times or changing lines etc. In addition Intel may have shipped the most chips for a quarter, but the shortage in chips was in the high mhz chips which would indicate a yield problem with high mhz parts. Do you really believe Intel down binned their 800 mhz chips worth $800 each to a 600 mhz chip worth $250 each when there was a shortage of 800 mhz chips. All these things indicate something is rotten in Denmark. I don't know what but something." I am not being disingenuous, I'm giving you my honest opinion. As Intel stated in their CC, their inventories are at an all time low. I suspect this is because their Q3 shipments were high as you pointed out and with Q4's additional demand the shipments exceeded capacity. But let me concede that, considering that production planning is done months in advance, the early CuMine problems and the process conversion undoubtedly led to some misallocation of resources. In regards to "yield problems" you are misusing the term. Yield refers to good vrs defective parts irrespective of speed distribution. You are referring to "binsplit" which is the speed distribution. A shortage of highspeed parts is not indicative of a yield problem in and of itself. I cannot comment on Binsplits but I believe PBs comments are correct. Keep in mind that a problem that is solved today still takes quite some time to flow through the pipeline. I expect to see much improved availability across the board this quarter. EP