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 (96693)	3/3/2000 11:03:00 PM
From: Bill Jackson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575176

Elmer, when the 820 debacle occurred all the chip sets made plus those in production became scrap and they had to make a fix and start to fill the pipeline. Now you say they had no shortages of chipsets/CPUs. I expect Dell stalled people to increase their period of joyful anticipation as to when their order would be filled.....just being a tease eh? Same for GTW etc? What you smokin' Elmer? There are those inside Intel that know the real story, yet still work there. One fine day they will retire and tell their tale. Bill

To: Elmer who wrote (96693)	3/4/2000 11:41:00 AM
From: Dan3	Respond to of 1575176

Re: Intel has had world class yields for as long as anyone can remember... Elmer, we've had posts here about one FAB making 1 million CPUs per week. Intel sold fewer than 30 million CPUs last quarter. I don't know how many of Intel's FABs are either .18 or .25 and so suitable for making processors, but at 1 million/week each, 2 FABs would have satisfied all demand - and even AMD has 2 FABs. And, presumably, any management not composed solely of fools would enter the biggest quarter of the year carrying a little extra inventory. It may have changed recently, we can only guess at that situation, but as far as last quarter was concerned, Intel's problem was that what it could yield couldn't be sold. And that's due to competition from AMD. Following your logic, the only reason we aren't drowning in a sea of 1.5GHZ Willamettes is the lack of FAB capacity (if they can make one, they can make 20 million, right?). We're arguing semantics here, if your process is useless at your FABs, I'd call it a process problem, but I suppose you are equally entitled to call it a FAB problem. It seems to be the mantra of the new intel "We have all the best designs: PIII, Willamette, and Rambus. Too bad none of it can be manufactured in volume". It's eerily reminiscent of the K6-3 situation last spring, isn't it? Dan