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.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pgerassi who wrote (28363)	2/13/2001 7:52:14 PM
From: fingolfen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Actually your defect density numbers look pretty good... and have at least some basic in real thought. I'd also say you know a heck of a lot more about semiconductor yield than the analyst in question... You do, of course, set yourself up a nice straw man, since you well-know neither Intel or AMD publish yield numbers, or anything that could be used to easily calculate yield. Logic in some ways can be a bit less sensitive than SRAMs in that there is always open space for a defect to hit that won't kill logic, but will kill SRAM... The core of my point was that the numbers cited gave the strong appearance of being fabricated as the P4 "yield values" were roughly 50% of the P3 "yield values," and that there is nothing inherent in the Pentium 4 design which causes it to yield poorly.

To: pgerassi who wrote (28363)	2/13/2001 8:22:20 PM
From: AK2004	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Peter thank you, what you said is a proof that analysts estimate is, at least, possible. Regards -Albert