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: Pravin Kamdar who wrote (33667)	3/27/2001 1:30:54 PM
From: porn_start878	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

The plan to only shrink this to 0.09u with their 0.13u process worries me a bit. But, AMD's process engineers have done a great job the last couple of years, so I will give them the benefit of the doubt (as long as they don't start running up against resolution issues with the existing Dresden equipment -- I know that it is supposed to be able to support 0.13u and perhaps a bit lower, but it could be the limiting factor in not going to the 0.08u gate length that Intel plans According to hansdevries, it's .8 vs .7 and not .9 vs .8. chip-architect.com Max

To: Pravin Kamdar who wrote (33667)	3/27/2001 3:43:00 PM
From: fyodor_	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Pravin: I have the sneaky suspicion that a lot of the success has come from the 0.10u drawn gate length that they are using in their 0.18u copper process. The plan to only shrink this to 0.09u with their 0.13u process worries me a bit. I think there is a lot of undue worry regarding AMD's .13mu process. Sure, their .18mu process has some really good features (heh), but all is not perfect. Remember, AMD's current process has an obscenely large SRAM cell size. -fyo